265 resultados para Double-blind method
Resumo:
Use of angiotensin (Ang) II AT1 receptor antagonists for treatment of hypertension is rapidly increasing, yet direct comparisons of the relative efficacy of antagonists to block the renin-angiotensin system in humans are lacking. In this study, the Ang II receptor blockade induced by the recommended starting dose of 3 antagonists was evaluated in normotensive subjects in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 4-way crossover study. At 1-week intervals, 12 subjects received a single dose of losartan (50 mg), valsartan (80 mg), irbesartan (150 mg), or placebo. Blockade of the renin-angiotensin system was assessed before and 4, 24, and 30 hours after drug intake by 3 independent methods: inhibition of the blood pressure response to exogenous Ang II, in vitro Ang II receptor assay, and reactive changes in plasma Ang II levels. At 4 hours, losartan blocked 43% of the Ang II-induced systolic blood pressure increase; valsartan, 51%; and irbesartan, 88% (P<0.01 between drugs). The effect of each drug declined with time. At 24 hours, a residual effect was found with all 3 drugs, but at 30 hours, only irbesartan induced a marked, significant blockade versus placebo. Similar results were obtained when Ang II receptor blockade was assessed with an in vitro receptor assay and by the reactive rise in plasma Ang II levels. This study thus demonstrates that the first administration of the recommended starting dose of irbesartan induces a greater and longer lasting Ang II receptor blockade than that of valsartan and losartan in normotensive subjects.
Resumo:
This double-blind placebo-controlled study was designed to investigate the acute and sustained hormonal, renal hemodynamic, and tubular effects of concomitant ACE and neutral endopeptidase (NEP) inhibition by omapatrilat, a vasopeptidase inhibitor, in men. Thirty-two normotensive subjects were randomized to receive a placebo, omapatrilat (40 or 80 mg), or the fosinopril/hydrochlorothiazide (FOS/HCTZ; 20 and 12.5 mg, respectively) fixed combination for 1 week. Blood pressure, renal hemodynamics, urinary electrolytes and atrial natriuretic peptide excretion, and several components of the renin-angiotensin system were measured for 6 hours on days 1 and 7 of drug administration. When compared with the placebo and the FOS/HCTZ combination, omapatrilat induced a significant decrease in plasma angiotensin II levels (P<0.001 versus placebo; P<0.05 versus FOS/HCTZ) and an increase in urinary atrial natriuretic peptide excretion (P<0.01). These hormonal effects were associated with a significant fall in blood pressure (P<0.01) and a marked renal vasodilatation, but with no significant changes in glomerular filtration rate. The FOS/HCTZ markedly increased urinary sodium excretion (P<0.001). The acute natriuretic response to FOS/HCTZ was significantly greater than that observed with omapatrilat (P<0.01). Over 1 week, however, the cumulative sodium excretion induced by both doses of omapatrilat (P<0.01 versus placebo) was at least as great as that induced by the dose of FOS/HCTZ (P=NS versus FOS/HCTZ). In conclusion, the results of the present study in normal subjects demonstrate that omapatrilat has favorable renal hemodynamic effects. Omapatrilat combines potent ACE inhibition with a sustained natriuresis, which explains its well-documented potent antihypertensive efficacy.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The use of n-3 fatty acids may prevent cardiovascular events in patients with recent myocardial infarction or heart failure. Their effects in patients with (or at risk for) type 2 diabetes mellitus are unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind study with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned 12,536 patients who were at high risk for cardiovascular events and had impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes to receive a 1-g capsule containing at least 900 mg (90% or more) of ethyl esters of n-3 fatty acids or placebo daily and to receive either insulin glargine or standard care. The primary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes. The results of the comparison between n-3 fatty acids and placebo are reported here. RESULTS: During a median follow up of 6.2 years, the incidence of the primary outcome was not significantly decreased among patients receiving n-3 fatty acids, as compared with those receiving placebo (574 patients [9.1%] vs. 581 patients [9.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.10; P=0.72). The use of n-3 fatty acids also had no significant effect on the rates of major vascular events (1034 patients [16.5%] vs. 1017 patients [16.3%]; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.10; P=0.81), death from any cause (951 [15.1%] vs. 964 [15.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.07; P=0.63), or death from arrhythmia (288 [4.6%] vs. 259 [4.1%]; hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.30; P=0.26). Triglyceride levels were reduced by 14.5 mg per deciliter (0.16 mmol per liter) more among patients receiving n-3 fatty acids than among those receiving placebo (P<0.001), without a significant effect on other lipids. Adverse effects were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Daily supplementation with 1 g of n-3 fatty acids did not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events in patients at high risk for cardiovascular events. (Funded by Sanofi; ORIGIN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00069784.).
