Quality of analgesic treatment in patients with advanced prostate cancer: do we do a better job now? The Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) experience

GOALS OF WORK: The aim of this study was to evaluate pain intensity and the application of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain treatment in patients with prostate cancer treated at Swiss cancer centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed a series of five multicenter phase II clinical trials which examined the palliative effect of different chemotherapies in patients with advanced hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. Of 170 patients, 1,018 visits were evaluable for our purpose, including ratings of pain intensity by patients and prescribed analgesics. MAIN RESULTS: No or mild pain was indicated by patients in 36 to 55% of the visits, more than mild pain in 30 to 46%. In 21% of the visits, the WHO pain treatment criteria (treatment according to one of the three steps; oral, rectal or transdermal application of the main dose; administration on a regular schedule) were fulfilled, and the Cleeland index was positive according to all recommendations. In 6% of the visits, neither the WHO criteria were fulfilled nor was the Cleeland index positive. This indicates insufficient pain treatment not following the WHO guidelines and that the prescribed analgesics were not sufficiently potent for the rated pain intensity. CONCLUSIONS: In this selective Swiss sample, the standard of analgesic treatment is high. However, there is still scope for improvement. This cannot solely be solved by improving the knowledge of the physicians. Programs to change the patients' attitude towards cancer pain, training to improve the physicians' communication skills, and institutional changes may be promising strategies.

Fenestrated and branched endografts: why we need them now

Standard endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has been shown to be associated with significant advantages compared with conventional surgery in the perioperative time frame related to the minimally invasive nature of the procedure. Given the encouraging long-term results of endovascular AAA repair, this method is increasingly applied to patients with complex AAA anatomies. The present article reviews the indications for branched and fenestrated endografts in various aortic pathologic processes.

Recent advances in understanding Marfan syndrome: should we now treat surgical patients with losartan?

OBJECTIVE: Marfan syndrome is a systemic connective tissue disorder caused by mutations in the fibrillin-1 gene. It was originally believed that Marfan syndrome results exclusively from the production of abnormal fibrillin-1 that leads to structurally weaker connective tissue when incorporated into the extracellular matrix. This effect seemed to explain many of the clinical features of Marfan syndrome, including aortic root dilatation and acute aortic dissection, which represent the main causes of morbidity and mortality in Marfan syndrome. METHODS: Recent molecular studies, most based on genetically defined mouse models of Marfan syndrome, have challenged this paradigm. These studies established the critical contribution of fibrillin-1 haploinsufficiency and dysregulated transforming growth factor-beta signaling to disease progression. RESULTS: It seems that many manifestations of Marfan syndrome are less related to a primary structural deficiency of the tissues than to altered morphogenetic and homeostatic programs that are induced by altered transforming growth factor-beta signaling. Most important, transforming growth factor-beta antagonism, through transforming growth factor-beta neutralizing antibodies or losartan (an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist), has been shown to prevent and possibly reverse aortic root dilatation, mitral valve prolapse, lung disease, and skeletal muscle dysfunction in a mouse model of Marfan syndrome. CONCLUSION: There are indicators that losartan, a drug widely used to treat arterial hypertension in humans, offers the first potential for primary prevention of clinical manifestations in Marfan syndrome.

Everolimus immunosuppression in de novo heart transplant recipients: What does the evidence tell us now?

The efficacy of everolimus with reduced cyclosporine in de novo heart transplant patients has been demonstrated convincingly in randomized studies. Moreover, everolimus-based immunosuppression in de novo heart transplant recipients has been shown in two randomized trials to reduce the increase in maximal intimal thickness based on intravascular ultrasound, indicating attenuation of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Randomized trials of everolimus in de novo heart transplantation have also consistently shown reduced cytomegalovirus infection versus antimetabolite therapy. In maintenance heart transplantation, conversion from calcineurin inhibitors to everolimus has demonstrated a sustained improvement in renal function. In de novo patients, a renal benefit may only be achieved if there is an adequate reduction in exposure to calcineurin inhibitor therapy. Delayed introduction of everolimus may be appropriate in patients at high risk of wound healing complications, e.g. diabetic patients or patients with ventricular assist device. The current evidence base suggests that the most convincing reasons for use of everolimus from the time of heart transplantation are to slow the progression of CAV and to lower the risk of cytomegalovirus infection. A regimen of everolimus with reduced-exposure calcineurin inhibitor and steroids in de novo heart transplant patients represents a welcome addition to the therapeutic armamentarium.