A Randomized Phase II Crossover Study of Imatinib or Rituximab for Cutaneous Sclerosis after Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

PURPOSE: Cutaneous sclerosis occurs in 20% of patients with chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and can compromise mobility and quality of life. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized, two-arm phase II crossover trial of imatinib (200 mg daily) or rituximab (375 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly × 4 doses, repeatable after 3 months) for treatment of cutaneous sclerosis diagnosed within 18 months (NCT01309997). The primary endpoint was significant clinical response (SCR) at 6 months, defined as quantitative improvement in skin sclerosis or joint range of motion. Treatment success was defined as SCR at 6 months without crossover, recurrent malignancy or death. Secondary endpoints included changes of B-cell profiles in blood (BAFF levels and cellular subsets), patient-reported outcomes, and histopathology between responders and nonresponders with each therapy. RESULTS: SCR was observed in 9 of 35 [26%; 95% confidence interval (CI); 13%-43%] participants randomized to imatinib and 10 of 37 (27%; 95% CI, 14%-44%) randomized to rituximab. Six (17%; 95% CI, 7%-34%) patients in the imatinib arm and 5 (14%; 95% CI, 5%-29%) in the rituximab arm had treatment success. Higher percentages of activated B cells (CD27(+)) were seen at enrollment in rituximab-treated patients who had treatment success (P = 0.01), but not in imatinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the need for more effective therapies for cutaneous sclerosis and suggest that activated B cells define a subgroup of patients with cutaneous sclerosis who are more likely to respond to rituximab.

A prospective comparison of a noninvasive cardiac output monitor versus esophageal doppler monitor for goal-directed fluid therapy in colorectal surgery patients

Copyright © 2014 International Anesthesia Research Society.BACKGROUND: Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is associated with improved outcomes after surgery. The esophageal Doppler monitor (EDM) is widely used, but has several limitations. The NICOM, a completely noninvasive cardiac output monitor (Cheetah Medical), may be appropriate for guiding GDFT. No prospective studies have compared the NICOM and the EDM. We hypothesized that the NICOM is not significantly different from the EDM for monitoring during GDFT. METHODS: One hundred adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery participated in this study. Patients in phase I (n = 50) had intraoperative GDFT guided by the EDM while the NICOM was connected, and patients in phase II (n = 50) had intraoperative GDFT guided by the NICOM while the EDM was connected. Each patient's stroke volume was optimized using 250- mL colloid boluses. Agreement between the monitors was assessed, and patient outcomes (postoperative pain, nausea, and return of bowel function), complications (renal, pulmonary, infectious, and wound complications), and length of hospital stay (LOS) were compared. RESULTS: Using a 10% increase in stroke volume after fluid challenge, agreement between monitors was 60% at 5 minutes, 61% at 10 minutes, and 66% at 15 minutes, with no significant systematic disagreement (McNemar P > 0.05) at any time point. The EDM had significantly more missing data than the NICOM. No clinically significant differences were found in total LOS or other outcomes. The mean LOS was 6.56 ± 4.32 days in phase I and 6.07 ± 2.85 days in phase II, and 95% confidence limits for the difference were -0.96 to +1.95 days (P = 0.5016). CONCLUSIONS: The NICOM performs similarly to the EDM in guiding GDFT, with no clinically significant differences in outcomes, and offers increased ease of use as well as fewer missing data points. The NICOM may be a viable alternative monitor to guide GDFT.