Resumo:
Anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) are doping agents that are mostly used for improvement of strength and muscle hypertrophy. In some sports, athletes reported that the intake of AAS is associated with a better recovery, a higher training load capacity and therefore an increase in physical and mental performances. The purpose of this study was to evaluate, the effect of multiple doses of AAS on different physiological parameters that could indirectly relate the physical state of athletes during a hard endurance training program. In a double blind settings, three groups (n = 9, 8 and 8) were orally administered placebo, testosterone undecanoate or 19-norandrostenedione, 12 times during 1 month. Serum biomarkers (creatine kinase, ASAT and urea), serum hormone profiles (testosterone, cortisol and LH) and urinary catecholamines (noradrenalin, adrenalin and dopamine) were evaluated during the treatment. Running performance was assessed before and after the intervention phase by means of a standardized treadmill test. None of the measured biochemical variables showed significant impact of AAS on physical stress level. Data from exercise testing on submaximal and maximal level did not reveal any performance differences between the three groups or their response to the treatment. In the present study, no effect of multiple oral doses of AAS on endurance performance or bioserum recovery markers was found.
Resumo:
Two retrospective epidemiologic studies have shown that cannabis is the main psychoactive substance detected in the blood of drivers suspected of driving under the influence of psychotropic drugs. An oral administration double-blind crossover study was carried out with eight healthy male subjects, aged 22 to 30 years, all occasional cannabis smokers. Three treatments and one placebo were administered to all participants at a two week interval: 20 mg dronabinol, 16.5 mg D9-tétrahydrocannabinol (THC) and 45.7 mg THC as a cannabis milk decoction. Participants were asked to report the subjective drug effects and their willingness to drive under various circumstances on a visual analog scale. Clinical observations, a psychomotor test and a tracking test on a driving simulator were also carried out. Compared to cannabis smoking, THC, 11-OH-THC and THC-COOH blood concentrations remained low through the whole study (<13.1 ng THC/mL,<24.7 ng 11-OH-THC/mL and<99.9 ng THC-COOH/mL). Two subjects experienced deep anxiety symptoms suggesting that this unwanted side-effect may occur when driving under the influence of cannabis or when driving and smoking a joint. No clear association could be found between these adverse reactions and a susceptibility gene to propensity to anxiety and psychotic symptoms (genetic polymorphism of the catechol-O-methyltransferase). The questionnaires have shown that the willingness to drive was lower when the drivers were assigned an insignificant task and was higher when the mission was of crucial importance. The subjects were aware of the effects of cannabis and their performances on the road sign and tracking test were greatly impaired, especially after ingestion of the strongest dose. The Cannabis Influence Factor (CIF) which relies on the molar ratio of active and inactive cannabinoids in blood provided a good estimate of the fitness to drive.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is generally performed with the patient sedated and receiving analgesics. However, the benefit of the most often used combination of intravenous midazolam and pethidine on patient tolerance and pain and its cardiorespiratory risk have not been fully defined. METHODS: In this double-blind prospective study, 150 outpatients undergoing routine colonoscopy were randomly assigned to receive either (1) low-dose midazolam (35 micrograms/kg) and pethidine (700 micrograms/kg in 48 patients, 500 micrograms/kg in 102 patients), (2) midazolam and placebo pethidine, or (3) pethidine and placebo midazolam. RESULTS: Tolerance (visual analog scale, 0 to 100 points: 0 = excellent; 100 = unbearable) did not improve significantly more in group 1 compared with group 2 (7 points; 95% confidence interval [-2-17]) and group 3 (2 points; 95% confidence interval [-7-12]). Similarly, pain was not significantly improved in group 1 as compared with the other groups. Male gender (p < 0.001) and shorter duration of the procedure (p = 0.004), but not amnesia, were associated with better patient tolerance and less pain. Patient satisfaction was similar in all groups. Oxygen desaturation and hypotension occurred in 33% and 11%, respectively, with a similar frequency in all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the combination of low-dose midazolam and pethidine does not improve patient tolerance and lessen pain during colonoscopy as compared with either drug given alone. When applying low-dose midazolam, oxygen desaturation and hypotension do not occur more often after combined use of both drugs. For the individual patient, sedation and analgesia should be based on the endoscopist's clinical judgement.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antihypertensive efficacy of sinorphan, an orally active inhibitor of neutral endopeptidase EC 3.4.24.11. DESIGN: The ability of sinorphan (100 mg twice a day) to lower blood pressure was compared with that of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor captopril (25 mg twice a day) using a randomized-sequence, double-blind crossover design in 16 patients with essential hypertension. Each treatment was administered for 4 weeks and treatments were separated by a 3-week placebo period. At the end of the last phase of treatment sinorphan was combined with captopril for a further 4-week period. The changes in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were monitored using repeated ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. RESULTS: When given as monotherapy for 4 weeks, neither sinorphan nor captopril significantly reduced the 24-h or the 14-h daytime mean SBP or DBP. However, a significant decrease in DBP was observed during the first 6 h after the morning administration of captopril. With sinorphan only a significant decrease in night-time SBP was found. With the combined therapy of sinorphan and captopril, significant decreases both in SBP and in DBP were observed, which were sustained over 24 h. After 4 weeks of sinorphan alone or in combination with captopril, no change in plasma atrial natriuretic peptide level was found. However, urinary cyclic GMP excretion increased transiently after administration of the neutral endopeptidase inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS: Neutral endopeptidase inhibition with sinorphan has a limited effect on blood pressure in hypertensive patients when given alone. However, simultaneous neutral endopeptidase and ACE inhibition induces a synergistic effect, and might therefore represent an interesting new therapeutic approach to the treatment of essential hypertension.