Phase 3 randomized trial on larynx preservation comparing sequential vs alternating chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Both induction chemotherapy followed by irradiation and concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy have been reported as valuable alternatives to total laryngectomy in patients with advanced larynx or hypopharynx cancer. We report results of the randomized phase 3 trial 24954 from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. METHODS: Patients with resectable advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx (tumor stage T3-T4) or hypopharynx (T2-T4), with regional lymph nodes in the neck staged as N0-N2 and with no metastasis, were randomly assigned to treatment in the sequential (or control) or the alternating (or experimental) arm. In the sequential arm, patients with a 50% or more reduction in primary tumor size after two cycles of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil received another two cycles, followed by radiotherapy (70 Gy total). In the alternating arm, a total of four cycles of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (in weeks 1, 4, 7, and 10) were alternated with radiotherapy with 20 Gy during the three 2-week intervals between chemotherapy cycles (60 Gy total). All nonresponders underwent salvage surgery and postoperative radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to obtain time-to-event data. RESULTS: The 450 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (224 to the sequential arm and 226 to the alternating arm). Median follow-up was 6.5 years. Survival with a functional larynx was similar in sequential and alternating arms (hazard ratio of death and/or event = 0.85, 95% confidence interval = 0.68 to 1.06), as were median overall survival (4.4 and 5.1 years, respectively) and median progression-free interval (3.0 and 3.1 years, respectively). Grade 3 or 4 mucositis occurred in 64 (32%) of the 200 patients in the sequential arm who received radiotherapy and in 47 (21%) of the 220 patients in the alternating arm. Late severe edema and/or fibrosis was observed in 32 (16%) patients in the sequential arm and in 25 (11%) in the alternating arm. CONCLUSIONS: Larynx preservation, progression-free interval, and overall survival were similar in both arms, as were acute and late toxic effects.

Assessment of letrozole and tamoxifen alone and in sequence for postmenopausal women with steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the BIG 1-98 randomised clinical trial at 8·1 years median follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer have persistent, long-term risk of breast-cancer recurrence and death. Therefore, trials assessing endocrine therapies for this patient population need extended follow-up. We present an update of efficacy outcomes in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study at 8·1 years median follow-up. METHODS: BIG 1-98 is a randomised, phase 3, double-blind trial of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer that compares 5 years of tamoxifen or letrozole monotherapy, or sequential treatment with 2 years of one of these drugs followed by 3 years of the other. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks, and stratified according to the two-arm or four-arm randomisation option, participating institution, and chemotherapy use. Patients, investigators, data managers, and medical reviewers were masked. The primary efficacy endpoint was disease-free survival (events were invasive breast cancer relapse, second primaries [contralateral breast and non-breast], or death without previous cancer event). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI). The monotherapy comparison included patients randomly assigned to tamoxifen or letrozole for 5 years. In 2005, after a significant disease-free survival benefit was reported for letrozole as compared with tamoxifen, a protocol amendment facilitated the crossover to letrozole of patients who were still receiving tamoxifen alone; Cox models and Kaplan-Meier estimates with inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) are used to account for selective crossover to letrozole of patients (n=619) in the tamoxifen arm. Comparison of sequential treatments to letrozole monotherapy included patients enrolled and randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, or tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. Treatment has ended for all patients and detailed safety results for adverse events that occurred during the 5 years of treatment have been reported elsewhere. Follow-up is continuing for those enrolled in the four-arm option. BIG 1-98 is registered at clinicaltrials.govNCT00004205. FINDINGS: 8010 patients were included in the trial, with a median follow-up of 8·1 years (range 0-12·4). 2459 were randomly assigned to monotherapy with tamoxifen for 5 years and 2463 to monotherapy with letrozole for 5 years. In the four-arm option of the trial, 1546 were randomly assigned to letrozole for 5 years, 1548 to tamoxifen for 5 years, 1540 to letrozole for 2 years followed by tamoxifen for 3 years, and 1548 to tamoxifen for 2 years followed by letrozole for 3 years. At a median follow-up of 8·7 years from randomisation (range 0-12·4), letrozole monotherapy was significantly better than tamoxifen, whether by IPCW or intention-to-treat analysis (IPCW disease-free survival HR 0·82 [95% CI 0·74-0·92], overall survival HR 0·79 [0·69-0·90], DRFI HR 0·79 [0·68-0·92], BCFI HR 0·80 [0·70-0·92]; intention-to-treat disease-free survival HR 0·86 [0·78-0·96], overall survival HR 0·87 [0·77-0·999], DRFI HR 0·86 [0·74-0·998], BCFI HR 0·86 [0·76-0·98]). At a median follow-up of 8·0 years from randomisation (range 0-11·2) for the comparison of the sequential groups with letrozole monotherapy, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the four endpoints for either sequence. 8-year intention-to-treat estimates (each with SE ≤1·1%) for letrozole monotherapy, letrozole followed by tamoxifen, and tamoxifen followed by letrozole were 78·6%, 77·8%, 77·3% for disease-free survival; 87·5%, 87·7%, 85·9% for overall survival; 89·9%, 88·7%, 88·1% for DRFI; and 86·1%, 85·3%, 84·3% for BCFI. INTERPRETATION: For postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early breast cancer, a reduction in breast cancer recurrence and mortality is obtained by letrozole monotherapy when compared with tamoxifen montherapy. Sequential treatments involving tamoxifen and letrozole do not improve outcome compared with letrozole monotherapy, but might be useful strategies when considering an individual patient's risk of recurrence and treatment tolerability. FUNDING: Novartis, United States National Cancer Institute, International Breast Cancer Study Group.

Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial.

BACKGROUND: In 2004, a randomised phase III trial by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC) reported improved median and 2-year survival for patients with glioblastoma treated with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide and radiotherapy. We report the final results with a median follow-up of more than 5 years. METHODS: Adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly assigned to receive either standard radiotherapy or identical radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide followed by up to six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide. The methylation status of the methyl-guanine methyl transferase gene, MGMT, was determined retrospectively from the tumour tissue of 206 patients. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00006353. FINDINGS: Between Aug 17, 2000, and March 22, 2002, 573 patients were assigned to treatment. 278 (97%) of 286 patients in the radiotherapy alone group and 254 (89%) of 287 in the combined-treatment group died during 5 years of follow-up. Overall survival was 27.2% (95% CI 22.2-32.5) at 2 years, 16.0% (12.0-20.6) at 3 years, 12.1% (8.5-16.4) at 4 years, and 9.8% (6.4-14.0) at 5 years with temozolomide, versus 10.9% (7.6-14.8), 4.4% (2.4-7.2), 3.0% (1.4-5.7), and 1.9% (0.6-4.4) with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.7; p<0.0001). A benefit of combined therapy was recorded in all clinical prognostic subgroups, including patients aged 60-70 years. Methylation of the MGMT promoter was the strongest predictor for outcome and benefit from temozolomide chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Benefits of adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy lasted throughout 5 years of follow-up. A few patients in favourable prognostic categories survive longer than 5 years. MGMT methylation status identifies patients most likely to benefit from the addition of temozolomide. FUNDING: EORTC, NCIC, Nélia and Amadeo Barletta Foundation, Schering-Plough.

Early mobilization out of bed after ischaemic stroke reduces severe complications but not cerebral blood flow: a randomized controlled pilot trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether early mobilization after acute ischaemic stroke is better than delayed mobilization with regard to medical complications and if it is safe in relation to neurological function and cerebral blood flow. DESIGN: Randomized controlled pilot trial of early versus delayed mobilization out of bed with incidence of severe complications as the primary outcome. SETTING: Acute stroke unit in the neurology department of a University Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty patients after ischaemic stroke with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score >6 were recruited. INTERVENTION: All patients were treated with physiotherapy immediately after their admission. In the early protocol patients were mobilized out of bed after 52 hours, in the delayed protocol after seven days. RESULTS: Eight out of 50 randomized patients were excluded from the per-protocol analysis because of early transfer to other hospitals. There were 2 (8%) severe complications in the 25 early mobilization patients and 8 (47%) in the 17 delayed mobilization patients (P < 0.006). There were no differences in the total number of complications or in clinical outcome. In the 26 patients (62%) who underwent serial transcranial Doppler ultrasonography, no blood flow differences were found. CONCLUSION: We found an apparent reduction in severe complications and no increase in total complications with an early mobilization protocol after acute ischaemic stroke. No influence on neurological three-month outcomes or on cerebral blood flow was seen. These results justify larger trials comparing mobilization protocols with possibly even faster mobilization out of bed than explored here.

