Icodextrin reduces insulin resistance in non-diabetic patients undergoing automated peritoneal dialysis: results of a randomized controlled trial (STARCH)

Insulin resistance is a common risk factor in chronic kidney disease patients contributing to the high cardiovascular burden, even in the absence of diabetes. Glucose-based peritoneal dialysis (PD) solutions are thought to intensify insulin resistance due to the continuous glucose absorption from the peritoneal cavity. The aim of our study was to analyse the effect of the substitution of glucose for icodextrin on insulin resistance in non-diabetic PD patients in a multicentric randomized clinical trial. This was a multicenter, open-label study with balanced randomization (1:1) and two parallel-groups. Inclusion criteria were non-diabetic adult patients on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) for at least 3 months on therapy prior to randomization. Patients assigned to the intervention group were treated with 2L of icodextrin 7.5%, and the control group with glucose 2.5% during the long dwell and, at night in the cycler, with a prescription of standard glucose-based PD solution only in both groups. The primary end-point was the change in insulin resistance measured by homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) index at 90 days. Sixty patients were included in the intervention (n = 33) or the control (n = 27) groups. There was no difference between groups at baseline. After adjustment for pre-intervention HOMA index levels, the group treated with icodextrin had the lower post-intervention levels at 90 days in both intention to treat [1.49 (95% CI: 1.23-1.74) versus 1.89 (95% CI: 1.62-2.17)], (F = 4.643, P = 0.03, partial η(2) = 0.078); and the treated analysis [1.47 (95% CI: 1.01-1.84) versus 2.18 (95% CI: 1.81-2.55)], (F = 7.488, P = 0.01, partial η(2) = 0.195). The substitution of glucose for icodextrin for the long dwell improved insulin resistance measured by HOMA index in non-diabetic APD patients.

Rationale, study design, and analysis plan of the Alveolar Recruitment for ARDS Trial (ART): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high in-hospital mortality. Alveolar recruitment followed by ventilation at optimal titrated PEEP may reduce ventilator-induced lung injury and improve oxygenation in patients with ARDS, but the effects on mortality and other clinical outcomes remain unknown. This article reports the rationale, study design, and analysis plan of the Alveolar Recruitment for ARDS Trial (ART). Methods/Design: ART is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized (concealed), controlled trial, which aims to determine if maximum stepwise alveolar recruitment associated with PEEP titration is able to increase 28-day survival in patients with ARDS compared to conventional treatment (ARDSNet strategy). We will enroll adult patients with ARDS of less than 72 h duration. The intervention group will receive an alveolar recruitment maneuver, with stepwise increases of PEEP achieving 45 cmH(2)O and peak pressure of 60 cmH2O, followed by ventilation with optimal PEEP titrated according to the static compliance of the respiratory system. In the control group, mechanical ventilation will follow a conventional protocol (ARDSNet). In both groups, we will use controlled volume mode with low tidal volumes (4 to 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight) and targeting plateau pressure <= 30 cmH2O. The primary outcome is 28-day survival, and the secondary outcomes are: length of ICU stay; length of hospital stay; pneumothorax requiring chest tube during first 7 days; barotrauma during first 7 days; mechanical ventilation-free days from days 1 to 28; ICU, in-hospital, and 6-month survival. ART is an event-guided trial planned to last until 520 events (deaths within 28 days) are observed. These events allow detection of a hazard ratio of 0.75, with 90% power and two-tailed type I error of 5%. All analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: If the ART strategy with maximum recruitment and PEEP titration improves 28-day survival, this will represent a notable advance to the care of ARDS patients. Conversely, if the ART strategy is similar or inferior to the current evidence-based strategy (ARDSNet), this should also change current practice as many institutions routinely employ recruitment maneuvers and set PEEP levels according to some titration method.

A phase I randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of 2009 influenza A (H1N1) inactivated monovalent vaccines with different adjuvant systems

