Multicenter randomized phase II clinical trial comparing neoadjuvant oxaliplatin, capecitabine, and preoperative radiotherapy with or without cetuximab followed by total mesorectal excision in patients with high-risk rectal cancer (EXPERT-C).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the addition of cetuximab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy in high-risk rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with operable magnetic resonance imaging-defined high-risk rectal cancer received four cycles of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CAPOX) followed by capecitabine chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant CAPOX (four cycles) or the same regimen plus weekly cetuximab (CAPOX+C). The primary end point was complete response (CR; pathologic CR or, in patients not undergoing surgery, radiologic CR) in patients with KRAS/BRAF wild-type tumors. Secondary end points were radiologic response (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety in the wild-type and overall populations and a molecular biomarker analysis. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-five eligible patients were randomly assigned. Ninety (60%) of 149 assessable tumors were KRAS or BRAF wild type (CAPOX, n = 44; CAPOX+C, n = 46), and in these patients, the addition of cetuximab did not improve the primary end point of CR (9% v 11%, respectively; P = 1.0; odds ratio, 1.22) or PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; P = .363). Cetuximab significantly improved RR (CAPOX v CAPOX+C: after chemotherapy, 51% v 71%, respectively; P = .038; after chemoradiation, 75% v 93%, respectively; P = .028) and OS (HR, 0.27; P = .034). Skin toxicity and diarrhea were more frequent in the CAPOX+C arm. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab led to a significant increase in RR and OS in patients with KRAS/BRAF wild-type rectal cancer, but the primary end point of improved CR was not met.

A randomised control trial of exercise and manipulative therapy for cervicogenic headache

Study Design. A multicenter, randomized controlled trial with unblinded treatment and blinded outcome assessment was conducted. The treatment period was 6 weeks with follow-up assessment after treatment, then at 3, 6, and 12 months. Objectives. To determine the effectiveness of manipulative therapy and a low-load exercise program for cervicogenic headache when used alone and in combination, as compared with a control group. Summary of Background Data. Headaches arising from cervical musculoskeletal disorders are common. Conservative therapies are recommended as the first treatment of choice. Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulative therapy is inconclusive and available only for the short term. There is no evidence for exercise, and no study has investigated the effect of combined therapies for cervicogenic headache. Methods. In this study, 200 participants who met the diagnostic criteria for cervicogenic headache were randomized into four groups: manipulative therapy group, exercise therapy group, combined therapy group, and a control group. The primary outcome was a change in headache frequency. Other outcomes included changes in headache intensity and duration, the Northwick Park Neck Pain Index, medication intake, and patient satisfaction. Physical outcomes included pain on neck movement, upper cervical joint tenderness, a craniocervical flexion muscle test, and a photographic measure of posture. Results. There were no differences in headache-related and demographic characteristics between the groups at baseline. The loss to follow-up evaluation was 3.5%. At the 12-month follow-up assessment, both manipulative therapy and specific exercise had significantly reduced headache frequency and intensity, and the neck pain and effects were maintained (P < 0.05 for all). The combined therapies was not significantly superior to either therapy alone, but 10% more patients gained relief with the combination. Effect sizes were at least moderate and clinically relevant. Conclusion. Manipulative therapy and exercise can reduce the symptoms of cervicogenic headache, and the effects are maintained.

Olanzapine vs risperidone in the management of schizophrenia: a randomized double-blind trial in Australia and New Zealand

Improved drug therapy for schizophrenia may represent the best strategy for reducing the costs of schizophrenia and the recurrent chronic course of the disease. Olanzapine and risperidone are atypical antipsychotic agents developed to meet this need. We report a multicenter, double-blind, parallel, 30-week study designed to compare the efficacy, safety, and associated resource use for olanzapine and risperidone in Australia and New Zealand. The study sample consisted of 65 patients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder. Olanzapine-treated patients showed a significantly greater reduction in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total, and PANSS General Psychopathology scores at endpoint compared to the risperidone-treated patients. Response rates through 30 weeks showed a significantly greater proportion of olanzapine-treated patients had achieved a 20% or greater improvement in their PANSS total score compared to risperidone-treated patients. Olanzapine and risperidone were equivalent in their improvement of PANSS positive and negative scores and Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) at endpoint. Using generic and disease-specific measures of quality of life, olanzapine-treated patients showed significant within-group improvement in most measures, and significant differences were observed in favor of olanzapine over risperidone in Quality of Life Scale (QLS) Intrapsychic Foundation and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-item instrument (SF-36) Role Functioning Limitations-Emotional subscale scores. Despite the relatively small sample size, our study suggests that olanzapine has a superior risk:benefit profile compared to risperidone. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Discontinuation of continuous renal replacement therapy: A post hoc analysis of a prospective multicenter observational study

