Zoledronic acid efficacy and safety over five years in postmenopausal osteoporosis

In a 5-year study involving 119 postmenopausal women, zoledronic acid 4 mg given once-yearly for 2, 3 or 5 years was well tolerated with no evidence of excessive bone turnover reduction or any safety signals. BMD increased significantly. Bone turnover markers decreased from baseline and were maintained within premenopausal reference ranges. INTRODUCTION: After completion of the core study, two consecutive, 2-year, open-label extensions investigated the efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid 4 mg over 5 years in postmenopausal osteoporosis. METHODS: In the core study, patients received 1 to 4 mg zoledronic acid or placebo. In the first extension, most patients received 4 mg per year and then patients entered the second extension and received 4 mg per year or calcium only. Patients were divided into three subgroups according to years of active treatment received (2, 3 or 5 years). Changes in BMD and bone turnover markers (bone ALP and CTX-I) were assessed. RESULTS: All subgroups showed substantial increases in BMD and decreases in bone markers. By the end of the core study, 37.5% of patients revealed a suboptimal reduction (< 30%) of bone ALP levels. After subsequent study drug administration during the extensions, there was no evidence of progressive reduction of bone turnover markers. Furthermore, increased marker levels after treatment discontinuation demonstrates preservation of bone remodelling capacity. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that zoledronic acid 4 mg once-yearly was well tolerated and effective in reducing biomarkers over 5 years. Detailed analysis of bone marker changes, however, suggests that this drug regimen causes insufficient reduction of remodelling activity in one third of patients.

Periprocedural and late consequences of overlapping Cypher sirolimus-eluting stents: pooled analysis of five clinical trials

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this research was to determine the relative safety and efficacy of multiple (> or =2) overlapping Cypher sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (Johnson ; Johnson, New Brunswick, New Jersey). BACKGROUND: Overlapping coronary stents are common. The periprocedural and late clinical and angiographic consequences of overlapped coronary stents are not clearly defined, particularly for drug-eluting stents. METHODS: All patients enrolled into five clinical trials of the SES were analyzed. Three of these trials were prospective randomized comparisons of the SES to the bare-metal stent (BMS), and two were prospective non-randomized trials of SES-treated patients with historical controls. All clinical and angiographic outcomes in overlap-stent-treated patients were compared by stent type and with single-stent-treated patients for the same stent device. RESULTS: In all, 575 patients with stent overlap (337 SES, 238 BMS) and 1,162 patients with single stents (697 SES, 465 BMS) were analyzed. Stent overlap was associated with a greater late lumen loss in stent and more frequent angiographic restenosis regardless of stent type. Among overlap-stent-treated patients, the SES provided similar magnitude of restenosis benefit as observed for single-stent-treated patients. Overlapped SES was not associated with an increase in myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy of SES overlap, when required, is both safe and efficacious in reducing restenosis with no increase in the incidence of myocardial infarction or major adverse cardiovascular events, when compared with a bare metal coronary stent prosthesis.

Are beta-blockers needed in patients receiving spironolactone for severe chronic heart failure? An analysis of the COPERNICUS study

BACKGROUND: The beneficial effects of beta-blockers and aldosterone receptor antagonists are now well established in patients with severe systolic chronic heart failure (CHF). However, it is unclear whether beta-blockers are able to provide additional benefit in patients already receiving aldosterone antagonists. We therefore examined this question in the COPERNICUS study of 2289 patients with severe CHF receiving the beta1-beta2/alpha1 blocker carvedilol compared with placebo. METHODS: Patients were divided post hoc into subgroups according to whether they were receiving spironolactone (n = 445) or not (n = 1844) at baseline. Consistency of the effect of carvedilol versus placebo was examined for these subgroups with respect to the predefined end points of all-cause mortality, death or CHF-related hospitalizations, death or cardiovascular hospitalizations, and death or all-cause hospitalizations. RESULTS: The beneficial effect of carvedilol was similar among patients who were or were not receiving spironolactone for each of the 4 efficacy measures. For all-cause mortality, the Cox model hazard ratio for carvedilol compared with placebo was 0.65 (95% CI 0.36-1.15) in patients receiving spironolactone and 0.65 (0.51-0.83) in patients not receiving spironolactone. Hazard ratios for death or all-cause hospitalization were 0.76 (0.55-1.05) versus 0.76 (0.66-0.88); for death or cardiovascular hospitalization, 0.61 (0.42-0.89) versus 0.75 (0.64-0.88); and for death or CHF hospitalization, 0.63 (0.43-0.94) versus 0.70 (0.59-0.84), in patients receiving and not receiving spironolactone, respectively. The safety and tolerability of treatment with carvedilol were also similar, regardless of background spironolactone. CONCLUSION: Carvedilol remained clinically efficacious in the COPERNICUS study of patients with severe CHF when added to background spironolactone in patients who were practically all receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (or angiotensin II antagonist) therapy. Therefore, the use of spironolactone in patients with severe CHF does not obviate the necessity of additional treatment that interferes with the adverse effects of sympathetic activation, specifically beta-blockade.

Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis

Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents.

Hylan versus hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intraarticular high-molecular hylan with standard preparations of hyaluronic acids in osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing hylan with a hyaluronic acid in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Trials were identified by systematic searches of Central, Medline, EMBase, Cinahl, the Food and Drug Administration, and Science Citation Index supplemented by hand searches of conference proceedings and reference lists (last update November 2006). Literature screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Effect sizes were calculated from differences in means of pain-related outcomes between treatment and control groups at the end of the trial, divided by the pooled standard deviation. Trials were combined using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen trials with a pooled total of 2,085 patients contributed to the meta-analysis. The pooled effect size was -0.27 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.55, 0.01), favoring hylan, but between-trial heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 88%). Trials with blinded patients, adequate concealment of allocation, and an intent-to-treat analysis had pooled effect sizes near null. The meta-analyses on safety revealed an increased risk associated with hylan for any local adverse events (relative risk [RR] 1.91; 95% CI 1.04, 3.49; I(2) = 28%) and for flares (RR 2.04; 95% CI 1.18, 3.53; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSION: Given the likely lack of a superior effectiveness of hylan over hyaluronic acids and the increased risk of local adverse events associated with hylan, we discourage the use of intraarticular hylan in patients with knee osteoarthritis in clinical research or practice.

A meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES: Our purpose was to make a synthesis of the available evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of 2 drug-eluting stents (DES)--sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES)--in patients with coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: It is not known whether there are differences in late outcomes between the 2 most commonly used DES: SES and PES. METHODS: Sixteen randomized trials of SES versus PES with a total number of 8,695 patients were included in this meta-analysis. A full set of individual outcome data from 5,562 patients was also available. Mean follow-up period ranged from 9 to 37 months. The primary efficacy end point was the need for reintervention (target lesion revascularization). The primary safety end point was stent thrombosis. Secondary end points were death and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: No significant heterogeneity was found across trials. Compared with PES, SES significantly reduced the risk of reintervention (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.87, p < 0.001) and stent thrombosis (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94, p = 0.02) without significantly impacting on the risk of death (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13, p = 0.43) or MI (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.03, p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stents are superior to PES in terms of a significant reduction of the risk of reintervention and stent thrombosis. The risk of death was not significantly different between the 2 DES, but there was a trend toward a higher risk of MI with PES, especially after the first year from the procedure.

A randomized comparison of the safety and efficacy of once-daily gentamicin or thrice-daily gentamicin in combination with ticarcillin-clavulanate