Methods We conducted a phase I, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-arm (10) parallel study involving healthy adults to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of influenza A (H1N1) 2009 non-adjuvanted and adjuvanted candidate vaccines. Subjects received two intramuscular injections of one of the candidate vaccines administered 21 days apart. Antibody responses were measured by means of hemagglutination-inhibition assay before and 21 days after each vaccination. The three co-primary immunogenicity end points were the proportion of seroprotection >70%, seroconversion >40%, and the factor increase in the geometric mean titer >2.5. Results A total of 266 participants were enrolled into the study. No deaths or serious adverse events were reported. The most commonly solicited local and systemic adverse events were injection-site pain and headache, respectively. Only three subjects (1.1%) reported severe injection-site pain. Four 2009 influenza A (H1N1) inactivated monovalent candidate vaccines that met the three requirements to evaluate influenza protection, after a single dose, were identified: 15 μg of hemagglutinin antigen without adjuvant; 7.5 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide, MPL and squalene; 3.75 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide and MPL; and 3.75 μg of hemagglutinin antigen with aluminum hydroxide and squalene. Conclusions Adjuvant systems can be safely used in influenza vaccines, including the adjuvant monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) derived from Bordetella pertussis with squalene and aluminum hydroxide, MPL with aluminum hydroxide, and squalene and aluminum hydroxide.

Gemtuzumab ozogamicin as postremission treatment in AML at 60 years of age or more: results of a multicenter phase 3 study

In older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), the prevention of relapse has remained one of the major therapeutic challenges, with more than 75% relapses after complete remission. The anti-CD33 immunotoxin conjugate gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) has shown antileukemic remission induction activity in patients with relapsed AML. Patients with AML or refractory anemia with excess blasts in first complete remission attained after intensive induction chemotherapy were randomized between 3 cycles of GO (6 mg/m(2) every 4 weeks) or no postremission therapy (control) to assess whether GO would improve outcome. The 2 treatment groups (113 patients receiving GO vs 119 control patients) were comparable with regard to age (60-78 years, median 67 years), performance status, and cytogenetics. A total of 110 of 113 received at least 1 cycle of GO, and 65 of 113 patients completed the 3 cycles. Premature discontinuation was mainly attributable to incomplete hematologic recovery or intercurrent relapse. Median time to recovery of platelets 50 x 10(9)/L and neutrophils 0.5 x 10(9)/L after GO was 14 days and 20 days. Nonhematologic toxicities were mild overall, but there was 1 toxic death caused by liver failure. There were no significant differences between both treatment groups with regard to relapse probabilities, nonrelapse mortality, overall survival, or disease-free survival (17% vs 16% at 5 years). Postremission treatment with GO in older AML patients does not provide benefits regarding any clinical end points. The HOVON-43 study is registered at The Netherlands Trial Registry (number NTR212) and at http://www.controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN77039377.

Early non-invasive cardiac output monitoring in hemodynamically unstable intensive care patients: A multi-center randomized controlled trial

Introduction Acute hemodynamic instability increases morbidity and mortality. We investigated whether early non-invasive cardiac output monitoring enhances hemodynamic stabilization and improves outcome. Methods A multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted in three European university hospital intensive care units in 2006 and 2007. A total of 388 hemodynamically unstable patients identified during their first six hours in the intensive care unit (ICU) were randomized to receive either non-invasive cardiac output monitoring for 24 hrs (minimally invasive cardiac output/MICO group; n = 201) or usual care (control group; n = 187). The main outcome measure was the proportion of patients achieving hemodynamic stability within six hours of starting the study. Results The number of hemodynamic instability criteria at baseline (MICO group mean 2.0 (SD 1.0), control group 1.8 (1.0); P = .06) and severity of illness (SAPS II score; MICO group 48 (18), control group 48 (15); P = .86)) were similar. At 6 hrs, 45 patients (22%) in the MICO group and 52 patients (28%) in the control group were hemodynamically stable (mean difference 5%; 95% confidence interval of the difference -3 to 14%; P = .24). Hemodynamic support with fluids and vasoactive drugs, and pulmonary artery catheter use (MICO group: 19%, control group: 26%; P = .11) were similar in the two groups. The median length of ICU stay was 2.0 (interquartile range 1.2 to 4.6) days in the MICO group and 2.5 (1.1 to 5.0) days in the control group (P = .38). The hospital mortality was 26% in the MICO group and 21% in the control group (P = .34). Conclusions Minimally-invasive cardiac output monitoring added to usual care does not facilitate early hemodynamic stabilization in the ICU, nor does it alter the hemodynamic support or outcome. Our results emphasize the need to evaluate technologies used to measure stroke volume and cardiac output--especially their impact on the process of care--before any large-scale outcome studies are attempted.

