Daily physical activities and sports in adult survivors of childhood cancer and healthy controls: a population-based questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: Healthy lifestyle including sufficient physical activity may mitigate or prevent adverse long-term effects of childhood cancer. We described daily physical activities and sports in childhood cancer survivors and controls, and assessed determinants of both activity patterns. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The Swiss Childhood Cancer Survivor Study is a questionnaire survey including all children diagnosed with cancer 1976-2003 at age 0-15 years, registered in the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry, who survived ≥5 years and reached adulthood (≥20 years). Controls came from the population-based Swiss Health Survey. We compared the two populations and determined risk factors for both outcomes in separate multivariable logistic regression models. The sample included 1058 survivors and 5593 controls (response rates 78% and 66%). Sufficient daily physical activities were reported by 52% (n = 521) of survivors and 37% (n = 2069) of controls (p<0.001). In contrast, 62% (n = 640) of survivors and 65% (n = 3635) of controls reported engaging in sports (p = 0.067). Risk factors for insufficient daily activities in both populations were: older age (OR for ≥35 years: 1.5, 95CI 1.2-2.0), female gender (OR 1.6, 95CI 1.3-1.9), French/Italian Speaking (OR 1.4, 95CI 1.1-1.7), and higher education (OR for university education: 2.0, 95CI 1.5-2.6). Risk factors for no sports were: being a survivor (OR 1.3, 95CI 1.1-1.6), older age (OR for ≥35 years: 1.4, 95CI 1.1-1.8), migration background (OR 1.5, 95CI 1.3-1.8), French/Italian speaking (OR 1.4, 95CI 1.2-1.7), lower education (OR for compulsory schooling only: 1.6, 95CI 1.2-2.2), being married (OR 1.7, 95CI 1.5-2.0), having children (OR 1.3, 95CI 1.4-1.9), obesity (OR 2.4, 95CI 1.7-3.3), and smoking (OR 1.7, 95CI 1.5-2.1). Type of diagnosis was only associated with sports. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Physical activity levels in survivors were lower than recommended, but comparable to controls and mainly determined by socio-demographic and cultural factors. Strategies to improve physical activity levels could be similar as for the general population.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics of once-daily raltegravir and atazanavir in healthy volunteers.

Atazanavir inhibits UDP-glucuronyl-transferase-1A1 (UGT1A1), which metabolizes raltegravir, but the magnitude of steady-state inhibition and role of the UGT1A1 genotype are unknown. Sufficient inhibition could lead to reduced-dose and -cost raltegravir regimens. Nineteen healthy volunteers, age 24 to 51 years, took raltegravir 400 mg twice daily (arm A) and 400 mg plus atazanavir 400 mg once daily (arm B), separated by ?3 days, in a crossover design. After 1 week on each regimen, raltegravir and raltegravir-glucuronide plasma and urine concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in multiple samples obtained over 12 h (arm A) or 24 h (arm B) and analyzed by noncompartmental methods. UGT1A1 promoter variants were detected with a commercially available kit and published primers. The primary outcome was the ratio of plasma raltegravir C(tau), or concentration at the end of the dosing interval, for arm B (24 h) versus arm A (12 h). The arm B-to-arm A geometric mean ratios (95% confidence interval, P value) for plasma raltegravir C(tau), area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC(0-12)), and raltegravir-glucuronide/raltegravir AUC(0-12) were 0.38 (0.22 to 0.65, 0.001), 1.32 (0.62 to 2.81, 0.45), and 0.47 (0.38 to 0.59, <0.001), respectively. Nine volunteers were heterozygous and one was homozygous for a UGT1A1 reduction-of-function allele, but these were not associated with metabolite formation. Although atazanavir significantly reduced the formation of the glucuronide metabolite, its steady-state boosting of plasma raltegravir did not render the C(tau) with a once-daily raltegravir dose of 400 mg similar to the C(tau) with the standard twice-daily dose. UGT1A1 promoter variants did not significantly influence this interaction.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Adjuvant early breast cancer systemic therapies according to daily used technologies.

Prognosis of early breast cancer patients is significantly improved with the use of adjuvant therapies. Various guidelines have been proposed to select patients who will derive the most benefit from such treatments. However, classifications have limited usefulness in subsets of patients such as those with node negative breast cancer. The 2007 St. Paul de Vence Clinical Practice Recommendations proposed to consider adjuvant therapy in accordance with the 10-year relapse-free survival reduction estimated by Adjuvant! Online. However, many limitations remain regarding the use of Adjuvant! Online. Among them, adverse prognostic and/or predictive factors such as vascular invasion, mitotic activity, progesterone receptor negativity, and HER-2 expression are not incorporated in the routine clinical decision process. Our group has therefore issued guidelines based on the consideration of both Adjuvant! Online calculations and the prognostic and/or predictive effects of these markers. In addition, web-accessible comprehensive tables summarizing these recommendations are provided.

Asymptomatic high flow subclavian steal in a patient with hemodialysis access.

Subclavian steal phenomenon due to proximal subclavian artery stenosis or occlusion is not un-common but often remains asymptomatic. We describe the case of a 66-year-old man with end-stage renal disease hemodialysed through a brachio-brachial loop graft of the left forearm. Echo-Doppler precerebral examination showed a high reversed flow of 570 ml/min in the ipsilateral vertebral artery. After successful endovascular recanalization of the subclavian artery, access blood flow increased and vertebral flow decreased to 30 ml/min. Complete neurological examination was normal both before and after endovascular treatment. This case demonstrates how high a subclavian steal can be without causing symptoms and how well precerbral and cerebral circulation can adapt to hemodynamic changes.