PURPOSE: The primary purpose of the clinical trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of once-a-day compared with three-times-a-day gentamicin in patients with serious infections who had protocol-determined peak serum aminoglycoside concentrations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 249 hospitalized patients with suspected or proven serious infections were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to gentamicin given three times a day with ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC), gentamicin once a day with TC, or ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC) alone. The gentamicin once-a-day dosage for patients with estimated creatinine clearance values of > or =80 mL/min was 5.1 mg/kg. With lower creatinine clearance estimates, the mg/kg dosage of gentamicin was decreased, and the dosage intervals (once daily or three times a day) were maintained. Evaluability required documentation of achievement of protocol-defined peak serum gentamicin levels. RESULTS: Of the total 175 evaluable patients, there were no significant differences found between treatment regimens with respect to clinical or microbiologic efficacy. Bedside audiometry proved impractical due to the frequency of altered mental state in ill patients. Based on the traditional increase in serum creatinine values from baseline values, no differences in renal toxicity between the treatment groups was identified. When changes in renal function were reanalyzed based on maintaining, as opposed to worsening, of renal function, preservation of renal function was better in the gentamicin once-a-day patients as opposed to the gentamicin three-times-a-day patients, P <0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Gentamicin once a day plus TC, gentamicin three times a day plus TC, and TC alone had similar effects in seriously ill hospitalized patients. The incidence of nephrotoxicity was similar in the three treatment groups. Using a nonvalidated post-hoc analysis, renal function was better preserved in gentamicin once-a-day + TC and TC-only patients as opposed to gentamicin three-times-a-day + TC.

Drug eluting and bare metal stents in people with and without diabetes: collaborative network meta-analysis

Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety of three types of stents (sirolimus eluting, paclitaxel eluting, and bare metal) in people with and without diabetes mellitus. Design Collaborative network meta-analysis. Data sources Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), relevant websites, reference lists, conference abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and proceedings of advisory panels for the US Food and Drug Administration. Manufacturers and trialists provided additional data. Review methods Network meta-analysis with a mixed treatment comparison method to combine direct within trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Overall mortality was the primary safety end point, target lesion revascularisation the effectiveness end point. Results 35 trials in 3852 people with diabetes and 10 947 people without diabetes contributed to the analyses. Inconsistency of the network was substantial for overall mortality in people with diabetes and seemed to be related to the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (P value for interaction 0.02). Restricting the analysis to trials with a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more, inconsistency was reduced considerably and hazard ratios for overall mortality were near one for all comparisons in people with diabetes: sirolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.88 (95% credibility interval 0.55 to 1.30), paclitaxel eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.91 (0.60 to 1.38), and sirolimus eluting stents compared with paclitaxel eluting stents 0.95 (0.63 to 1.43). In people without diabetes, hazard ratios were unaffected by the restriction. Both drug eluting stents were associated with a decrease in revascularisation rates compared with bare metal stents in people both with and without diabetes. Conclusion In trials that specified a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more after stent implantation, drug eluting stents seemed safe and effective in people both with and without diabetes.

Thrombolysis in patients with acute stroke caused by cervical artery dissection: analysis of 9 patients and review of the literature

BACKGROUND: Results of recently published studies suggest that intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and local intra-arterial thrombolysis (LIT) are feasible procedures in acute stroke after cervical artery dissection (CAD). OBJECTIVES: To describe 9 patients with acute stroke caused by CAD who were treated by LIT (n = 7) or IVT (n = 2) and to review the literature. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of clinical and neuroradiological findings; literature review from 1980 to present. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. RESULTS: Of 7 patients treated with LIT, 3 had good outcomes (mRS score of 0-2) and 4 had bad outcomes (mRS score of 3-6) at 3 months. The 2 patients who had received IVT recovered to mRS scores of 0 and 3. Twenty-one patients were identified in the literature. Overall (N = 30), in the IVT group (n = 19), the outcome was good in 8 patients (42%) and bad in 11 (58%); in the LIT group (n = 11), 6 patients (55%) had a good outcome and 5 (45%) had a bad outcome. Overall, 47% (14/30) of the patients (IVT and LIT groups) had a good outcome. Total mortality was 13% (4/30). There were no secondary complications due to extension of wall hematoma or angiography. One symptomatic hemorrhage occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolysis is feasible in acute stroke caused by CAD. Local complications from extension of wall hematoma did not occur. Further prospective studies are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of thrombolysis in the special circumstance of acute stroke caused by CAD.