The effect of 3 versus 6 years of zoledronic acid treatment of osteoporosis: a randomized extension to the HORIZON-Pivotal Fracture Trial (PFT)

Zoledronic acid 5 mg (ZOL) annually for 3 years reduces fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. To investigate long-term effects of ZOL on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk, the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic acid Once Yearly-Pivotal Fracture Trial (HORIZON-PFT) was extended to 6 years. In this international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled extension trial, 1233 postmenopausal women who received ZOL for 3 years in the core study were randomized to 3 additional years of ZOL (Z6, n = 616) or placebo (Z3P3, n = 617). The primary endpoint was femoral neck (FN) BMD percentage change from year 3 to 6 in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary endpoints included other BMD sites, fractures, biochemical bone turnover markers, and safety. In years 3 to 6, FN-BMD remained constant in Z6 and dropped slightly in Z3P3 (between-treatment difference = 1.04%; 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 1.7; p = 0.0009) but remained above pretreatment levels. Other BMD sites showed similar differences. Biochemical markers remained constant in Z6 but rose slightly in Z3P3, remaining well below pretreatment levels in both. New morphometric vertebral fractures were lower in the Z6 (n = 14) versus Z3P3 (n = 30) group (odds ratio = 0.51; p = 0.035), whereas other fractures were not different. Significantly more Z6 patients had a transient increase in serum creatinine >0.5 mg/dL (0.65% versus 2.94% in Z3P3). Nonsignificant increases in Z6 of atrial fibrillation serious adverse events (2.0% versus 1.1% in Z3P3; p = 0.26) and stroke (3.1% versus 1.5% in Z3P3; p = 0.06) were seen. Postdose symptoms were similar in both groups. Reports of hypertension were significantly lower in Z6 versus Z3P3 (7.8% versus 15.1%, p < 0.001). Small differences in bone density and markers in those who continued versus those who stopped treatment suggest residual effects, and therefore, after 3 years of annual ZOL, many patients may discontinue therapy up to 3 years. However, vertebral fracture reductions suggest that those at high fracture risk, particularly vertebral fracture, may benefit by continued treatment.

Atorvastatin added to interferon beta for relapsing multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial

Statins have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties in addition to lipid-lowering effects. The present study evaluated the effect of atorvastatin added to interferon beta-1b in multiple sclerosis (MS) in a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, rater-blinded study performed in eight Swiss hospitals. Seventy-seven patients with relapsing-remitting MS started interferon beta-1b every other day. After 3 months, they were randomized 1:1 to receive atorvastatin 40 mg/day or not in addition to interferon beta-1b until month 15. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with new lesions on T2-weighted images at month 15 compared to baseline at month three. At study end, the proportion of patients with new lesions on T2-weighted images was equal in both groups (odds ratio 1.14; 95 % CI 0.36-3.56; p = 0.81). All predefined secondary endpoints including number of new lesions and total lesion volume on T2-weighted images, total number of new Gd-enhancing lesions on T1-weighted images, total brain volume, volume of grey matter, volume of white matter, EDSS, MSFC, relapse rate, time to first relapse, number of relapse-free patients and neutralizing antibodies did not show any significant differences (all p values >0.1). Transient elevations of liver enzymes were more frequent with atorvastatin (p = 0.02). In conclusion, atorvastatin 40 mg/day in addition to interferon beta-1b did not have a beneficial effect on relapsing-remitting MS compared to interferon beta-1b monotherapy over a 12-month period.

A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) of Titanium-13Zirconium versus Titanium Grade IV Small-Diameter Bone Level Implants in Edentulous Mandibles - Results from a 1-Year Observation Period

Background: The use of endosseous dental implants has become common practice for the rehabilitation of edentulous patients, and a two-implant overdenture has been recommended as the standard of care. The use of small-diameter implants may extend treatment options and reduce the necessity for bone augmentation. However, the mechanical strength of titanium is limited, so titanium alloys with greater tensile and fatigue strength may be preferable. Purpose: This randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter study investigated in a split-mouth model whether small-diameter implants made from Titanium-13Zirconium alloy (TiZr, Roxolid™) perform at least as well as Titanium Grade IV implants. Methods and Materials: Patients with an edentulous mandible received one TiZr and one Ti Grade IV small-diameter bone level implant (3.3 mm, SLActive®) in the interforaminal region. The site distribution was randomized and double-blinded. Outcome measures included change in radiological peri-implant bone level from surgery to 12 months post-insertion (primary), implant survival, success, soft tissue conditions, and safety (secondary). Results: Of 91 treated patients, 87 were available for the 12-month follow-up. Peri-implant bone level change (-0.3 ± 0.5 mm vs -0.3 ± 0.6 mm), plaque, and sulcus bleeding indices were not significantly different between TiZr and Ti Grade IV implants. Implant survival rates were 98.9 percent and 97.8 percent, success rates were 96.6 percent and 94.4 percent, respectively. Nineteen minor and no serious adverse events were related to the study devices. Conclusion: This study confirms that TiZr small-diameter bone level implants provide at least the same outcomes after 12 months as Ti Grade IV bone level implants. The improved mechanical properties of TiZr implants may extend implant therapy to more challenging clinical situations.

