Reply to the editor

We appreciate the comments and concerns expressed by Arakawa and colleagues regarding our article, titled “Pulsatile control of rotary blood pumps: Does the modulation waveform matter?”1 Unfortunately, we have to disagree with Arakawa and colleagues. As is obvious from the title of our article, it investigates the effect of different waveforms on the heart–device interaction. In contrast to the authors' claim, this is the first article in the literature that uses basic waveforms (sine, triangle, saw tooth, and rectangular) with different phase shifts to examines their impact on left ventricular unloading. The previous publications2, 3 and 4 just varied the pump speed during systole and diastole, which was first reported by Bearnson and associates5 in 1996, and studied its effect on aortic pressure, coronary flow, and end-diastolic volume. We should mention that dp/dtmax is a load-sensitive parameter of contractility and not representative for the degree of unloading. Moreover, none of the aforementioned reports has studied mechanical unloading and in particular the stroke work of the left ventricle. Our method is unique because we do not just alternate between high and low speed but have accurate control of the waveform because of the direct drive system of Levitronix Technologies LLC (Waltham, Mass) and a custom-developed pump controller. Without referring, Arakawa and associates state “several previous studies have already reported the coronary flow diminishes as the left ventricular assist device support increases.” It should be noted that all the waveforms used in our study have 2000 rpm average value with 1000 rpm amplitude, which is not an excessive speed for the CentriMag rotary pump (Levitronix) to collapse the ventricle and diminish the coronary flow. We agree with Arakawa and coworkers that there is a need for a heart failure model to come to more relevant results with respect to clinical expectations. However, we have explored many existing models, including species and breeds that have a native proneness to cardiomyopathy, but all of them differ from the genetic presentation in humans. We certainly do not believe that the use of microembolization, in which the coronary circulation is impaired by the injection of microspheres, would form a good model from which to draw conclusions about coronary flow change under different loading conditions. A model would be needed in which either an infarct is created to mimic ischemic heart failure or the coronary circulation remains untouched to simulate, for instance, dilated cardiomyopathy. Furthermore, in discussion we clearly mention that “lack of heart failure is a major limitation of our study.” We also believe that unloading is not the only factor of the cardiac functional recovery, and an excessive unloading of the left ventricle might lead to cardiac tissue atrophy. Therefore, in our article we mention that control of the level of cardiac unloading by assist devices has been suggested as a mechanical tool to promote recovery, and more studies are required to find better strategies for the speed modulation of rotary pumps and to achieve an optimal heart load control to enhance myocardial recovery. Finally, there are many publications about pulsing rotary blood pumps and it was impossible to include them all. We preferred to reference some of the earlier basic works such as an original research by Bearnson and coworkers5 and another article published by our group,6 which is more relevant.

Urinary diversion: how experts divert

OBJECTIVE To determine the rates of the available urinary diversion options for patients treated with radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in different settings (pioneering institutions, leading urologic oncology centers, and population based). METHODS Population-based data from the literature included all patients (n = 7608) treated in Sweden during the period 1964-2008, from Germany (n = 14,200) for the years 2008 and 2011, US patients (identified from National Inpatient Sample during 1998-2005, 35,370 patients and 2001-2008, 55,187 patients), and from Medicare (n = 22,600) for the years 1992, 1995, 1998, and 2001. After the International Consultation on Urologic Diseases-European Association of Urology International Consultation on Bladder Cancer 2012, the urinary diversion committee members disclosed data from their home institutions (n = 15,867), including the pioneering institutions and the leading urologic oncology centers. They are the coauthors of this report. RESULTS The receipt of continent urinary diversion in Sweden and the United States is <15%, whereas in the German high-volume setting, 30% of patients receive a neobladder. At leading urologic oncology centers, this rate is also 30%. At pioneering institutions up to 75% of patients receive an orthotopic reconstruction. Anal diversion is <1%. Continent cutaneous diversion is the second choice. CONCLUSION Enormous variations in urinary diversion exist for >2 decades. Increased attention in expanding the use of continent reconstruction may help to reduce these disparities for patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Continent reconstruction should not be the exclusive domain of cystectomy centers. Efforts to increase rates of this complex reconstruction must concentrate on better definition of the quality-of-life impact, technique dissemination, and the centralization of radical cystectomy.

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone. METHODS Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544). FINDINGS 2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc. INTERPRETATION Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.