Adding a new anticoagulant or antiplatelet agent for patient receiving aspirin after an acute coronary syndrome? - Results from a pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

 Objectives: To synthesize the efficacy and safety outcomes from randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) regarding new oral anticoagulant, protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR-1) antagonist, and warfarin adjunctive to aspirin for patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) via pair-wise and network meta-analyses.
Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library Web of Knowledge, and Scopus. The pair-wise meta-analysis was undertaken respectively to each agent/treatment category via Revmen 5.1. In order to estimate the relative efficacy of each agent/treatment category whilst preserving the randomized comparisons within each trial, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted in WinBUGS using both fixed- and random-effects model. Covariate analysis was performed to explore the effects of length of follow-up and age of subject on the final results.
Results: In total, 23 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. As shown by the results (OR,95%CI) for the pair-wise meta-analysis, new oral anticoagulants (0.85, [0.78, 0.93] and 3.04, [2.21, 4.19]), PAR-1 antagonists (0.80, [0.52, 1.22] and 1.55, [1.25, 1.93]) and warfarin (0.87, [0.74, 1.02] and 1.77, [1.46, 2.14]) might be able to provide better outcome in the incidences of major adverse events (MAE) but with higher bleeding risk comparing to aspirin treatment alone. Based on the model fit assessment, the random-effects model was adopted. The network meta-analysis (treatment effect comparing to aspirin lone) identified ximelagatran (-0.3044, [-0.8601, 0.2502]), dabigatran (-0.2144, [-0.8666, 0.4525]), rivoroxaban (-0.2179, [-0.5986, 0.1628]) and vorapaxar (-0.2272, [-0.81, 0.1664]) produced better improvements in MAE incidences whereas vorapaxar (0.3764, [-0.4444, 1.124]), warfarin (0.663, [0.3375, 1.037]), ximelagatran (0.7509, [-0.4164, 2.002]) and apixaban (0.8594, [-0.0049, 1.7]) produced less major bleeding events. The indirect comparisons among drug category (difference in incidence comparing to aspirin lone) showed new oral anticoagulants (-0.1974, [-0.284, -0.111]) and PAR-1 antagonists (-0.1239, [-0.215, -0.033]) to besuperior to warfarin (-0.1004, [-0.166, -0.035]) in the occurrences of MAE whereas PAR-1 antagonists (0.4292, [0.2123, 0.6476]) afforded better outcomes in major bleeding events against warfarin (0.5742, [0.3889, 0.7619]) and new oral anticoagulants (1.169, [0.8667, 1.485]).
Conclusion: Based on the study results, we cannot recommend the routine administration of new oral anticoagulant as add-on treatment for patients after ACS. However, for ACS patients comorbid with atrial fibrillation, new oral anticoagulant might be superior to warfarin in both efficacy and safety outcomes.

Sleep education improves the sleep duration of adolescents: a randomized controlled pilot study

PURPOSE: To determine the feasibility and pilot a sleep education program in New Zealand high school students.

METHODS: A parallel, two-arm randomized controlled pilot trial was conducted. High school students (13 to 16 years) were randomly allocated to either a classroom-based sleep education program intervention (n = 15) or to a usual curriculum control group (n = 14). The sleep education program involved four 50-minute classroom-based education sessions with interactive groups. Students completed a 7-day sleep diary, a sleep questionnaire (including sleep hygiene, knowledge and problems) at baseline, post-intervention (4 weeks) and 10 weeks follow-up.

RESULTS: An overall treatment effect was observed for weekend sleep duration (F 1,24 = 5.21, p = 0.03). Participants in the intervention group slept longer during weekend nights at 5 weeks (1:37 h:min, p = 0.01) and 10 weeks: (1:32 h:min, p = 0.03) compared to those in the control group. No differences were found between groups for sleep duration on weekday nights. No significant differences were observed between groups for any of the secondary outcomes (sleep hygiene, sleep problems, or sleep knowledge).