Chest pain in daily practice: occurrence, causes and management

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: We assessed the occurrence and aetiology of chest pain in primary care practice. These features differ between primary and emergency care settings, where most previous studies have been performed. METHODS: 59 GPs in western Switzerland recorded all consecutive cases presenting with chest pain. Clinical characteristics, laboratory tests and other investigations as well as the diagnoses remaining after 12 months of follow-up were systematically registered. RESULTS: Among 24,620 patients examined during a total duration of 300 weeks of observation, 672 (2.7%) presented with chest pain (52% female, mean age 55 +/- 19(SD)). Most cases, 442 (1.8%), presented new symptoms and in 356 (1.4%) it was the reason for consulting. Over 40 ailments were diagnosed: musculoskeletal chest pain (including chest wall syndrome) (49%), cardiovascular (16%), psychogenic (11%), respiratory (10%), digestive (8%), miscellaneous (2%) and without diagnosis (3%). The three most prevalent diseases were: chest wall syndrome (43%), coronary artery disease (12%) and anxiety (7%). Unstable angina (6), myocardial infarction (4) and pulmonary embolism (2) were uncommon (1.8%). Potentially serious conditions including cardiac, respiratory and neoplasic diseases accounted for 20% of cases. A large number of laboratory tests (42%), referral to a specialist (16%) or hospitalisation (5%) were performed. Twentyfive patients died during follow-up, of which twelve were for a reason directly associated with thoracic pain [cancer (7) and cardiac causes (5)]. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic pain was present in 2.7% of primary care consultations. Chest wall syndrome pain was the main aetiology. Cardio - vascular emergencies were uncommon. However chest pain deserves full consideration because of the occurrence of potentially serious conditions.

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Severity and Overnight Body Fluid Shift before and after Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Obstructive sleep apnea is associated with significantly increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Fluid overload may promote obstructive sleep apnea in patients with ESRD through an overnight fluid shift from the legs to the neck soft tissues. Body fluid shift and severity of obstructive sleep apnea before and after hemodialysis were compared in patients with ESRD. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Seventeen patients with hemodialysis and moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea were included. Polysomnographies were performed the night before and after hemodialysis to assess obstructive sleep apnea, and bioimpedance was used to measure fluid overload and leg fluid volume. RESULTS: The mean overnight rostral fluid shift was 1.27±0.41 L prehemodialysis; it correlated positively with fluid overload volume (r=0.39; P=0.02) and was significantly lower posthemodialysis (0.78±0.38 L; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the mean obstructive apnea-hypopnea index before and after hemodialysis (46.8±22.0 versus 42.1±18.6 per hour; P=0.21), but obstructive apnea-hypopnea index was significantly lower posthemodialysis (-10.1±10.8 per hour) in the group of 12 patients, with a concomitant reduction of fluid overload compared with participants without change in fluid overload (obstructive apnea-hypopnea index +8.2±16.1 per hour; P<0.01). A lower fluid overload after hemodialysis was significantly correlated (r=0.49; P=0.04) with a lower obstructive apnea-hypopnea index. Fluid overload-assessed by bioimpedance-was the best predictor of the change in obstructive apnea-hypopnea index observed after hemodialysis (standardized r=-0.68; P=0.01) in multivariate regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid overload influences overnight rostral fluid shift and obstructive sleep apnea severity in patients with ESRD undergoing intermittent hemodialysis. Although no benefit of hemodialysis on obstructive sleep apnea severity was observed in the whole group, the change in obstructive apnea-hypopnea index was significantly correlated with the change in fluid overload after hemodialysis. Moreover, the subgroup with lower fluid overload posthemodialysis showed a significantly lower obstructive sleep apnea severity, which provides a strong incentive to further study whether optimizing fluid status in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and ESRD will improve the obstructive apnea-hypopnea index.

Prevalence and Diagnostic Approach to Sleep Apnea in Hemodialysis Patients: A Population Study.

BACKGROUND: Previous observations found a high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the hemodialysis population, but the best diagnostic approach remains undefined. We assessed OSA prevalence and performance of available screening tools to propose a specific diagnostic algorithm. METHODS: 104 patients from 6 Swiss hemodialysis centers underwent polygraphy and completed 3 OSA screening scores: STOP-BANG, Berlin's Questionnaire, and Adjusted Neck Circumference. The OSA predictors were identified on a derivation population and used to develop the diagnostic algorithm, which was validated on an independent population. RESULTS: We found 56% OSA prevalence (AHI ≥ 15/h), which was largely underdiagnosed. Screening scores showed poor performance for OSA screening (ROC areas 0.538 [SE 0.093] to 0.655 [SE 0.083]). Age, neck circumference, and time on renal replacement therapy were the best predictors of OSA and were used to develop a screening algorithm, with higher discriminatory performance than classical screening tools (ROC area 0.831 [0.066]). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the high OSA prevalence and highlights the low diagnosis rate of this treatable cardiovascular risk factor in the hemodialysis population. Considering the poor performance of OSA screening tools, we propose and validate a specific algorithm to identify hemodialysis patients at risk for OSA for whom further sleep investigations should be considered.