7 resultados para Trials (Libel and slander)
em Repositório da Produção Científica e Intelectual da Unicamp
Resumo:
Phase I trials use a small number of patients to define a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the safety of new agents. We compared data from phase I and registration trials to determine whether early trials predicted later safety and final dose. We searched the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website for drugs approved in nonpediatric cancers (January 1990-October 2012). The recommended phase II dose (R2PD) and toxicities from phase I were compared with doses and safety in later trials. In 62 of 85 (73%) matched trials, the dose from the later trial was within 20% of the RP2D. In a multivariable analysis, phase I trials of targeted agents were less predictive of the final approved dose (OR, 0.2 for adopting ± 20% of the RP2D for targeted vs. other classes; P = 0.025). Of the 530 clinically relevant toxicities in later trials, 70% (n = 374) were described in phase I. A significant relationship (P = 0.0032) between increasing the number of patients in phase I (up to 60) and the ability to describe future clinically relevant toxicities was observed. Among 28,505 patients in later trials, the death rate that was related to drug was 1.41%. In conclusion, dosing based on phase I trials was associated with a low toxicity-related death rate in later trials. The ability to predict relevant toxicities correlates with the number of patients on the initial phase I trial. The final dose approved was within 20% of the RP2D in 73% of assessed trials.
Resumo:
The 2005 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference proposed new criteria for diagnosing and scoring the severity of chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The 2014 NIH consensus maintains the framework of the prior consensus with further refinement based on new evidence. Revisions have been made to address areas of controversy or confusion, such as the overlap chronic GVHD subcategory and the distinction between active disease and past tissue damage. Diagnostic criteria for involvement of mouth, eyes, genitalia, and lungs have been revised. Categories of chronic GVHD should be defined in ways that indicate prognosis, guide treatment, and define eligibility for clinical trials. Revisions have been made to focus attention on the causes of organ-specific abnormalities. Attribution of organ-specific abnormalities to chronic GVHD has been addressed. This paradigm shift provides greater specificity and more accurately measures the global burden of disease attributed to GVHD, and it will facilitate biomarker association studies.
Resumo:
To assess the effects of a soy dietary supplement on the main biomarkers of cardiovascular health in postmenopausal women compared with the effects of low-dose hormone therapy (HT) and placebo. Double-blind, randomized and controlled intention-to-treat trial. Sixty healthy postmenopausal women, aged 40-60 years, 4.1 years mean time since menopause were recruited and randomly assigned to 3 groups: a soy dietary supplement group (isoflavone 90mg), a low-dose HT group (estradiol 1 mg plus noretisterone 0.5 mg) and a placebo group. Lipid profile, glucose level, body mass index, blood pressure and abdominal/hip ratio were evaluated in all the participants at baseline and after 16 weeks. Statistical analyses were performed using the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), paired Student's t-test and Wilcoxon test. After a 16-week intervention period, total cholesterol decreased 11.3% and LDL-cholesterol decreased 18.6% in the HT group, but both did not change in the soy dietary supplement and placebo groups. Values for triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, glucose level, body mass index, blood pressure and abdominal/hip ratio did not change over time in any of the three groups. The use of dietary soy supplement did not show any significant favorable effect on cardiovascular health biomarkers compared with HT. The trial is registered at the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clínicos - ReBEC), number RBR-76mm75.
Resumo:
The efficacy of the human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV-16)/HPV-18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against cervical infections with HPV in the Papilloma Trial against Cancer in Young Adults (PATRICIA) was evaluated using a combination of the broad-spectrum L1-based SPF10 PCR-DNA enzyme immunoassay (DEIA)/line probe assay (LiPA25) system with type-specific PCRs for HPV-16 and -18. Broad-spectrum PCR assays may underestimate the presence of HPV genotypes present at relatively low concentrations in multiple infections, due to competition between genotypes. Therefore, samples were retrospectively reanalyzed using a testing algorithm incorporating the SPF10 PCR-DEIA/LiPA25 plus a novel E6-based multiplex type-specific PCR and reverse hybridization assay (MPTS12 RHA), which permits detection of a panel of nine oncogenic HPV genotypes (types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 45, 52, 58, and 59). For the vaccine against HPV types 16 and 18, there was no major impact on estimates of vaccine efficacy (VE) for incident or 6-month or 12-month persistent infections when the MPTS12 RHA was included in the testing algorithm versus estimates with the protocol-specified algorithm. However, the alternative testing algorithm showed greater sensitivity than the protocol-specified algorithm for detection of some nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types. More cases were gained in the control group than in the vaccine group, leading to higher point estimates of VE for 6-month and 12-month persistent infections for the nonvaccine oncogenic types included in the MPTS12 RHA assay (types 31, 33, 35, 45, 52, 58, and 59). This post hoc analysis indicates that the per-protocol testing algorithm used in PATRICIA underestimated the VE against some nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types and that the choice of the HPV DNA testing methodology is important for the evaluation of VE in clinical trials. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00122681.).
Resumo:
The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of dual tasking on obstacle crossing during walking by individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and by healthy older people. Thirty four elderly individuals (16 healthy subjects and 18 individuals with AD) were recruited to participate in this study. Three AD individuals and one control participant were excluded due to exclusion criteria. The participants were instructed to walk barefoot at their own speed along an 8 m long pathway. Each participant performed five trials for each condition (unobstructed walking, unobstructed walking with dual tasking, and obstacle crossing during walking with dual tasking). The trials were completely randomized for each participant. The mid-pathway stride was measured in the unobstructed walking trials and the stride that occurred during the obstacle avoidance was measured in the trials that involved obstacle crossing. The behavior of the healthy elderly subjects and individuals with AD was similar for obstacle crossing during walking with dual tasking. Both groups used the posture first strategy to prioritize stability and showed decreased attention to executive tasking while walking. Additionally, AD had a strong influence on the modifications that are made by the elderly while walking under different walking conditions.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To compare clinical trials published in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology and in foreign journals of ophthalmology with respect to the number of citations and the quality of reporting [by applying the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement writing standards]. METHODS: The sample of this systematic review comprised the two Brazilian journals of ophthalmology indexed at Science Citation Index Expanded and six of the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor® according ISI. All clinical trials (CTs) published from January 2009 to December 2010 at the Brazilians journals and a 1:1 randomized sample of the foreign journals were included. The primary outcome was the number of citations through the end of 2011. Subgroup analysis included language. The secondary outcome included likelihood of citation (cited at least once versus no citation), and presence or absence of CONSORT statement indicators. RESULTS: The citation counts were statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (10.50) compared with the Brazilian Group (0.45). The likelihood citation was statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (20/20 - 100%) compared with the Brazilian Group (8/20 - 40%). The subgroup analysis of the language influence in Brazilian articles showed that the citation counts were statistically significantly higher in the papers published in English (P<0.04). Of 37 possible CONSORT items, the mean for the Foreign Group was 20.55 and for the Brazilian Group was 13.65 (P<0.003). CONCLUSION: The number of citations and the quality of reporting of clinical trials in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology still are low when compared with the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor®.
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física