Design, conduct, and analysis of a multicenter, pharmacogenomic, biomarker study in matched patients with severe sepsis treated with or without drotrecogin Alfa (activated)

A genomic biomarker identifying patients likely to benefit from drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DAA) may be clinically useful as a companion diagnostic. This trial was designed to validate biomarkers (improved response polymorphisms (IRPs)). Each IRP (A and B) contains two single nucleotide polymorphisms that were associated with a differential DAA treatment effect.

Orexin receptor antagonism, a new sleep-enabling paradigm: a proof-of-concept clinical trial

The orexin system is a key regulator of sleep and wakefulness. In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover study, 161 primary insomnia patients received either the dual orexin receptor antagonist almorexant, at 400, 200, 100, or 50 mg in consecutive stages, or placebo on treatment nights at 1-week intervals. The primary end point was sleep efficiency (SE) measured by polysomnography; secondary end points were objective latency to persistent sleep (LPS), wake after sleep onset (WASO), safety, and tolerability. Dose-dependent almorexant effects were observed on SE , LPS , and WASO . SE improved significantly after almorexant 400 mg vs. placebo (mean treatment effect 14.4%; P < 0.001). LPS (–18 min (P = 0.02)) and WASO (–54 min (P < 0.001)) decreased significantly at 400 mg vs. placebo. Adverse-event incidence was dose-related. Almorexant consistently and dose-dependently improved sleep variables. The orexin system may offer a new treatment approach for primary insomnia.

The Long-Term Multicenter Observational Study of Dabigatran Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (RELY-ABLE) Study

During follow-up of between 1 and 3 years in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial, 2 doses of dabigatran etexilate were shown to be effective and safe for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. There is a need for longer-term follow-up of patients on dabigatran and for further data comparing the 2 dabigatran doses.

Sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions: the REALITY trial: a randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT: Compared with bare metal stents, sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents have been shown to markedly improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization, but their performance in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions has not been compared in a prospective multicenter study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized comparative trial (the REALITY trial) conducted between August 2003 and February 2004, with angiographic follow-up at 8 months and clinical follow-up at 12 months. SETTING: Ninety hospitals in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. PATIENTS: A total of 1386 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; 73.1% men; 28.0% with diabetes) with angina pectoris and 1 or 2 de novo lesions (2.25-3.00 mm in diameter) in native coronary arteries. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 701) or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 685). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was in-lesion binary restenosis (presence of a more than 50% luminal-diameter stenosis) at 8 months. Secondary end points included 1-year rates of target lesion and vessel revascularization and a composite end point of cardiac death, Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or repeat target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: In-lesion binary restenosis at 8 months occurred in 86 patients (9.6%) with a sirolimus-eluting stent vs 95 (11.1%) with a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.17; P = .31). For sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the mean (SD) in-stent late loss was 0.09 (0.43) mm vs 0.31 (0.44) mm (difference, -0.22 mm; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.18 mm; P<.001), mean (SD) in-stent diameter stenosis was 23.1% (16.6%) vs 26.7% (15.8%) (difference, -3.60%; 95% CI, -5.12% to -2.08%; P<.001), and the number of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year was 73 (10.7%) vs 76 (11.4%) (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.27; P = .73). CONCLUSION: In this trial comparing sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents, there were no differences in the rates of binary restenosis or major adverse cardiac events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00235092.

Efficacy and safety of intraarticular hylan or hyaluronic acids for osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of intraarticular hylan and 2 hyaluronic acids (HAs) in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. METHODS: This was a multicenter, patient-blind, randomized controlled trial in 660 patients with symptomatic knee OA. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 cycle of 3 intraarticular injections per knee of 1 of 3 preparations: a high molecular weight cross-linked hylan, a non-cross-linked medium molecular weight HA of avian origin, or a non-cross-linked low molecular weight HA of bacterial origin. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at 6 months. Secondary outcome measures included local adverse events (effusions or flares) in injected knees. During months 7-12, patients were offered a second cycle of viscosupplementation. RESULTS: Pain relief was similar in all 3 groups. The difference in changes between baseline and 6 months between hylan and the combined HAs was 0.1 on the WOMAC pain score (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.2, 0.3). No relevant differences were observed in any of the secondary efficacy outcomes, and stratified analyses provided no evidence for differences in effects across different patient groups. There was a trend toward more local adverse events in the hylan group than in the HA groups during the first cycle (difference 2.2% [95% CI -2.4, 6.7]), and this trend became more pronounced during the second cycle (difference 6.4% [95% CI 0.6, 12.2]). CONCLUSION: We found no evidence for a difference in efficacy between hylan and HAs. In view of its higher costs and potential for more local adverse events, we see no rationale for the continued use of hylan in patients with knee OA.