Erythropoietin or Darbepoetin for patients with cancer--meta-analysis based on individual patient data

BACKGROUND: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) reduce anemia in cancer patients and may improve quality of life, but there are concerns that ESAs might increase mortality. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the effect of ESAs and identify factors that modify the effects of ESAs on overall survival, progression free survival, thromboembolic and cardiovascular events as well as need for transfusions and other important safety and efficacy outcomes in cancer patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and conference proceedings for eligible trials. Manufacturers of ESAs were contacted to identify additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) versus red blood cell transfusions (as necessary) alone, to prevent or treat anemia in adult or pediatric cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin alpha, epoetin beta or darbepoetin alpha plus red blood cell transfusions versus transfusion alone, for prophylaxis or therapy of anemia while or after receiving anti-cancer treatment. Patient-level data were obtained and analyzed by independent statisticians at two academic departments, using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis. Analyses were according to the intention-to-treat principle. Primary endpoints were on study mortality and overall survival during the longest available follow-up, regardless of anticancer treatment, and in patients receiving chemotherapy. Tests for interactions were used to identify differences in effects of ESAs on mortality across pre-specified subgroups. The present review reports only the results for the primary endpoint. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 13933 cancer patients from 53 trials were analyzed, 1530 patients died on-study and 4993 overall. ESAs increased on study mortality (combined hazard ratio [cHR] 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.30) and worsened overall survival (cHR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00-1.12), with little heterogeneity between trials (I(2) 0%, p=0.87 and I(2) 7.1%, p=0.33, respectively). Thirty-eight trials enrolled 10441 patients receiving chemotherapy. The cHR for on study mortality was 1.10 (95% CI 0.98-1.24) and 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.11) for overall survival. There was little evidence for a difference between trials of patients receiving different cancer treatments (P for interaction=0.42). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ESA treatment in cancer patients increased on study mortality and worsened overall survival. For patients undergoing chemotherapy the increase was less pronounced, but an adverse effect could not be excluded.

Feasibility and safety of same-day home discharge after radiofrequency catheter ablation

Interventional cardiology in a day-case setting might reduce logistic constraints on hospital resources. However, in contrast with coronary angioplasty, few data support the feasibility and safety of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RCA). The aim of this prospective, multicenter cohort study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of RCA in 1,342 patients (814 men; mean age 57 +/- 17 years) considered eligible for ambulatory RCA, according to specific set of criteria, for common atrial flutter (n = 632), atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (n = 436), accessory pathways (n = 202), and atrial tachycardia (n = 72). Patients suitable for early discharge (4 to 6 hours after uncomplicated RCA) were scheduled for 1-month follow-up. Predictive factors for delayed complications were studied by multivariate analysis. Of the 1,342 enrolled patients, 1,270 (94.6%) were discharged the same day and followed for 1 month; no deaths occurred, and the readmission rate was 0.79% (95% confidence interval 0.30% to 1.27%). Six patients had significant puncture complications, 2 presented with symptomatic delayed pulmonary embolism, and 2 had new onset of poorly tolerated atrial flutter. None of these complications was life threatening. Multivariate analysis did not identify any significant independent predictors for delayed complications. In conclusion, these data suggest that same-day discharge after uncomplicated RCA for routine supraventricular arrhythmias is safe and may be applicable in clinical practice. This approach is known to be associated with significant patient satisfaction and cost savings and can be considered a first-line option in most patients who undergo routine ablation procedures.

Antiplatelets versus Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Cervical Artery Dissection: Bayesian Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE To compare the effects of antiplatelets and anticoagulants on stroke and death in patients with acute cervical artery dissection. DESIGN Systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES The reviewers searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to November 2012, checked reference lists, and contacted authors. STUDY SELECTION Studies were eligible if they were randomised, quasi-randomised or observational comparisons of antiplatelets and anticoagulants in patients with cervical artery dissection. DATA EXTRACTION Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by another. Bayesian techniques were used to appropriately account for studies with scarce event data and imbalances in the size of comparison groups. DATA SYNTHESIS Thirty-seven studies (1991 patients) were included. We found no randomised trial. The primary analysis revealed a large treatment effect in favour of antiplatelets for preventing the primary composite outcome of ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage or death within the first 3 months after treatment initiation (relative risk 0.32, 95% credibility interval 0.12 to 0.63), while the degree of between-study heterogeneity was moderate (τ(2) = 0.18). In an analysis restricted to studies of higher methodological quality, the possible advantage of antiplatelets over anticoagulants was less obvious than in the main analysis (relative risk 0.73, 95% credibility interval 0.17 to 2.30). CONCLUSION In view of these results and the safety advantages, easier usage and lower cost of antiplatelets, we conclude that antiplatelets should be given precedence over anticoagulants as a first line treatment in patients with cervical artery dissection unless results of an adequately powered randomised trial suggest the opposite.

