Is screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm bad for your health and well-being?

Background: The purpose of the present paper was to investigate whether screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) causes health-related quality of life to change in men or their partners. Methods: A cross-sectional case-control comparison was undertaken of men aged 65-83 years living in Perth, Western Australia, using questionnaires incorporating three validated instruments (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36, EuroQol EQ-5D and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) as well as several independent questions about quality of life. The 2009 men who attended for ultrasound scans of the abdominal aorta completed a short prescreening questionnaire about their perception of their general health. Four hundred and ninety-eight men (157 with an AAA and 341 with a normal aorta) were sent two questionnaires for completion 12 months after screening, one for themselves and one for their partner, each being about the quality of life of the respondent. Results: Men with an AAA were more limited in performing physical activities than those with a normal aorta (t-test of means P = 0.04). After screening, men with an AAA were significantly less likely to have current pain or discomfort than those with a normal aorta (multivariate odds ratio: 0.5; 95% confidence interval (Cl): 0.3-0.9) and reported fewer visits to their doctor. The mean level of self-perceived general health increased for all men from before to after screening (from 63.4 to 65.4). Conclusions: Apart from physical functioning, screening was not associated with decreases in health and well-being. A high proportion of men rated their health over the year after screening as being either the same or improved, regardless of whether or not they were found to have an AAA.

Response to Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm - Screening reduces deaths related to aneurysm

Editor—We reported the study in a transparent fashion and were deliberately cautious in our conclusions. Australia and the United Kingdom are very different with regard to arrangements for primary care, which did not permit us to undertake a preliminary assessment of the eligibility of men for screening before we randomised them and issued half invitations to attend for the ultrasound examination.

Abatacept in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled withdrawal trial

Background Some children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis either do not respond, or are intolerant to, treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) drugs. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis who had failed previous treatments. Methods We did a double-blind, randomised controlled withdrawal trial between February, 2004, and June, 2006. We enrolled 190 patients aged 6-17 years, from 45 centres, who had a history of active juvenile idiopathic arthritis; at least five active joints; and an inadequate response to, or intolerance to, at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. All 190 patients were given 10 mg/kg of abatacept intravenously in the open-label period of 4 months. Of the 170 patients who completed this lead-in course, 47 did not respond to the treatment according to predefined American College of Rheumatology (ACR) paediatric criteria and were excluded. Of the patients who did respond to abatacept, arthritis, and 62 were randomly assigned to receive placebo at the same dose and timing. The primary endpoint was time to flare of arthritis. Flare was defined as worsening of 30% or more in at least three of six core variables, with at least 30% improvement in no more than one variable. We analysed all patients who were treated as per protocol. This trial is registered, number NCT00095173. Findings Flares of arthritis occurred in 33 of 62 (53%) patients who were given placebo and 12 of 60 (20%) abatacept patients during the double-blind treatment (p=0.0003). Median time to flare of arthritis was 6 months for patients given placebo (insufficient events to calculate IQR); insufficient events had occurred in the abatacept group for median time to flare to be assessed (p=0.0002). The risk of flare in patients who contined abatacept was less than a third of that for controls during that double-blind period (hazard ratio 0.31, 95% CI 0.16-0.95). During the double-blind period, the frequency of adverse events did not differ in the two treatment groups, Adverse events were recorded in 37 abatacept recipients (62%) and 34 (55%) placebo recipients (p=0.47); only two serious adverse events were reported, bouth in controls (p=0.50). Interpretation Selective modulation of T-cell costimulation with abatacept is a rational alternative treatment for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Abatacept Improves Health-Related Quality of Life, Pain, Sleep Quality, and Daily Participation in Subjects With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Objective. To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in abatacept-treated children/adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Methods. In this phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, subjects with active polyarticular course JIA and an inadequate response/intolerance to >= 1 disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (including biologics) received abatacept 10 mg/kg plus methotrexate (MTX) during the 4-month open-label period (period A). Subjects achieving the American College of Rheumatology Pediatric 30 criteria for improvement (defined ""responders"") were randomized to abatacept or placebo (plus MTX) in the 6-month double-blind withdrawal period (period B). HRQOL assessments included 15 Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ) health concepts plus the physical (PhS) and psychosocial summary scores (PsS), pain (100-mm visual analog scale), the Children`s Sleep Habits Questionnaire, and a daily activity participation questionnaire. Results. A total of 190 subjects from period A and 122 from period B were eligible for analysis. In period A, there were substantial improvements across all of the CHQ domains (greatest improvement was in pain/discomfort) and the PhS (8.3 units) and PsS (4.3 units) with abatacept. At the end of period B, abatacept-treated subjects had greater improvements versus placebo in all domains (except behavior) and both summary scores. Similar improvement patterns were seen with pain and sleep. For participation in daily activities, an additional 2.6 school days/month and 2.3 parents` usual activity days/month were gained in period A responders with abatacept, and further gains were made in period B (1.9 versus 0.9 [P = 0.033] and 0.2 versus -1.3 [P = 0.109] school days/month and parents` usual activity days/month, respectively, in abatacept-versus placebo-treated subjects). Conclusion. Improvements in HRQOL were observed with abatacept, providing real-life tangible benefits to children with JIA and their parents/caregivers.

Calculating current densities and fields produced by shielded magnetic resonance imaging probes

A method is presented for computing the fields produced by radio frequency probes of the type used in magnetic resonance imaging. The effects of surrounding the probe with a shielding coil, intended to eliminate stray fields produced outside the probe, are included. An essential feature of these devices is the fact that the conducting rungs of the probe are of finite width relative to the coil radius, and it is therefore necessary to find the distribution of current within the conductors as part of the solution process. This is done here using a numerical method based on the inverse finite Hilbert transform, applied iteratively to the entire structure including its shielding coils. It is observed that the fields are influenced substantially by the width of the conducting rungs of the probe, since induced eddy currents within the rungs become more pronounced as their width is increased. The shield is also shown to have a significant effect on both the primary current density and the resultant fields. Quality factors are computed for these probes and compared with values measured experimentally.

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.)

Out of the shadows: The critical sociology of sport in Australia, 1986 to 1996

The sociology of sport in Australia has reached a key point in its development. A critical tradition in the subdiscipline has been established over the last decade, but its intellectual and institutional progress has been uneven. This article briefly traces the emergence of critical sports sociology in a country outside the major centers in the UK and U.S., its break with functionalist approaches, and its attempts to overcome the neglect of local mainstream sociology. The authors proceed to examine (self-reflexively) the changes of theoretical direction and the new lines of research that are being explored in the field. A recent ''skirmish'' with narrative history over the preferred theories and methods in sports analysis is discussed as illustrative of the difficulties encountered by an energetic but small, dispersed and underorganized scholarly movement in Australia.