CONCLUSIONS: A sleep education program appears to increase weekend sleep duration in the short term. Although this program was feasible, most schools are under time and resource pressure, thus alternative methods of delivery should be assessed for feasibility and efficacy. Larger trials of longer duration are needed to confirm these findings and determine the sustained effect of sleep education on sleep behavior and its impact on health and psychosocial outcomes.

Academic outcomes 2 years after working memory training for children with low working memory: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE: Working memory training may help children with attention and learning difficulties, but robust evidence from population-level randomized controlled clinical trials is lacking.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether a computerized adaptive working memory intervention program improves long-term academic outcomes of children 6 to 7 years of age with low working memory compared with usual classroom teaching.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Population-based randomized controlled clinical trial of first graders from 44 schools in Melbourne, Australia, who underwent a verbal and visuospatial working memory screening. Children were classified as having low working memory if their scores were below the 15th percentile on either the Backward Digit Recall or Mister X subtest from the Automated Working Memory Assessment, or if their scores were below the 25th percentile on both. These children were randomly assigned by an independent statistician to either an intervention or a control arm using a concealed computerized random number sequence. Researchers were blinded to group assignment at time of screening. We conducted our trial from March 1, 2012, to February 1, 2015; our final analysis was on October 30, 2015. We used intention-to-treat analyses.

INTERVENTION: Cogmed working memory training, comprising 20 to 25 training sessions of 45 minutes' duration at school.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Directly assessed (at 12 and 24 months) academic outcomes (reading, math, and spelling scores as primary outcomes) and working memory (also assessed at 6 months); parent-, teacher-, and child-reported behavioral and social-emotional functioning and quality of life; and intervention costs.

RESULTS: Of 1723 children screened (mean [SD] age, 6.9 [0.4] years), 226 were randomized to each arm (452 total), with 90% retention at 1 year and 88% retention at 2 years; 90.3% of children in the intervention arm completed at least 20 sessions. Of the 4 short-term and working memory outcomes, 1 outcome (visuospatial short-term memory) benefited the children at 6 months (effect size, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.25-0.62]) and 12 months (effect size, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.70]), but not at 24 months. There were no benefits to any other outcomes; in fact, the math scores of the children in the intervention arm were worse at 2 years (mean difference, -3.0 [95% CI, -5.4 to -0.7]; P = .01). Intervention costs were A$1035 per child.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Working memory screening of children 6 to 7 years of age is feasible, and an adaptive working memory training program may temporarily improve visuospatial short-term memory. Given the loss of classroom time, cost, and lack of lasting benefit, we cannot recommend population-based delivery of Cogmed within a screening paradigm.

Statins for the treatment of depression: a meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND: In epidemiological studies, statins appear to benefit mood, and there are now some randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy of statins. However, the role of statins in depression remains uncertain. Thus the aim of this paper was to assess the effect of statins on depressive symptoms by performing a meta-analysis of all double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled clinical trials (RCT) conducted in subjects with depression. METHODS: A systematic search was executed using PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov in November 30th, 2015 for all double-blind, RCT of statins versus placebo in persons with depressive symptoms. Sixty-seven potential articles were identified through search of electronic databases, of those three met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The outcome measure was change in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) scores associated with statin use. A meta-analysis was conducted and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. GRADE was used to assess study quality. RESULTS: The three articles included provided data on 165 participants with moderate to severe depression. Of these, 82 were randomized to statins as an adjuvant therapy to antidepressant treatment (i.e., citalopram or fluoxetine) and 83 to the placebo arm. All studies were double-blind RCTs, with a follow-up of 6-12 weeks. The statin agents evaluated were lovastatin, atorvastatin, and simvastatin. When compared to placebo, statins, as add-on to treatment as usual, largely improved depressive symptoms as assessed by the HDRS (SMD=-0.73, 95% IC -1.04 to -0.42, p<0.001, 3 between-group comparisons, n=165). No serious adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that adjunctive treatment with statins could be useful for the treatment of depressive symptoms. Additional double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials are necessary to settle the matter.