Brief alcohol intervention and alcohol assessment do not influence alcohol use in injured patients treated in the emergency department: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of brief alcohol intervention (BAI) in reducing alcohol use among hazardous drinkers treated in the emergency department (ED) after an injury; in addition it tests whether assessment of alcohol use without BAI is sufficient to reduce hazardous drinking. DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial with 12-month follow-up conducted between January 2003 and June 2005. SETTING: Urban academic emergency department (ED) of the Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5136 consecutive patients attending ED after an injury completed a seven-item general and a three-item alcohol screen and 1472 (28.7%) were positive for hazardous drinking according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Addiction definition; of these 987 (67.1%) were randomized into a BAI group (n = 310) or a control group with screening and assessment (n = 342) or a control group with screening only (n = 335) and then a total of 770 patients (78.0%) completed the 12-month follow-up procedures. INTERVENTION: A single 10-15-minute session of standardized BAI conducted by a trained research assistant. MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of participants who have changed to low-risk drinking at follow-up. FINDINGS: Data obtained at 12 months indicated that similar proportions were low-risk drinkers in BAI versus control groups with and without assessment (35.6%, 34.0%, 37.0%, respectively, P = 0.71). Data also indicated similar reductions in drinking frequency, quantity, binge drinking frequency and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores across groups. All groups reported similar numbers of days hospitalized and numbers of medical consults in the last 12 months. A model including age groups, gender, AUDIT and injury severity scores indicated that BAI had no influence on the main alcohol use outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the evidence that a 10-15-minute BAI does not decrease alcohol use and health resource utilization in hazardous drinkers treated in the ED, and demonstrates that commonly found decreases in hazardous alcohol use in control groups cannot be attributed to the baseline alcohol assessment.

Referral from primary care to a physical activity programme: establishing long-term adherence? A randomized controlled trial. Rationale and study design

Background: Declining physical activity is associated with a rising burden of global disease. There is little evidence about effective ways to increase adherence to physical activity. Therefore, interventions are needed that produce sustained increases in adherence to physical activity and are cost-effective. The purpose is to assess the effectiveness of a primary care physical activity intervention in increasing adherence to physical activity in the general population seen in primary care. Method and design: Randomized controlled trial with systematic random sampling. A total of 424 subjects of both sexes will participate; all will be over the age of 18 with a low level of physical activity (according to the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IPAQ), self-employed and from 9 Primary Healthcare Centres (PHC). They will volunteer to participate in a physical activity programme during 3 months (24 sessions; 2 sessions a week, 60 minutes per session). Participants from each PHC will be randomly allocated to an intervention (IG) and control group (CG). The following parameters will be assessed pre and post intervention in both groups: (1) health-related quality of life (SF-12), (2) physical activity stage of change (Prochaska's stages of change), (3) level of physical activity (IPAQ-short version), (4) change in perception of health (vignettes from the Cooperative World Organization of National Colleges, Academies, and Academic Associations of Family Physicians, COOP/WONCA), (5) level of social support for the physical activity practice (Social Support for Physical Activity Scale, SSPAS), and (6) control based on analysis (HDL, LDL and glycated haemoglobin).Participants' frequency of visits to the PHC will be registered over the six months before and after the programme. There will be a follow up in a face to face interview three, six and twelve months after the programme, with the reduced version of IPAQ, SF-12, SSPAS, and Prochaska's stages. Discussion: The pilot study showed the effectiveness of an enhanced low-cost, evidence-based intervention in increased physical activity and improved social support. If successful in demonstrating long-term improvements, this randomised controlled trial will be the first sustainable physical activity intervention based in primary care in our country to demonstrate longterm adherence to physical activity. Trial Registration: A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Developed by the National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00714831.