Objectives: To describe current practice for the discontinuation of continuous renal replacement therapy in a multinational setting and to identify variables associated with successful discontinuation. The approach to discontinue continuous renal replacement therapy may affect patient outcomes. However, there is lack of information on how and under what conditions continuous renal replacement therapy is discontinued. Design: Post hoc analysis of a prospective observational study. Setting. Fifty-four intensive care units in 23 countries. Patients: Five hundred twenty-nine patients (52.6%) who survived initial therapy among 1006 patients treated with continuous renal replacement therapy. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results., Three hundred thirteen patients were removed successfully from continuous renal replacement therapy and did not require any renal replacement therapy for at least 7 days and were classified as the ""success"" group and the rest (216 patients) were classified as the ""repeat-RRT"" (renal replacement therapy) group. Patients in the ""success"" group had lower hospital mortality (28.5% vs. 42.7%, p < .0001) compared with patients in the ""repeat-RRT"" group. They also had lower creatinine and urea concentrations and a higher urine output at the time of stopping continuous renal replacement therapy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis for successful discontinuation of continuous renal replacement therapy identified urine output (during the 24 hrs before stopping continuous renal replacement therapy: odds ratio, 1.078 per 100 mL/day increase) and creatinine (odds ratio, 0.996 per mu mol/L increase) as significant predictors of successful cessation. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to predict successful discontinuation of continuous renal replacement therapy was 0.808 for urine output and 0.635 for creatinine. The predictive ability of urine output was negatively affected by the use of diuretics (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.671 with diuretics and 0.845 without diuretics). Conclusions. We report on the current practice of discontinuing continuous renal replacement therapy in a multinational setting. Urine output at the time of initial cessation (if continuous renal replacement therapy was the most important predictor of successful discontinuation, especially if occurring without the administration of diuretics. (Crit Care Med 2009; 37:2576-2582)

An 18-Week, Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study of Amlodipine/Ramipril Combination Versus Amlodipine Monotherapy in the Treatment of Hypertension: The Assessment of Combination Therapy of Amlodipine/Ramipril (ATAR) Study

Background: A combination of antihypertensive agents of different drug classes in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) may offer advantages in terms of efficacy, tolerability, and treatment compliance. Combination of a calcium channel blocker with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor may act synergistically to reduce blood pressure (BP). Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of an amlodipine/ramipril FDC with those of amlodipine monotherapy. Methods: This 18-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 8 centers across Brazil. Patients with stage 1 or 2 essential hypertension were enrolled. After a 2-week placebo run-in phase, patients received amlodipine/ramipril 2.5/2.5 mg or amlodipine 2.5 mg, after which the doses were titrated, based on BP, to 515 then 10/10 mg (amlodipme/ramipril) and 5 then 10 mg (amiodipine). The primary end point was BP measured in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Hematology and serum biochemistry were assessed at baseline and study end. Tolerability was assessed using patient interview, laboratory analysis, and physical examination, including measurement of ankle circumference to assess peripheral edema. Results: A total of 222 patients completed the study (age range, 40-79 years; FDC group, 117 patients [mean dose, 7.60/7.60 mg]; monotherapy, 105 patients [mean dose, 7.97 mg]). The mean (SD) changes in systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), as measured using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and in the physician`s office, were significantly greater with combination therapy than monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP (ABPM, -20.76 [1.25] vs -15.80 [1.18] mm Hg and -11.71 [0.78] vs -8.61 [0.74] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.004]; office, -27.51 [1.40] vs -22.84 [1.33] min Hg [P = 0.012] and -16.41 [0.79] vs -14.64 [0.75] mm Hg [P = NS], respectively). In the ITT analysis, the mean changes in ambulatory, but not office-based, BP were statistically significant (ABPM: SBP, -20.21 [1.14] vs -15.31 [1.12] mm Hg and DBP, -11.61 [0.72] vs -8.42 [0.70] mm Hg, respectively [both, P = 0.002]; office: SBP, -26.60 [1.34] vs -22.97 [1.30] mm Hg and DBP, -16.48 [0.78] vs -14.48 [0.75] mm Hg [both, P = NS]). Twenty-nine patients (22.1%) treated with combination therapy and 41 patients (30.6%) treated with monotherapy experienced >= 1 adverse event considered possibly related to study drug. The combmation-therapy group had lower prevalence of edema (7.6% vs 18.7%; P = 0.011) and a similar prevalence of dry cough (3.8% vs 0.8%; P = NS). No clinically significant changes in laboratory values were found in either group. Conclusions: In this population of patients with essential hypertension, the amlodipine/ramipril FDC was associated with significantly reduced ambulatory and office-measured BP compared with amlodipine monotherapy, with the exception of office DBP. Both treatments were well tolerated. (Clin Ther. 2008;30: 1618-1628) (C) 2008 Excerpta Medica Inc.