Clinical field trial examining an implant with a sand-blasted, acid-etched surface

BACKGROUND: Conventionally, endosseous dental implants have required 3 to 6 months of uninterrupted healing based on observations for dental implants that were characterized by a relatively smooth machined surface. Many studies have since demonstrated that implants with a roughened surface resulted in greater bone apposition, earlier bone contact, and a stronger bond between the implant and the bone, suggesting that implants with roughened surfaces could be loaded earlier than 3 to 6 months. Formal clinical studies confirmed that implants with rough surfaces can have abutments placed and be loaded occlusally as early as 6 weeks postplacement. The purpose of this prospective, human clinical investigation was to evaluate a large number of implants with a specific rough surface (sand-blasted acid-etched [SLA]) placed in everyday practice under routine private-practice conditions. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, human clinical observational study was initiated with the goal of recruiting a minimum of 500 patients and 800 implants. The implants were to be placed and restored in predominantly private-practice settings around the world. Ninety-two practitioners in 16 countries agreed to participate, and 86 followed the study design. Patients had to be in good health, have sufficient bone to encase the implant, and agree to return for recall appointments. Exclusion criteria included heavy smoking (>10 cigarettes a day) and bone augmentation procedures at the implant site. All implants were two-piece (an abutment was to be placed after 6 weeks of healing) and were characterized by the presence of a transmucosal polished collar. Each implant had an SLA surface. All implants were positioned using a non-submerged (single-stage) surgical technique. Survival and success rates were calculated by life-table analyses. RESULTS: A total of 706 patients were enrolled and 1,406 implants were placed. In the final analyses, 590 patients with 990 implants (70.4% of those enrolled) met all inclusion criteria, including placement of an abutment and provisional restoration within 63 days of surgical placement. The majority of implants were 10 and 12 mm long (78.7%) and were placed in type II and III bone (87%). Seventy-three percent of the implants were placed in the mandible, and 27% were placed in the maxilla. The cumulative survival rate was 99.56% at 3 years and 99.26% at 5 years. The overall success rate was 99.12% at 3 years and 97.38% after 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Under private-practice conditions, implants with an SLA surface could be placed and restored predictably within 6 to 8 weeks. Data from this prospective, multicenter, human observational study reinforced the results of more formal clinical studies and demonstrated that implants with the SLA surface can be restored in patients in approximately half of the time of conventional healing periods.

An implantable carotid sinus baroreflex activating system: surgical technique and short-term outcome from a multi-center feasibility trial for the treatment of resistant hypertension

OBJECTIVES: To assess perioperative outcomes and blood pressure (BP) responses to an implantable carotid sinus baroreflex activating system being investigated for the treatment of resistant hypertension. METHODS: We report on the first seventeen patients enrolled in a multicenter study. Bilateral perivascular carotid sinus electrodes (CSL) and a pulse generator (IPG) are permanently implanted. Optimal placement of the CSL is determined by intraoperative BP responses to test activations. Acute BP responses were tested postoperatively and during the first four months of follow-up. RESULTS: Prior to implant, BP was 189.6+/-27.5/110.7+/-15.3 mmHg despite stable therapy (5.2+/-1.8 antihypertensive drugs). The mean procedure time was 202+/-43 minutes. No perioperative strokes or deaths occurred. System tests performed 1 or up to 3 days postoperatively resulted in significant (all p < or = 0.0001) mean maximum reduction, with standard deviations and 95% confidence limits for systolic BP, diastolic BP and heart rate of 28+/-22 (17, 39) mmHg, 16+/-11 (10, 22) mmHg and 8+/-4 (6, 11) BPM, respectively. Repeated testing during 3 months of therapeutic electrical activation demonstrated a durable response. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary data suggest an acceptable safety of the procedure with a low rate of adverse events and support further clinical development of baroreflex activation as a new concept to treat resistant hypertension.