Carboplatin and weekly paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy compared with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: IFCT-0501 randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is recommended to treat advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in fit, non-elderly adults, but monotherapy is recommended for patients older than 70 years. We compared a carboplatin and paclitaxel doublet chemotherapy regimen with monotherapy in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised trial we recruited patients aged 70-89 years with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and WHO performance status scores of 0-2. Patients received either four cycles (3 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of carboplatin (on day 1) plus paclitaxel (on days 1, 8, and 15) or five cycles (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment) of vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy. Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation method. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number NCT00298415. FINDINGS: 451 patients were enrolled. 226 were randomly assigned monotherapy and 225 doublet chemotherapy. Median age was 77 years and median follow-up was 30.3 months (range 8.6-45.2). Median overall survival was 10.3 months for doublet chemotherapy and 6.2 months for monotherapy (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78; p<0.0001); 1-year survival was 44.5% (95% CI 37.9-50.9) and 25.4% (19.9-31.3), respectively. Toxic effects were more frequent in the doublet chemotherapy group than in the monotherapy group (most frequent, decreased neutrophil count (108 [48.4%] vs 28 [12.4%]; asthenia 23 [10.3%] vs 13 [5.8%]). INTERPRETATION: Despite increased toxic effects, platinum-based doublet chemotherapy was associated with survival benefits compared with vinorelbine or gemcitabine monotherapy in elderly patients with NSCLC. We feel that the current treatment paradigm for these patients should be reconsidered. FUNDING: Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique, Institut National du Cancer.

Concomitant Cisplatin and Hyperfractionated Radiotherapy in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: Ten-year Follow-up of a Randomized Phase III Trial (SAKK 10/94)

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To analyze the long-term outcome of treatment with concomitant cisplatin and hyperfractionated radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck cancer compared with hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone. MATERIALS/METHODS: From July 1994 to July 2000 a total of 224 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck were randomized to either hyperfractionated radiotherapy (median dose 74.4 Gy; 1.2 Gy twice daily) or the same radiotherapy combined with two cycles of concomitant cisplatin (20mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days of weeks 1 and 5). The primary endpoint was time to any treatment failure; secondary endpoints were locoregional failure, metastatic failure, overall survival, and late toxicity assessed according to RTOG criteria. The trial was registered at the National Institutes of Health (www.clinicaltrials.gov; identifier number: NCT00002654). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 9.5 years (range, 0.1 - 15.4 years). Median time to any treatment failure was not significantly different between treatment arms (p = 0.19). Locoregional control (p\0.05), distant metastasis-free survival (p = 0.02) and cancer specific survival (p = 0.03) were significantly improved in the combined treatment arm, with no difference in late toxicity between treatment arms. However, overall survival was not significantly different (p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After long-term follow-up combined treatment with cisplatin and hyperfractionated, radiotherapy maintained an improved locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival, and cancer specific survival as compared to hyperfractionated radiotherapy alone with no difference in late toxicity.

Radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: recursive partitioning analysis of the EORTC 26981/22981-NCIC CE3 phase III randomized trial.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and National Cancer Institute of Canada trial on temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy (RT) in glioblastoma (GBM) has demonstrated that the combination of TMZ and RT conferred a significant and meaningful survival advantage compared with RT alone. We evaluated in this trial whether the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) retains its overall prognostic value and what the benefit of the combined modality is in each RPA class. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three patients with newly diagnosed GBM were randomly assigned to standard postoperative RT or to the same RT with concomitant TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ. The primary end point was overall survival. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer RPA used accounts for age, WHO performance status, extent of surgery, and the Mini-Mental Status Examination. RESULTS: Overall survival was statistically different among RPA classes III, IV, and V, with median survival times of 17, 15, and 10 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 32%, 19%, and 11%, respectively (P < .0001). Survival with combined TMZ/RT was higher in RPA class III, with 21 months median survival time and a 43% 2-year survival rate, versus 15 months and 20% for RT alone (P = .006). In RPA class IV, the survival advantage remained significant, with median survival times of 16 v 13 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 28% v 11%, respectively (P = .0001). In RPA class V, however, the survival advantage of RT/TMZ was of borderline significance (P = .054). CONCLUSION: RPA retains its prognostic significance overall as well as in patients receiving RT with or without TMZ for newly diagnosed GBM, particularly in classes III and IV.