A Randomized Trial of a Skin Sealant to Reduce the Risk of Incision Contamination in Cardiac Surgery

Background. Immobilizing skin microbes is a rational approach to reducing contamination of surgical sites by endogenous microorganisms. Methods. This randomized, controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, open-label clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00467857) enrolled 300 adults scheduled for elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Patients received iodine-based skin preparations followed by a cyanoacrylate-based skin sealant or skin preparations alone. Microbiological samples collected from sternal and graft incision sites immediately before any skin preparation, at the wound border after skin incision, and at the incision after fascial closure were evaluated quantitatively. Results. In evaluable patients, mean microbial counts in collected samples increased at the sternal site after fascial closure compared with after skin incision by 0.37 log(10) colony-forming units (CFU)/mL in the skin sealant group (n = 120) and by 0.57 log10 CFU/mL in the control group (n = 132) (p = 0.047, Wilcoxon rank sum test). At the graft site, mean microbial counts increased by 0.09 (n = 119) and 0.27 (n = 127) log(10) CFU/mL, respectively (p = 0.037). There was a 35.3% relative risk reduction in surgical site infection (SSI) occurring in the skin sealant group (9 of 146 patients, 6.2%) versus the control group (14 of 147 patients, 9.5%). In obese patients (body mass index [BMI] > 30.0 to <= 37.0 kg/m(2)), the relative risk reduction for SSI associated with skin sealant was 83.3%. Conclusions. Pretreatment with skin sealant protects against contamination of the surgical incision by migration of skin microbes. Further data are needed to confirm the impact of this technology on SSI rates in clinical practice. (Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:632-7) (C) 2011 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons ADULT CARDIAC

The Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRA.CER) trial: study design and rationale

Background The protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR-1), the main platelet receptor for thrombin, represents a novel target for treatment of arterial thrombosis, and SCH 530348 is an orally active, selective, competitive PAR-1 antagonist. We designed TRA.CER to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCH 530348 compared with placebo in addition to standard of care in patients with non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and high-risk features. Trial design TRA.CER is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III trial with an original estimated sample size of 10,000 subjects. Our primary objective is to demonstrate that SCH 530348 in addition to standard of care will reduce the incidence of the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, and urgent coronary revascularization compared with standard of care alone. Our key secondary objective is to determine whether SCH 530348 will reduce the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke compared with standard of care alone. Secondary objectives related to safety are the composite of moderate and severe GUSTO bleeding and clinically significant TIMI bleeding. The trial will continue until a predetermined minimum number of centrally adjudicated primary and key secondary end point events have occurred and all subjects have participated in the study for at least I year. The TRA.CER trial is part of the large phase III SCH 530348 development program that includes a concomitant evaluation in secondary prevention. Conclusion TRA.CER will define efficacy and safety of the novel platelet PAR-1 inhibitor SCH 530348 in the treatment of high-risk patients with NSTE ACS in the setting of current treatment strategies. (Am Heart J 2009; 158:327-34.)

Double-blind, Randomized placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: Results from EFECT

Purpose The third-generation nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are increasingly used as adjuvant and first-line advanced therapy for postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive (HR +) breast cancer. Because many patients subsequently experience progression or relapse, it is important to identify agents with efficacy after AI failure. Materials and Methods Evaluation of Faslodex versus Exemestane Clinical Trial (EFECT) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, multicenter phase III trial of fulvestrant versus exemestane in postmenopausal women with HR + advanced breast cancer (ABC) progressing or recurring after nonsteroidal AI. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). A fulvestrant loading-dose (LD) regimen was used: 500 mg intramuscularly on day 0, 250 mg on days 14, 28, and 250 mg every 28 days thereafter. Exemestane 25 mg orally was administered once daily. Results A total of 693 women were randomly assigned to fulvestrant (n = 351) or exemestane ( n = 342). Approximately 60% of patients had received at least two prior endocrine therapies. Median TTP was 3.7 months in both groups ( hazard ratio = 0.963; 95% CI, 0.819 to 1.133; P = .6531). The overall response rate ( 7.4% v 6.7%; P = .736) and clinical benefit rate ( 32.2% v 31.5%; P = .853) were similar between fulvestrant and exemestane respectively. Median duration of clinical benefit was 9.3 and 8.3 months, respectively. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidence of adverse events or quality of life. Pharmacokinetic data confirm that steady-state was reached within 1 month with the LD schedule of fulvestrant. Conclusion Fulvestrant LD and exemestane are equally active and well-tolerated in a meaningful proportion of postmenopausal women with ABC who have experienced progression or recurrence during treatment with a nonsteroidal AI.

