Nonoxynol-9 spermicide for prevention of vaginally acquired HIV and other sexually transmitted infections: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials including more than 5000 women

We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the vaginally administered spermicide nonoxynol-9 (N-9) among women for the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), We did a systematic review of randomised controlled trials, Nine such trials including 5096 women, predominantly sex workers, comparing N-9 with placebo or no treatment, were included. Primary outcomes were new HIV infection, new episodes of various STIs, and genital lesions. Five trials included HIV and nine included STI outcomes, and all but one (2% of the data) contributed to the meta-analysis. Overall, relative risks of HIV infection (1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.42), gonorrhoea (0.91, 0.67-1.24), chlamyclia (0.88, 0.77-1.01), cervical infection (1.01, 0.84-1-22), trichomoniasis (0.84, 0.69-1.02), bacterial vaginosis (0.88, 0.74-1.04) and candidiasis (0.97, 0.84-1.12) were not significantly different in the N-9 and placebo or no treatment groups. Genital lesions were more common in the N-9 group (1.18, 1.02-1.36). Our review has found no statistically significant reduction in risk of HIV and STIs, and the confidence intervals indicate that any protection that may exist is likely to be very small. There is some evidence of harm through genital lesions. N-9 cannot be recommended for HIV and STI prevention.

Long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease - A meta-analysis with 5-year patient-level data from the ARTS, ERACI-II, MASS-II, and SoS trials

Background-Randomized trials that studied clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are underpowered to properly assess safety end points like death, stroke, and myocardial infarction. Pooling data from randomized controlled trials increases the statistical power and allows better assessment of the treatment effect in high-risk subgroups. Methods and Results-We performed a pooled analysis of 3051 patients in 4 randomized trials evaluating the relative safety and efficacy of PCI with stenting and CABG at 5 years for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease. The primary end point was the composite end point of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The secondary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular accidents, death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. We tested for heterogeneities in treatment effect in patient subgroups. At 5 years, the cumulative incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was similar in patients randomized to PCI with stenting versus CABG (16.7% versus 16.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.27; P = 0.69). Repeat revascularization, however, occurred significantly more frequently after PCI than CABG (29.0% versus 7.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.29; P<0.001). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were significantly higher in the PCI than the CABG group (39.2% versus 23.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 0.61; P<0.001). No heterogeneity of treatment effect was found in the subgroups, including diabetic patients and those presenting with 3-vessel disease. Conclusions-In this pooled analysis of 4 randomized trials, PCI with stenting was associated with a long-term safety profile similar to that of CABG. However, as a result of persistently lower repeat revascularization rates in the CABG patients, overall major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event rates were significantly lower in the CABG group at 5 years.

Ramp and constant power trials produce equivalent critical power estimates

The standard critical power test protocol on the cycle prescribes a series of trials to exhaustion, each at a different but constant power setting. Recently the protocol has been modified and applied to a series of trials to exhaustion each at a different ramp incremental rate. This study was undertaken to compare critical power and anaerobic work capacity estimates in the same group of subjects when derived from the two protocols. Ten male subjects of mixed athletic ability cycled to exhaustion on eight occasions in randomized order over a 3-wk period. Four trials were performed at differing constant power settings and four trials on differing ramp incremental rates. Both critical power and anaerobic work capacity were estimated for each subject by curve fitting of the ramp model and of three versions of the constant power model. After adjusting for inter-subject variability, no significant differences were detected between critical power estimates or between anaerobic work capacity estimates from any model formulation or from the two protocols. It is concluded that both the ramp and constant power protocols produce equivalent estimates for critical power and anaerobic work capacity.

Clinical trials profile: Professionals and sites

Clinical trial is considered a breakthrough method in medicine and essential to the development of new drugs. Clinical trials that comply with international and national regulations require an appropriate infrastructure and team qualification. The goal of this study was to evaluate clinical trial groups in Brazil: professional qualification, site structure regulatory knowledge and Good Clinical Practice (GCP) adherence. This is a transversal study with investigators (PI) and sub investigator (SI). PI and SI data were initially identified from Curriculum Lattes from National Advice of Scientific and Technological Development. The study participants were submitted to a questionnaire, which was composed of qualitative and quantitative questions. A hundred PI and SI were interviewed. The most representative Brazilian regions were Southeast (68%) and South (18%). The main institutions involved were HCFMUSP complex and UNIFESP among others institutions. Academic graduation is observed in 86% of them and the higher degree is Doctorate (62%). 91% had GCP knowledge although only 74% had formal training. About the team, all of them are multidisciplinary with majority of nurses and pharmaceuticals. 88% had GCP knowledge although only 77% had formal training. 36%, 60% and 44% of clinical trials were in phase II,III and IV. In conclusion, researchers have appropriate skills and knowledge to perform clinical studies however there is still a need for training. The centers where the researchers work, have trained staff and adequate infrastructure for conducting clinical trials phase II,III and IV. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Challenges and Recommendations for Placebo Controls in Randomized Trials in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine A Report of the International Placebo Symposium Working Group

Compared with other specialties, the field of physical and rehabilitation medicine has not received the deserved recognition from clinicians and researchers in the scientific community. One of the reasons is the lack of sound evidence to support the traditional physical and rehabilitation medicine treatments. The best way to change this disadvantage is through a well conducted clinical research, such as standard placebo- or sham-controlled randomized clinical trials. Therefore, having placebo groups in clinical trials is essential to improve the level of evidence-based practice in physical and rehabilitation medicine that ultimately translates to better clinical care. To address the challenges for the use of placebo in physical and rehabilitation medicine and randomized clinical trials and to create useful recommendations, we convened a working group during the inaugural International Symposium in Placebo (February 2009, in Sao Paulo, Brazil) in which the following topics were discussed: (1) current status of randomized clinical trials in physical and rehabilitation medicine, (2) challenges for the use of placebo in physical and rehabilitation medicine, (3) bioethics, (4) use of placebo in acupuncture trials and for the treatment of low-back pain, (5) mechanisms of placebo, and (6) insights from other specialties. The current article represents the consensus report from the working group.