Vaccines safety; effect of supervision or SMS on reporting rates of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with meningitis vaccine (MenAfriVac?): a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To ensure vaccines safety, given the weaknesses of the national pharmacovigilance system in Cameroon, there is a need to identify effective interventions that can contribute to improving AEFI reporting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of: (i) sending weekly SMS, or (ii) weekly supervisory visits on AEFI reporting rate during a meningitis immunization campaign conducted in Cameroon in 2012 using the meningitis A conjugate vaccine (MenAfriVac?). METHODS: Health facilities that met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to receive: (i) a weekly standardized SMS, (ii) a weekly standardized supervisory visits or (iii) no intervention. The primary outcome was the reported AEFI incidence rate from week 5 to 8 after the immunization campaign. Poisson regression model was used to estimate the effect of interventions after adjusting for health region, type of health facility, type and position of health workers as well as the cumulative number of AEFI reported from weeks 1 to 4. RESULTS: A total of 348 (77.2%) of 451 health facility were included, and 116 assigned to each of three groups. The incidence rate of reported AEFI per 100 health facility per week was 20.0 (15.9-24.1) in the SMS group, 40.2 (34.4-46.0) in supervision group and 13.6 (10.1-16.9) in the control group. Supervision led to a significant increase of AEFI reporting rate compared to SMS [adjusted RR=2.1 (1.6-2.7); p<0.001] and control [RR=2.8(2.1-3.7); p<0.001)] groups. The effect of SMS led to some increase in AEFI reporting rate compared to the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant [RR=1.4(0.8-1.6); p=0.07)]. CONCLUSION: Supervision was more effective than SMS or routine surveillance in improving AEFI reporting rate. It should be part of any AEFI surveillance system. SMS could be useful in improving AEFI reporting rates but strategies need to be found to improve its effectiveness, and thus maximize its benefits.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Identification of imaging selection patterns in acute ischemic stroke patients and the influence on treatment and clinical trial enrollment decision making.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: For the STroke Imaging Research (STIR) and VISTA-Imaging Investigators The purpose of this study was to collect precise information on the typical imaging decisions given specific clinical acute stroke scenarios. Stroke centers worldwide were surveyed regarding typical imaging used to work up representative acute stroke patients, make treatment decisions, and willingness to enroll in clinical trials. METHODS: STroke Imaging Research and Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Imaging circulated an online survey of clinical case vignettes through its website, the websites of national professional societies from multiple countries as well as through email distribution lists from STroke Imaging Research and participating societies. Survey responders were asked to select the typical imaging work-up for each clinical vignette presented. Actual images were not presented to the survey responders. Instead, the survey then displayed several types of imaging findings offered by the imaging strategy, and the responders selected the appropriate therapy and whether to enroll into a clinical trial considering time from onset, clinical presentation, and imaging findings. A follow-up survey focusing on 6 h from onset was conducted after the release of the positive endovascular trials. RESULTS: We received 548 responses from 35 countries including 282 individual centers; 78% of the centers originating from Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States. The specific onset windows presented influenced the type of imaging work-up selected more than the clinical scenario. Magnetic Resonance Imaging usage (27-28%) was substantial, in particular for wake-up stroke. Following the release of the positive trials, selection of perfusion imaging significantly increased for imaging strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Usage of vascular or perfusion imaging by Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging beyond just parenchymal imaging was the primary work-up (62-87%) across all clinical vignettes and time windows. Perfusion imaging with Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging was associated with increased probability of enrollment into clinical trials for 0-3 h. Following the release of the positive endovascular trials, selection of endovascular only treatment for 6 h increased across all clinical vignettes.

Evaluation of a sequential global test of improved recovery following stroke as applied to the ICTUS trial of citicoline

The International Citicoline Trial in acUte Stroke is a sequential phase III study of the use of the drug citicoline in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke, which was initiated in 2006 in 56 treatment centres. The primary objective of the trial is to demonstrate improved recovery of patients randomized to citicoline relative to those randomized to placebo after 12 weeks of follow-up. The primary analysis will take the form of a global test combining the dichotomized results of assessments on three well-established scales: the Barthel Index, the modified Rankin scale and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. This approach was previously used in the analysis of the influential National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke trial of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in stroke. The purpose of this paper is to describe how this trial was designed, and in particular how the simultaneous objectives of taking into account three assessment scales, performing a series of interim analyses and conducting treatment allocation and adjusting the analyses to account for prognostic factors, including more than 50 treatment centres, were addressed. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.