PARTAKE survey of public knowledge and perceptions of clinical research in India.

BACKGROUND: A public that is an informed partner in clinical research is important for ethical, methodological, and operational reasons. There are indications that the public is unaware or misinformed, and not sufficiently engaged in clinical research but studies on the topic are lacking. PARTAKE - Public Awareness of Research for Therapeutic Advancements through Knowledge and Empowerment is a program aimed at increasing public awareness and partnership in clinical research. The PARTAKE Survey is a component of the program. OBJECTIVE: To study public knowledge and perceptions of clinical research. METHODS: A 40-item questionnaire combining multiple-choice and open-ended questions was administered to 175 English- or Hindi-speaking individuals in 8 public locations representing various socioeconomic strata in New Delhi, India. RESULTS: Interviewees were 18-84 old (mean: 39.6, SD ± 16.6), 23.6% female, 68.6% employed, 7.3% illiterate, 26.3% had heard of research, 2.9% had participated and 58.9% expressed willingness to participate in clinical research. The following perceptions were reported (% true/% false/% not aware): 'research benefits society' (94.1%/3.5%/2.3%), 'the government protects against unethical clinical research' (56.7%/26.3%/16.9%), 'research hospitals provide better care' (67.2%/8.7%/23.9%), 'confidentiality is adequately protected' (54.1%/12.3%/33.5%), 'participation in research is voluntary' (85.3%/5.8%/8.7%); 'participants treated like 'guinea pigs'' (20.7%/53.2%/26.0%), and 'compensation for participation is adequate' (24.7%/12.9%/62.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the Indian public is aware of some key features of clinical research (e.g., purpose, value, voluntary nature of participation), and supports clinical research in general but is unaware of other key features (e.g., compensation, confidentiality, protection of human participants) and exhibits some distrust in the conduct and reporting of clinical trials. Larger, cross-cultural surveys are required to inform educational programs addressing these issues.

Teaching yoga to seniors: essential considerations to enhance safety and reduce risk in a uniquely vulnerable age group.

BACKGROUND: Seniors age 65 and older represent the fastest-growing sector of the population and, like many Americans, are increasingly drawn to yoga. This presents both an extraordinary opportunity and a serious challenge for yoga instructors who must be both a resource and guardians of safety for this uniquely vulnerable group. A typical class of seniors is likely to represent the most diverse mix of abilities of any age group. While some may be exceedingly healthy, most fit the profile of the average older adult in America, 80% of whom have at least one chronic health condition and 50% of whom have at least two. OBJECTIVES: This article discusses the Therapeutic Yoga for Seniors program, offered since 2007 at Duke Integrative Medicine to fill a critical need to help yoga instructors work safely and effectively with the increasing number of older adults coming to yoga classes, and explores three areas that pose the greatest risk of compromise to older adult students: sedentary lifestyle, cardiovascular disease, and osteoporosis. To provide a skillful framework for teaching yoga to seniors, we have developed specific Principles of Practice that integrate the knowledge gained from Western medicine with yogic teachings.

Safety and efficacy of rivastigmine in adolescents with Down syndrome: long-term follow-up.

Following the completion of a 20-week, open-label study of the safety and efficacy of liquid rivastigmine for adolescents with Down syndrome, 5 of the 10 adolescents in the clinical trial continued long-term rivastigmine therapy and 5 did not. After an average period of 38 months, all 10 subjects returned for a follow-up assessment to determine the safety and efficacy of long-term rivastigmine use. Rivastigmine was well tolerated and overall health appeared to be unaffected by long-term rivastigmine use. Performance change on cognitive and language measures administered at the termination of the open-label clinical trial was compared between the two groups. No between-group difference in median performance change across the long-term period was found, suggesting that the long-term use of rivastigmine does not improve cognitive and language performance. However, two subjects demonstrated remarkable improvement in adaptive function over the long-term period. Both subjects had received long-term rivastigmine therapy. The discussion addresses the challenge of assessing cognitive change in clinical trials using adolescents with Down syndrome as subjects and the use of group versus individual data to evaluate the relevance of medication effects.