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: In alcohol withdrawal, fixed doses of benzodiazepine are generally recommended as a first-line pharmacologic approach. This study determines the benefits of an individualized treatment regimen on the quantity of benzodiazepine administered and the duration of its use during alcohol withdrawal treatment. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial including 117 consecutive patients with alcohol dependence, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, entering an alcohol treatment program at both the Lausanne and Geneva university hospitals, Switzerland. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: (1) 56 were treated with oxazepam in response to the development of signs of alcohol withdrawal (symptom-triggered); and (2) 61 were treated with oxazepam every 6 hours with additional doses as needed (fixed-schedule). The administration of oxazepam in group 1 and additional oxazepam in group 2 was determined using a standardized measure of alcohol withdrawal. The main outcome measures were the total amount and duration of treatment with oxazepam, the incidence of complications, and the comfort level. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients (39%) in the symptom-triggered group were treated with oxazepam vs 100% in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). The mean oxazepam dose administered in the symptom-triggered group was 37.5 mg compared with 231.4 mg in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). The mean duration of oxazepam treatment was 20.0 hours in the symptom-triggered group vs 62.7 hours in the fixed-schedule group (P<.001). Withdrawal complications were limited to a single episode of seizures in the symptom-triggered group. There were no differences in the measures of comfort between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom-triggered benzodiazepine treatment for alcohol withdrawal is safe, comfortable, and associated with a decrease in the quantity of medication and duration of treatment.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Whether the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban can be an alternative to warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, we randomly assigned patients with acute venous thromboembolism, who had initially received heparin, to receive edoxaban at a dose of 60 mg once daily, or 30 mg once daily (e.g., in the case of patients with creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute or a body weight below 60 kg), or to receive warfarin. Patients received the study drug for 3 to 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients presented with deep-vein thrombosis, and 3319 with a pulmonary embolism. Among patients receiving warfarin, the time in the therapeutic range was 63.5%. Edoxaban was noninferior to warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy outcome, which occurred in 130 patients in the edoxaban group (3.2%) and 146 patients in the warfarin group (3.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.13; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The safety outcome occurred in 349 patients (8.5%) in the edoxaban group and 423 patients (10.3%) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004 for superiority). The rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. A total of 938 patients with pulmonary embolism had right ventricular dysfunction, as assessed by measurement of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels; the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in this subgroup was 3.3% in the edoxaban group and 6.2% in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding in a broad spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism, including those with severe pulmonary embolism. (Funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; Hokusai-VTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00986154.).
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Tobacco dependence is the leading cause of preventable death and disabilities worldwide and nicotine is the main substance responsible for the addiction to tobacco. A vaccine against nicotine was tested in a 6-month randomized, double blind phase II smoking cessation study in 341 smokers with a subsequent 6-month follow-up period. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 229 subjects were randomized to receive five intramuscular injections of the nicotine vaccine and 112 to receive placebo at monthly intervals. All subjects received individual behavioral smoking cessation counseling. The vaccine was safe, generally well tolerated and highly immunogenic, inducing a 100% antibody responder rate after the first injection. Point prevalence of abstinence at month 2 showed a statistically significant difference between subjects treated with Nicotine-Qbeta (47.2%) and placebo (35.1%) (P = 0.036), but continuous abstinence between months 2 and 6 was not significantly different. However, in subgroup analysis of the per-protocol population, the third of subjects with highest antibody levels showed higher continuous abstinence from month 2 until month 6 (56.6%) than placebo treated participants (31.3%) (OR 2.9; P = 0.004) while medium and low antibody levels did not increase abstinence rates. After 12 month, the difference in continuous abstinence rate between subjects on placebo and those with high antibody response was maintained (difference 20.2%, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas Nicotine-Qbeta did not significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in the intention-to-treat population, subgroup analyses of the per-protocol population suggest that such a vaccination against nicotine can significantly increase continuous abstinence rates in smokers when sufficiently high antibody levels are achieved. Immunotherapy might open a new avenue to the treatment of nicotine addiction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Swiss Medical Registry 2003DR2327; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00369616.