A randomized controlled trial comparing a computer-assisted insulin infusion protocol with a strict and a conventional protocol for glucose control in critically ill patients

Purpose: The objective of this study is to evaluate blood glucose (BG) control efficacy and safety of 3 insulin protocols in medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients. Methods: This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial involving 167 MICU patients with at least one BG measurement +/- 150 mg/dL and one or more of the following: mechanical ventilation, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, trauma, or burns. The interventions were computer-assisted insulin protocol (CAIP), with insulin infusion maintaining BG between 100 and 130 mg/dL; Leuven protocol, with insulin maintaining BG between 80 and 110 mg/dL; or conventional treatment-subcutaneous insulin if glucose > 150 mg/dL. The main efficacy outcome was the mean of patients` median BG, and the safety outcome was the incidence of hypoglycemia (<= 40 mg/dL). Results: The mean of patients` median BG was 125.0, 127.1, and 158.5 mg/dL for CAIP, Leuven, and conventional treatment, respectively (P = .34, CAIP vs Leuven; P < .001, CAIP vs conventional). In CAIP, 12 patients (21.4%) had at least one episode of hypoglycemia vs 24 (41.4%) in Leuven and 2 (3.8%) in conventional treatment (P = .02, CAIP vs Leuven; P = .006, CAIP vs conventional). Conclusions: The CAIP is safer than and as effective as the standard strict protocol for controlling glucose in MICU patients. Hypoglycemia was rare under conventional treatment. However, BG levels were higher than with IV insulin protocols. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Rationale and design of a randomized placebo-controlled trial assessing the effects of etiologic treatment in Chagas` cardiomyopathy: The BENznidazole Evaluation For Interrupting Trypanosomiasis (BENEFIT)

Background Benznidazole is effective for treating acute and chronic (recently acquired) Tryponosoma cruzi infection (Chagas` disease). Recent data indicate that parasite persistence plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of chronic Chagas` cardiomyopathy. However, the efficacy of trypanocidal therapy in preventing clinical complications in patients with preexisting cardiac disease is unknown. Study Design BENEFIT is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 3,000 patients with Chagas` cardiomyopathy in Latin America. Patients are randomized to receive benznidazole (5 mg/kg per day) or matched placebo, for 60 days. The primary outcome is the composite of death; resuscitated cardiac arrest; sustained ventricular tachycardia; insertion of pacemaker or cardiac defibrillator; cardiac transplantation; and development of new heart failure, stroke, or systemic or pulmonary thromboembolic events. The average follow-up time will be 5 years, and the trial has a 90% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction. The BENEFIT program also comprises a substudy evaluating the effects of benznidazole on parasite clearance and an echo substudy exploring the impact of etiologic treatment on left ventricular function. Recruitment started in November 2004, and >1,000 patients have been enrolled in 35 centers from Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia to date. Conclusion This is the largest trial yet conducted in Chagas` disease. BENEFIT will clarify the role of trypanocidal therapy in preventing cardiac disease progression and death.

A randomized trial of 5 versus 7 French guiding catheters for transfemoral percutaneous coronary stent implantation

Comparative studies between 5 French guiding catheter and others of larger size using the transfemoral approach to coronary stenting have not been described. Coronary stent implantation was performed in 90 patients in a randomized trial. The primary end-point was to compare the incidence of successful uncomplicated stent implantation per lesion with the 5F and 7F guiding catheters. Patients were excluded for excessive vessel tortuosity or anticipated need for equipment not fitting through a 5 catheter. Baseline characteristics and the use of direct stenting did not differ between the two groups. The primary success rate was 97.8% per patient in both groups and 98% per lesion in the 5 French and 97.9% in the 7 French. Guiding catheter change was necessary in 1 patient in each group to successfully complete the procedure in both groups. The amount of contrast used was 63 +/- 27.3 mL in the 5 French and 76 +/- 25 mL in the 7 French groups (P < 0.05). Vascular complications and blood transfusions occurred somewhat more frequently in the 7 French group (P = 0.058). The manual compression time after sheath removal was 5.1 +/- 2.0 min and 8.0 +/- 4.3 min, respectively, in the 5 and 7 French groups (P < 0.01). In conclusion, the 5 French guiding catheters showed a similar success rate with coronary stenting when compared to the 7 French, but the amount of contrast used and manual compression time after sheath removal, as well as the rate of vascular and bleeding complications, were reduced in the 5 French group.