Safety and immunogenicity of a replication-defective adenovirus type 5 HIV vaccine in Ad5-seronegative persons: a randomized clinical trial (HVTN 054).

BACKGROUND: Individuals without prior immunity to a vaccine vector may be more sensitive to reactions following injection, but may also show optimal immune responses to vaccine antigens. To assess safety and maximal tolerated dose of an adenoviral vaccine vector in volunteers without prior immunity, we evaluated a recombinant replication-defective adenovirus type 5 (rAd5) vaccine expressing HIV-1 Gag, Pol, and multiclade Env proteins, VRC-HIVADV014-00-VP, in a randomized, double-blind, dose-escalation, multicenter trial (HVTN study 054) in HIV-1-seronegative participants without detectable neutralizing antibodies (nAb) to the vector. As secondary outcomes, we also assessed T-cell and antibody responses. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Volunteers received one dose of vaccine at either 10(10) or 10(11) adenovector particle units, or placebo. T-cell responses were measured against pools of global potential T-cell epitope peptides. HIV-1 binding and neutralizing antibodies were assessed. Systemic reactogenicity was greater at the higher dose, but the vaccine was well tolerated at both doses. Although no HIV infections occurred, commercial diagnostic assays were positive in 87% of vaccinees one year after vaccination. More than 85% of vaccinees developed HIV-1-specific T-cell responses detected by IFN-γ ELISpot and ICS assays at day 28. T-cell responses were: CD8-biased; evenly distributed across the three HIV-1 antigens; not substantially increased at the higher dose; and detected at similar frequencies one year following injection. The vaccine induced binding antibodies against at least one HIV-1 Env antigen in all recipients. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This vaccine appeared safe and was highly immunogenic following a single dose in human volunteers without prior nAb against the vector. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00119873.

Integrated analysis of CANVAS 1 and 2: phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ceftaroline versus vancomycin plus aztreonam in complicated skin and skin-structure infection.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of complicated skin and skin-structure infection (cSSSI). Increasing antimicrobial resistance in cSSSI has led to a need for new safe and effective therapies. Ceftaroline was evaluated as treatment for cSSSI in 2 identical phase 3 clinical trials, the pooled analysis of which is presented here. The primary objective of each trial was to determine the noninferiority of the clinical cure rate achieved with ceftaroline monotherapy, compared with that achieved with vancomycin plus aztreonam combination therapy, in the clinically evaluable (CE) and modified intent-to-treat (MITT) patient populations. METHODS: Adult patients with cSSSI requiring intravenous therapy received ceftaroline (600 mg every 12 h) or vancomycin plus aztreonam (1 g each every 12 h) for 5-14 days. RESULTS: Of 1378 patients enrolled in both trials, 693 received ceftaroline and 685 received vancomycin plus aztreonam. Baseline characteristics of the treatment groups were comparable. Clinical cure rates were similar for ceftaroline and vancomycin plus aztreonam in the CE (91.6% vs 92.7%) and MITT (85.9% vs 85.5%) populations, respectively, as well as in patients infected with MRSA (93.4% vs 94.3%). The rates of adverse events, discontinuations because of an adverse event, serious adverse events, and death also were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline achieved high clinical cure rates, was efficacious against cSSSI caused by MRSA and other common cSSSI pathogens, and was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the cephalosporin class. Ceftaroline has the potential to provide a monotherapy alternative for the treatment of cSSSI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00424190 for CANVAS 1 and NCT00423657 for CANVAS 2.

Public goods and procreation.

Procreation is the ultimate public goods problem. Each new child affects the welfare of many other people, and some (but not all) children produce uncompensated value that future people will enjoy. This essay addresses challenges that arise if we think of procreation and parenting as public goods. These include whether individual choices are likely to lead to a socially desirable outcome, and whether changes in laws, social norms, or access to genetic engineering and embryo selection might improve the aggregate outcome of our reproductive choices.