Sirolimus versus paclitaxel coronary stents in clinical practice

Objectives: We aimed at comparing the long term clinical outcome of SES and PES in routine clinical practice. Background: Although sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) more effectively reduce neointimal hyperplasia than paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), uncertainty prevails whether this difference translates into differences in clinical outcomes outside randomized controlled trials with selected patient populations and protocol-mandated angiographic follow-up. Methods: Nine hundred and four consecutive patients who underwent implantation of a drug-eluting stent between May 2004 and February 2005: 467 patients with 646 lesions received SES, 437 patients with 600 lesions received PES. Clinical follow-up was obtained at 2 years without intervening routine angiographic follow-up. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: At 2 years, the primary endpoint was less frequent with SES (12.9%) than PES (17.6%, HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.50–0.98, P = 0.04). The difference in favor of SES was largely driven by a lower rate of target lesion revascularisation (TLR; 4.1% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.05), whereas rates of death (6.4% vs. 7.6%, P = 0.49), MI (1.9% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.21), or definite stent thrombosis (0.6% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.27) were similar for both stent types. The benefit regarding reduced rates of TLR was significant in nondiabetic (3.6% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.04) but not in diabetic patients (5.6% vs. 6.1%, P = 0.80). Conclusions: SES more effectively reduced the need for repeat revascularization procedures than PES when used in routine clinical practice. The beneficial effect is maintained up to 2 years and may be less pronounced in diabetic patients.

Soziale Ungleichheit von Bildungschancen und Chancengleichheit - eine Reanalyse mit bildungspolitischen Implikationen

Zweifelsohne war und ist das Prinzip der Chancengleichheit – gleiches Recht auf Entfaltung ungleicher Anlagen – eine Maxime für die Bildungspolitik und Gestal-tung von Bildungssystemen (vgl. Müller 1998; Friedeburg 1992; Baumert 1991: 333). Diese Prämisse wird nicht zuletzt durch Artikel 3, Absatz 3 des Grundgeset-zes, wonach niemand wegen seines Geschlechts, seiner Abstammung, seiner Ras-se, seiner Sprache, seiner Heimat und Herkunft, seines Glaubens, seiner religiösen oder politischen Anschauungen benachteiligt oder bevorzugt werden darf, inhalt-lich vorgegeben. So lag ein Hauptteil der Zielsetzungen von Bildungsreformen seit den 1960er Jahren darin, die Rahmenbedingungen für den Bildungszugang – für die Chancennutzung – in der Weise zu setzen, dass weder das strukturelle Angebot an Bildungsgelegenheiten noch sozialstrukturelle Eigenschaften von Schulkindern und ihres Elternhauses systematische Einflüsse auf den Bildungsweg und den Erwerb von Bildungszertifikaten haben (Friedeburg 1992). Mit dem Ausbau des Schul- und Hochschulwesens und den institutionellen Reformen seit den 1960er Jahren ist das Ziel auch größtenteils erreicht worden, dass neben institutionellen Barrieren auch ökonomische und geografische Barrieren beim Bildungszugang weitgehend an Bedeutung verloren haben (Müller 1998; Krais 1996). Bildungs-disparitäten nach sozialstrukturellen Merkmalen wie etwa Klassenlage des Eltern-hauses haben sich ebenfalls bis zu einem bestimmten Grad abgeschwächt (Müller und Haun 1994; Schimpl-Neimanns 2000). Insbesondere konnten Mädchen ihre Bildungsdefizite gegenüber den Jungen mehr als ausgleichen (Rodax und Rodax 1996; Rodax 1995), sodass nunmehr von einer Bildungsungleichheit zu Unguns-ten von Jungen auszugehen ist (Diefenbach und Klein 2002; Becker 2007). Einige der beabsichtigten wie unbeabsichtigten Folgen dieser Reformbemühungen kön-nen am Wandel der Bildungsbeteiligung, insbesondere beim Übergang von der Grundschule auf das Gymnasium, abgelesen werden (Becker 2006).

Cardiovascular safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: network meta-analysis

Objective To analyse the available evidence on cardiovascular safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Design Network meta-analysis. Data sources Bibliographic databases, conference proceedings, study registers, the Food and Drug Administration website, reference lists of relevant articles, and reports citing relevant articles through the Science Citation Index (last update July 2009). Manufacturers of celecoxib and lumiracoxib provided additional data. Study selection All large scale randomised controlled trials comparing any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug with other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or placebo. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data extraction The primary outcome was myocardial infarction. Secondary outcomes included stroke, death from cardiovascular disease, and death from any cause. Two investigators independently extracted data. Data synthesis 31 trials in 116 429 patients with more than 115 000 patient years of follow-up were included. Patients were allocated to naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac, celecoxib, etoricoxib, rofecoxib, lumiracoxib, or placebo. Compared with placebo, rofecoxib was associated with the highest risk of myocardial infarction (rate ratio 2.12, 95% credibility interval 1.26 to 3.56), followed by lumiracoxib (2.00, 0.71 to 6.21). Ibuprofen was associated with the highest risk of stroke (3.36, 1.00 to 11.6), followed by diclofenac (2.86, 1.09 to 8.36). Etoricoxib (4.07, 1.23 to 15.7) and diclofenac (3.98, 1.48 to 12.7) were associated with the highest risk of cardiovascular death. Conclusions Although uncertainty remains, little evidence exists to suggest that any of the investigated drugs are safe in cardiovascular terms. Naproxen seemed least harmful. Cardiovascular risk needs to be taken into account when prescribing any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

How valuable are multiple treatment comparison methods in evidence-based health-care evaluation?

Objectives To compare the use of pair-wise meta-analysis methods to multiple treatment comparison (MTC) methods for evidence-based health-care evaluation to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alternative health-care interventions based on the available evidence. Methods Pair-wise meta-analysis and more complex evidence syntheses, incorporating an MTC component, are applied to three examples: 1) clinical effectiveness of interventions for preventing strokes in people with atrial fibrillation; 2) clinical and cost-effectiveness of using drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease; and 3) clinical and cost-effectiveness of using neuraminidase inhibitors in the treatment of influenza. We compare the two synthesis approaches with respect to the assumptions made, empirical estimates produced, and conclusions drawn. Results The difference between point estimates of effectiveness produced by the pair-wise and MTC approaches was generally unpredictable—sometimes agreeing closely whereas in other instances differing considerably. In all three examples, the MTC approach allowed the inclusion of randomized controlled trial evidence ignored in the pair-wise meta-analysis approach. This generally increased the precision of the effectiveness estimates from the MTC model. Conclusions The MTC approach to synthesis allows the evidence base on clinical effectiveness to be treated as a coherent whole, include more data, and sometimes relax the assumptions made in the pair-wise approaches. However, MTC models are necessarily more complex than those developed for pair-wise meta-analysis and thus could be seen as less transparent. Therefore, it is important that model details and the assumptions made are carefully reported alongside the results.