Resumo:
We investigated the short-term and sustained hormonal and renal effects of angiotensin II (Ang II) receptor blockade in normotensive healthy volunteers. Twenty-four subjects maintained on a fixed sodium diet were randomized to receive for 8 days a placebo or 10 or 50 mg doses of the Ang II antagonist irbesartan (SR 47436, BMS 186295) according to a double-blind, parallel group design. Plasma renin activity, plasma immunoreactive Ang II and aldosterone levels, blood pressure, renal hemodynamics, and urinary electrolyte excretion were measured for 8 hours after the first and eighth administration of each dose of irbesartan or placebo. Ang II receptor blockade with irbesartan induced a dose-dependent compensatory increase in plasma renin activity and plasma angiotensin levels and a significant decrease in plasma aldosterone levels. The compensatory rise in plasma renin activity and Ang II levels was more pronounced on day 8, reflecting a long duration of the blocking effect of irbesartan. Irbesartan induced small changes in blood pressure and did not significantly modify renal blood flow and glomerular filtration rate. However, a significant decrease in filtration fraction was observed during receptor blockade on days 1 and 8. The tubular effects of irbesartan were characterized by a dose-dependent increase in sodium and chloride excretions. Interestingly, the cumulative natriuretic response to Ang II receptor blockade was similar on days 1 and 8, suggesting that in these subjects, renal Ang II receptors are not blocked over 24 hours during repeated administration even though this antagonist has a long duration of action (t1/2 of 15 to 17 hours).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Oxidative stress is involved in the development of secondary tissue damage and organ failure. Micronutrients contributing to the antioxidant (AOX) defense exhibit low plasma levels during critical illness. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of early AOX micronutrients on clinical outcome in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with conditions characterized by oxidative stress. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center trial in patients admitted to a university hospital ICU with organ failure after complicated cardiac surgery, major trauma, or subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stratification by diagnosis was performed before randomization. The intervention was intravenous supplements for 5 days (selenium 270 microg, zinc 30 mg, vitamin C 1.1 g, and vitamin B1 100 mg) with a double-loading dose on days 1 and 2 or placebo. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were included (102 AOX and 98 placebo). While age and gender did not differ, brain injury was more severe in the AOX trauma group (P = 0.019). Organ function endpoints did not differ: incidence of acute kidney failure and sequential organ failure assessment score decrease were similar (-3.2 +/- 3.2 versus -4.2 +/- 2.3 over the course of 5 days). Plasma concentrations of selenium, zinc, and glutathione peroxidase, low on admission, increased significantly to within normal values in the AOX group. C-reactive protein decreased faster in the AOX group (P = 0.039). Infectious complications did not differ. Length of hospital stay did not differ (16.5 versus 20 days), being shorter only in surviving AOX trauma patients (-10 days; P = 0.045). CONCLUSION: The AOX intervention did not reduce early organ dysfunction but significantly reduced the inflammatory response in cardiac surgery and trauma patients, which may prove beneficial in conditions with an intense inflammation. TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov RCT Register: NCT00515736.
Resumo:
This study presents the results of a multicenter investigation of the efficacy of acamprosate in the treatment of patients with chronic or episodic alcohol dependence. One hundred eighteen patients were randomly assigned to either placebo or acamprosate, and both groups were stratified for concomitant voluntary use of disulfiram. Treatment lasted for 360 days, with an additional 360-day follow-up period. The primary efficacy parameters evaluated were: relapse rate and cumulative abstinence duration (CAD). Results were analyzed according to Intention-To-Treat principles using chi2, t, and multiple regression analyses where appropriate. After 30 days on study medication, 40 of 55 (73%) acamprosate-treated patients were abstinent, compared with 26 of 55 (43%) placebo-treated patients (p = 0.019). The treatment advantage remained throughout the study medication period and was statistically significant until day 270 (p = 0.028). Twenty-seven percent of patients on acamprosate and 53% of patients on placebo had a first drink within the first 30 days of the study. The mean CAD was 137 days (40% abstinent days) for the patients treated with acamprosate and 75 days (21% abstinent days) for the placebo group (p = 0.013). No adverse interaction between acamprosate and disulfiram occurred, and the subgroup who received both medications had a better outcome on CAD than the those on only one or no medication. Acamprosate was well tolerated. Diarrhea was the only significant treatment-induced effect. It was concluded that acamprosate was a useful and safe pharmacotherapy in the long-term treatment of alcoholism. Concomitant administration of disulfiram improved the effectiveness of acamprosate.