Effect of adjunctive raloxifene therapy on severity of refractory schizophrenia in women: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE: A substantial proportion of women with schizophrenia experience debilitating treatment-refractory symptoms. The efficacy of estrogen in modulating brain function in schizophrenia has to be balanced against excess exposure of peripheral tissue. Raloxifene hydrochloride is a selective estrogen receptor modulator (mixed estrogen agonist/antagonist) with potential psychoprotective effects and fewer estrogenic adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adjunctive raloxifene therapy reduces illness severity in women with refractory schizophrenia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial with fortnightly assessments was performed at an urban tertiary referral center and a regional center from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2014. Participants included 56 women with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and marked symptom severity despite substantial and stable antipsychotic doses. Data were analyzed using intention to treat as the basis. INTERVENTIONS: Adjunctive raloxifene hydrochloride, 120 mg/d, or placebo for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Clinical response (defined as a ≥20% decrease in PANSS total score from baseline) and change in PANSS subscale scores, mood, cognition, reproductive hormone levels, and adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 56 participants (mean [SD] age, 53 [7.7] years; age range, 40-70 years; mean [SD] duration of psychotic illness, 24 [11] years), 26 were randomized to raloxifene and 30 were randomized to placebo. Raloxifene produced a greater reduction in the PANSS total score relative to placebo (β = -6.37; 95% CI, -11.64 to -1.10; P = .02) and resulted in an increased probability of a clinical response (hazard ratio, 5.79; 95% CI, 1.46 to 22.97; P = .01). A significant reduction was found in the PANSS general symptom scores for the raloxifene compared with the placebo (β = -3.72; 95% CI, -6.83 to -0.61; P = .02) groups. For patients who completed the full 12-week trial, there was not a statistically significant treatment effect on PANSS positive symptom scores (β for change in raloxifene vs placebo, -1.92; 95% CI, -3.83 to 0.00; P = .05). Change in mood, cognition, and reproductive hormone levels and the rate of adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Raloxifene hydrochloride, 120 mg/d, reduces illness severity and increases the probability of a clinical response in women with refractory schizophrenia. This large trial of raloxifene in this patient population offers a promising, well-tolerated agent that has potential application in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00361543.

Effect of an internet-based, personalized nutrition randomized trial on dietary changes associated with the Mediterranean diet: the Food4Me Study

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the efficacy of personalized nutrition (PN) interventions for improving consumption of a Mediterranean diet (MedDiet).

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the effect of a PN intervention on dietary changes associated with the MedDiet.

DESIGN: Participants (n = 1607) were recruited into a 6-mo, Internet-based, PN randomized controlled trial (Food4Me) designed to evaluate the effect of PN on dietary change. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conventional dietary advice [control; level 0 (L0)] or PN advice on the basis of current diet [level 1 (L1)], diet and phenotype [level 2 (L2)], or diet, phenotype, and genotype [level 3 (L3)]. Dietary intakes from food-frequency questionnaires at baseline and at 6 mo were converted to a MedDiet score. Linear regression compared participant characteristics between high (>5) and low (≤5) MedDiet scores. Differences in MedDiet scores between treatment arms at month 6 were evaluated by using contrast analyses.

RESULTS: At baseline, high MedDiet scorers had a 0.5 lower body mass index (in kg/m(2); P = 0.007) and a 0.03 higher physical activity level (P = 0.003) than did low scorers. MedDiet scores at month 6 were greater in individuals randomly assigned to receive PN (L1, L2, and L3) than in controls (PN compared with controls: 5.20 ± 0.05 and 5.48 ± 0.07, respectively; P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in MedDiet scores at month 6 between PN advice on the basis of L1 compared with L2 and L3. However, differences in MedDiet scores at month 6 were greater in L3 than in L2 (L3 compared with L2: 5.63 ± 0.10 and 5.38 ± 0.10, respectively; P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS: Higher MedDiet scores at baseline were associated with healthier lifestyles and lower adiposity. After the intervention, MedDiet scores were greater in individuals randomly assigned to receive PN than in controls, with the addition of DNA-based dietary advice resulting in the largest differences in MedDiet scores. Although differences were significant, their clinical relevance is modest.