Improved safety and reduction in stent thrombosis associated with biodegradable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: final 5-year report of the LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) randomized, noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVES This study sought to report the final 5 years follow-up of the landmark LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) trial. BACKGROUND The LEADERS trial is the first randomized study to evaluate biodegradable polymer-based drug-eluting stents (DES) against durable polymer DES. METHODS The LEADERS trial was a 10-center, assessor-blind, noninferiority, "all-comers" trial (N = 1,707). All patients were centrally randomized to treatment with either biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BES) (n = 857) or durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (n = 850). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization within 9 months. Secondary endpoints included extending the primary endpoint to 5 years and stent thrombosis (ST) (Academic Research Consortium definition). Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS At 5 years, the BES was noninferior to SES for the primary endpoint (186 [22.3%] vs. 216 [26.1%], rate ratio [RR]: 0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68 to 1.02], p for noninferiority <0.0001, p for superiority = 0.069). The BES was associated with a significant reduction in the more comprehensive patient-orientated composite endpoint of all-cause death, any MI, and all-cause revascularization (297 [35.1%] vs. 339 [40.4%], RR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.71 to 0.98], p for superiority = 0.023). A significant reduction in very late definite ST from 1 to 5 years was evident with the BES (n = 5 [0.7%] vs. n = 19 [2.5%], RR: 0.26 [95% CI: 0.10 to 0.68], p = 0.003), corresponding to a significant reduction in ST-associated clinical events (primary endpoint) over the same time period (n = 3 of 749 vs. n = 14 of 738, RR: 0.20 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.71], p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS The safety benefit of the biodegradable polymer BES, compared with the durable polymer SES, was related to a significant reduction in very late ST (>1 year) and associated composite clinical outcomes. (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating [LEADERS] trial; NCT00389220).

Psychometric properties of the Swiss version of the Nursing Home Survey on Patient Safety Culture

The Nursing Home Survey on Patient Safety Culture (NHSPSC) was specifically developed for nursing homes to assess a facility’s safety climate and it consists of 12 dimensions. After its pilot testing, however, no fur- ther psychometric analyses were performed on the instrument. For this study of safety climate in Swiss nursing home units, the NHSPSC was linguistically adapted to the Swiss context and to address the unit as well as facility level, with the aim of testing aspects of the validity and reliability of the Swiss version before its use in Swiss nursing home units. Psychometric analyses were performed on data from 367 nurs- ing personnel from nine nursing homes in the German-speaking part of Switzerland (response rate = 66%), and content validity (CVI) examined. The statistical influence of unit membership on respondents’ answers, and on their agreement concerning their units’ safety climate, was tested using intraclass corre- lation coefficients (ICCs) and the rWG(J) interrater agreement index. A multilevel exploratory factor analysis (MEFA) with oblimin rotation was applied to examine the questionnaire’s dimensionality. Cronbach’s alpha and Raykov’s rho were calculated to assess factor reliability. The relationship of safety climate dimensions with clinical outcomes was explored. Expert feedback confirmed the relevance of the instru- ment’s items (CVI = 0.93). Personnel showed strong agreement in their perceptions in three dimensions of the questionnaire. ICCs supported a multilevel analysis. MEFA produced nine factors at the within-level (in comparison to 12 in the original version) and two factors at the between-level with satisfactory fit statis- tics. Raykov’s Rho for the single level factors ranged between 0.67 and 0.86. Some safety climate dimen- sions show moderate, but non-significant correlations with the use of bedrails, physical restraint use, and fall-related injuries. The Swiss version of the NHSPSC needs further refinement and testing before its use can be recommended in Swiss nursing homes: its dimensionality needs further clarification, particularly to distinguish items addressing the unit-level safety climate from those at the facility level.