Prevention and treatment of protein energy wasting in chronic kidney disease patients: a consensus statement by the International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism.

Protein energy wasting (PEW) is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes, especially in individuals receiving maintenance dialysis therapy. A multitude of factors can affect the nutritional and metabolic status of CKD patients requiring a combination of therapeutic maneuvers to prevent or reverse protein and energy depletion. These include optimizing dietary nutrient intake, appropriate treatment of metabolic disturbances such as metabolic acidosis, systemic inflammation, and hormonal deficiencies, and prescribing optimized dialytic regimens. In patients where oral dietary intake from regular meals cannot maintain adequate nutritional status, nutritional supplementation, administered orally, enterally, or parenterally, is shown to be effective in replenishing protein and energy stores. In clinical practice, the advantages of oral nutritional supplements include proven efficacy, safety, and compliance. Anabolic strategies such as anabolic steroids, growth hormone, and exercise, in combination with nutritional supplementation or alone, have been shown to improve protein stores and represent potential additional approaches for the treatment of PEW. Appetite stimulants, anti-inflammatory interventions, and newer anabolic agents are emerging as novel therapies. While numerous epidemiological data suggest that an improvement in biomarkers of nutritional status is associated with improved survival, there are no large randomized clinical trials that have tested the effectiveness of nutritional interventions on mortality and morbidity.

Antiretroviral treatment of adult HIV infection: 2010 recommendations of the International AIDS Society-USA panel.

CONTEXT: Recent data regarding the consequences of untreated human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and the expansion of treatment choices for antiretroviral-naive and antiretroviral-experienced patients warrant an update of the International AIDS Society-USA guidelines for the use of antiretroviral therapy in adults with HIV infection. OBJECTIVES: To provide updated recommendations for management of HIV-infected adults, using antiretroviral drugs and laboratory monitoring tools available in the international, developed-world setting. This report provides guidelines for when to initiate antiretroviral therapy, selection of appropriate initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and what regimens to use when changing. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A panel with expertise in HIV research and clinical care reviewed relevant data published or presented at selected scientific conferences since the last panel report through April 2010. Data were identified through a PubMed search, review of scientific conference abstracts, and requests to antiretroviral drug manufacturers for updated clinical trials and adverse event data. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: New evidence was reviewed by the panel. Recommendations were drafted by section writing committees and reviewed and edited by the entire panel. The quality and strength of the evidence were rated and recommendations were made by full panel consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Patient readiness for treatment should be confirmed before initiation of antiretroviral treatment. Therapy is recommended for asymptomatic patients with a CD4 cell count < or = 500/microL, for all symptomatic patients, and those with specific conditions and comorbidities. Therapy should be considered for asymptomatic patients with CD4 cell count > 500/microL. Components of the initial and subsequent regimens must be individualized, particularly in the context of concurrent conditions. Patients receiving antiretroviral treatment should be monitored regularly; treatment failure should be detected and managed early, with the goal of therapy, even in heavily pretreated patients, being HIV-1 RNA suppression below commercially available assay quantification limits.

The prognostic value of health-related quality-of-life data in predicting survival in glioblastoma cancer patients: results from an international randomised phase III EORTC Brain Tumour and Radiation Oncology Groups, and NCIC Clinical Trials Group study.

This is one of the few studies that have explored the value of baseline symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in predicting survival in brain cancer patients. Baseline HRQOL scores (from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the Brain Cancer Module (BN 20)) were examined in 490 newly diagnosed glioblastoma cancer patients for the relationship with overall survival by using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Refined techniques as the bootstrap re-sampling procedure and the computation of C-indexes and R(2)-coefficients were used to try and validate the model. Classical analysis controlled for major clinical prognostic factors selected cognitive functioning (P=0.0001), global health status (P=0.0055) and social functioning (P<0.0001) as statistically significant prognostic factors of survival. However, several issues question the validity of these findings. C-indexes and R(2)-coefficients, which are measures of the predictive ability of the models, did not exhibit major improvements when adding selected or all HRQOL scores to clinical factors. While classical techniques lead to positive results, more refined analyses suggest that baseline HRQOL scores add relatively little to clinical factors to predict survival. These results may have implications for future use of HRQOL as a prognostic factor in cancer patients.

Addressing ethical dilemmas in the clinical care of adolescents: an international view.

This chapter reviews some basic concepts underlying ethical issues in adolescence and provides a step-by-step procedure to address ethical dilemmas involving minor adolescents, based on a deliberative approach. "Deliberation" with the patient, along with involving the opinion of relevant stakeholders if possible, allows for a careful, multidisciplinary examination of all options, the medical and psychosocial consequences, and the moral values stressed by each option. Although the final decision regarding which ethical option should be chosen usually belongs to the health care providers and his or her patient, the deliberative approach provides the ingredients for sound, unbiased decision-making.