Resumo:
The object of this study was to compare the protective action of a new barrier cream (Excipial Protect, Spirig Pharma AG, Egerkingen, Switzerland) to its vehicle in the context of hand irritation of apprentice hairdressers caused by repeated shampooing and exposure to hair-care products. This was a double-blind cross-over comparing Excipial Protect (containing aluminium chlorohydrate 5% as active ingredient) against its vehicle alone. The efficacy of the creams was evaluated taking into account: (1) clinical scores by researchers, (2) biometric measurements, (3) subjective opinions of the subjects. An analysis of variance was performed considering order of application, degree of atopy, and reported number of shampoos. We observed very little difference in efficacy between the protective cream and its vehicle. The presence, however, of aluminium chlorhydrate in the protective cream was shown to have a positive effect against work-related irritation. The cosmetic qualities of the creams seemed, to the participants, to be as important as their real protective and hydrating properties, an important factor in compliance issues.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up. METHODS: BIG 1-98 is a randomised, phase 3, double-blind trial of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer that compares 5 years of tamoxifen or letrozole monotherapy, or sequential treatment with 2 years of one of these drugs followed by 3 years of the other. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks, and stratified according to the two-arm or four-arm randomisation option, participating institution, and chemotherapy use. Patients, investigators, data managers, and medical reviewers were masked. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease-free survival (events were invasive breast cancer relapse, second primaries [contralateral breast and non-breast], or death without previous cancer event). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). The monotherapy comparison included patients randomly assigned to tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years. In 2005, after a significant disease-free survival benefit was reported for letrozole as compared with tamoxifen, a protocol amendment facilitated the crossover to letrozole of patients who were still receiving tamoxifen alone; Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates with inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) are used to account for selective crossover to letrozole of patients (n=619) in the tamoxifen arm. Comparison of sequential treatments to letrozole monotherapy included patients enrolled and randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. Treatment has ended for all patients and detailed safety results for adverse events that occurred during the 5 years of treatment have been reported elsewhere. Follow-up is continuing for those enrolled in the four-arm option. BIG 1-98 is registered at clinicaltrials.govNCT00004205. FINDINGS: 8010 patients were included in the trial, with a median follow-up of 8·1 years (range 0-12·4). 2459 were randomly assigned to monotherapy with tamoxifen for 5 years and 2463 to monotherapy with letrozole for 5 years. In the four-arm option of the trial, 1546 were randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, 1548 to tamoxifen for 5 years, 1540 to letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, and 1548 to tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. At a median follow-up of 8·7 years from randomisation (range 0-12·4), letrozole monotherapy was significantly better than tamoxifen, whether by IPCW or intention-to-treat analysis (IPCW disease-free survival HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·74-0·92], overall survival HR 0·79 [0·69-0·90], DRFI HR 0·79 [0·68-0·92], BCFI HR 0·80 [0·70-0·92]; intention-to-treat disease-free survival HR 0·86 [0·78-0·96], overall survival HR 0·87 [0·77-0·999], DRFI HR 0·86 [0·74-0·998], BCFI HR 0·86 [0·76-0·98]). At a median follow-up of 8·0 years from randomisation (range 0-11·2) for the comparison of the sequential groups with letrozole monotherapy, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the four endpoints for either sequence. 8-year intention-to-treat estimates (each with SE ≤1·1%) for letrozole monotherapy, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole were 78·6%, 77·8%, 77·3% for disease-free survival; 87·5%, 87·7%, 85·9% for overall survival; 89·9%, 88·7%, 88·1% for DRFI; and 86·1%, 85·3%, 84·3% for BCFI. INTERPRETATION: For postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer, a reduction in breast cancer recurrence and mortality is obtained by letrozole monotherapy when compared with tamoxifen montherapy. Sequential treatments involving tamoxifen and letrozole do not improve outcome compared with letrozole monotherapy, but might be useful strategies when considering an individual patient's risk of recurrence and treatment tolerability. FUNDING: Novartis, United States National Cancer Institute, International Breast Cancer Study Group.