Multimodal treatment for high-risk prostate cancer with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy preceded or not by radical prostatectomy, concurrent intensified-dose docetaxel and long-term androgen deprivation therapy: results of a prospective phase II trial.

BACKGROUND The optimal management of high-risk prostate cancer remains uncertain. In this study we assessed the safety and efficacy of a novel multimodal treatment paradigm for high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS This was a prospective phase II trial including 35 patients with newly diagnosed high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer treated with high-dose intensity-modulated radiation therapy preceded or not by radical prostatectomy, concurrent intensified-dose docetaxel-based chemotherapy and long-term androgen deprivation therapy. Primary endpoint was acute and late toxicity evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0. Secondary endpoint was biochemical and clinical recurrence-free survival explored with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Acute gastro-intestinal and genito-urinary toxicity was grade 2 in 23% and 20% of patients, and grade 3 in 9% and 3% of patients, respectively. Acute blood/bone marrow toxicity was grade 2 in 20% of patients. No acute grade ≥ 4 toxicity was observed. Late gastro-intestinal and genito-urinary toxicity was grade 2 in 9% of patients each. No late grade ≥ 3 toxicity was observed. Median follow-up was 63 months (interquartile range 31-79). Actuarial 5-year biochemical and clinical recurrence-free survival rate was 55% (95% confidence interval, 35-75%) and 70% (95% confidence interval, 52-88%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS In our phase II trial testing a novel multimodal treatment paradigm for high-risk prostate cancer, toxicity was acceptably low and mid-term oncological outcome was good. This treatment paradigm, thus, may warrant further evaluation in phase III randomized trials.

General distress, hopelessness—suicidal ideation and worrying in adolescence: Concurrent and predictive validity of a symptom-level bifactor model for clinical diagnoses

BACKGROUND: Clinical disorders often share common symptoms and aetiological factors. Bifactor models acknowledge the role of an underlying general distress component and more specific sub-domains of psychopathology which specify the unique components of disorders over and above a general factor. METHODS: A bifactor model jointly calibrated data on subjective distress from The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. The bifactor model encompassed a general distress factor, and specific factors for (a) hopelessness-suicidal ideation, (b) generalised worrying and (c) restlessness-fatigue at age 14 which were related to lifetime clinical diagnoses established by interviews at ages 14 (concurrent validity) and current diagnoses at 17 years (predictive validity) in a British population sample of 1159 adolescents. RESULTS: Diagnostic interviews confirmed the validity of a symptom-level bifactor model. The underlying general distress factor was a powerful but non-specific predictor of affective, anxiety and behaviour disorders. The specific factors for hopelessness-suicidal ideation and generalised worrying contributed to predictive specificity. Hopelessness-suicidal ideation predicted concurrent and future affective disorder; generalised worrying predicted concurrent and future anxiety, specifically concurrent generalised anxiety disorders. Generalised worrying was negatively associated with behaviour disorders. LIMITATIONS: The analyses of gender differences and the prediction of specific disorders was limited due to a low frequency of disorders other than depression. CONCLUSIONS: The bifactor model was able to differentiate concurrent and predict future clinical diagnoses. This can inform the development of targeted as well as non-specific interventions for prevention and treatment of different disorders.

Studying functional brain networks with concurrent transcranical alternating current stimulation and EEG

Recently transcranial electric stimulation (tES) has been widely used as a mean to modulate brain activity. The modulatory effects of tES have been studied with the excitability of primary motor cortex. However, tES effects are not limited to the site of stimulation but extended to other brain areas, suggesting a need for the study of functional brain networks. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) applies sinusoidal current at a specified frequency, presumably modulating brain activity in a frequency-specific manner. At a behavioural level, tACS has been confirmed to modulate behaviour, but its neurophysiological effects are still elusive. In addition, neural oscillations are considered to reflect rhythmic changes in transmission efficacy across brain networks, suggesting that tACS would provide a mean to modulate brain networks. To study neurophysiological effects of tACS, we have been developing a methodological framework by combining transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), EEG and tACS. We have developed the optimized concurrent tACS-EEG recording protocol and powerful artefact removal method that allow us to study neurophysiological effects of tACS. We also established the concurrent tACS-TMS-EEG recording to study brain network connectivity while introducing extrinsic oscillatory activity by tACS. We show that tACS modulate brain activity in a phase-dependent manner. Our methodological advancement will open an opportunity to study causal role of oscillatory brain activity in neural transmissions in cortical brain networks.

Reporting and handling missing outcome data in mental health: a systematic review of Cochrane systematic reviews and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVES The purpose of the study was to provide empirical evidence about the reporting of methodology to address missing outcome data and the acknowledgement of their impact in Cochrane systematic reviews in the mental health field. METHODS Systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews after January 1, 2009 by three Cochrane Review Groups relating to mental health were included. RESULTS One hundred ninety systematic reviews were considered. Missing outcome data were present in at least one included study in 175 systematic reviews. Of these 175 systematic reviews, 147 (84%) accounted for missing outcome data by considering a relevant primary or secondary outcome (e.g., dropout). Missing outcome data implications were reported only in 61 (35%) systematic reviews and primarily in the discussion section by commenting on the amount of the missing outcome data. One hundred forty eligible meta-analyses with missing data were scrutinized. Seventy-nine (56%) of them had studies with total dropout rate between 10 and 30%. One hundred nine (78%) meta-analyses reported to have performed intention-to-treat analysis by including trials with imputed outcome data. Sensitivity analysis for incomplete outcome data was implemented in less than 20% of the meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS Reporting of the techniques for handling missing outcome data and their implications in the findings of the systematic reviews are suboptimal.

An Exploration Based Cognitive Bias Test for Mice: Effects of Handling Method and Stereotypic Behaviour

Behavioural tests to assess affective states are widely used in human research and have recently been extended to animals. These tests assume that affective state influences cognitive processing, and that animals in a negative affective state interpret ambiguous information as expecting a negative outcome (displaying a negative cognitive bias). Most of these tests however, require long discrimination training. The aim of the study was to validate an exploration based cognitive bias test, using two different handling methods, as previous studies have shown that standard tail handling of mice increases physiological and behavioural measures of anxiety compared to cupped handling. Therefore, we hypothesised that tail handled mice would display a negative cognitive bias. We handled 28 female CD-1 mice for 16 weeks using either tail handling or cupped handling. The mice were then trained in an eight arm radial maze, where two adjacent arms predicted a positive outcome (darkness and food), while the two opposite arms predicted a negative outcome (no food, white noise and light). After six days of training, the mice were also given access to the four previously unavailable intermediate ambiguous arms of the radial maze and tested for cognitive bias. We were unable to validate this test, as mice from both handling groups displayed a similar pattern of exploration. Furthermore, we examined whether maze exploration is affected by the expression of stereotypic behaviour in the home cage. Mice with higher levels of stereotypic behaviour spent more time in positive arms and avoided ambiguous arms, displaying a negative cognitive bias. While this test needs further validation, our results indicate that it may allow the assessment of affective state in mice with minimal training— a major confound in current cognitive bias paradigms.