Multimodal approach in the use of clinical scoring, morphological MRI and biochemical T2-mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging in their ability to assess differences between cartilage repair tissue after microfracture therapy and matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present pilot study is to show initial results of a multimodal approach using clinical scoring, morphological magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biochemical T2-relaxation and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in their ability to assess differences between cartilage repair tissue after microfracture therapy (MFX) and matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT). METHOD: Twenty patients were cross-sectionally evaluated at different post-operative intervals from 12 to 63 months after MFX and 12-59 months after MACT. The two groups were matched by age (MFX: 36.0+/-10.4 years; MACT: 35.1+/-7.7 years) and post-operative interval (MFX: 32.6+/-16.7 months; MACT: 31.7+/-18.3 months). After clinical evaluation using the Lysholm score, 3T-MRI was performed obtaining the MR observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) score as well as T2-mapping and DWI for multi-parametric MRI. Quantitative T2-relaxation was achieved using a multi-echo spin-echo sequence; semi-quantitative diffusion-quotient (signal intensity without diffusion-weighting divided by signal intensity with diffusion weighting) was prepared by a partially balanced, steady-state gradient-echo pulse sequence. RESULTS: No differences in Lysholm (P=0.420) or MOCART (P=0.209) score were observed between MFX and MACT. T2-mapping showed lower T2 values after MFX compared to MACT (P=0.039). DWI distinguished between healthy cartilage and cartilage repair tissue in both procedures (MFX: P=0.001; MACT: P=0.007). Correlations were found between the Lysholm and the MOCART score (Pearson: 0.484; P=0.031), between the Lysholm score and DWI (Pearson:-0.557; P=0.011) and a trend between the Lysholm score and T2 (Person: 0.304; P=0.193). CONCLUSION: Using T2-mapping and DWI, additional information could be gained compared to clinical scoring or morphological MRI. In combination clinical, MR-morphological and MR-biochemical parameters can be seen as a promising multimodal tool in the follow-up of cartilage repair.

Hypereosinophilic syndrome: a multicenter, retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics and response to therapy

BACKGROUND: Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a heterogeneous group of rare disorders defined by persistent blood eosinophilia > or =1.5 x 10(9)/L, absence of a secondary cause, and evidence of eosinophil-associated pathology. With the exception of a recent multicenter trial of mepolizumab (anti-IL-5 mAb), published therapeutic experience has been restricted to case reports and small case series. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to collect and summarize baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics in a large, diverse cohort of patients with HES and to review responses to treatment with conventional and novel therapies. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data from 188 patients with HES, seen between January 2001 and December 2006 at 11 institutions in the United States and Europe, were collected retrospectively by chart review. RESULTS: Eighteen of 161 patients (11%) tested were Fip1-like 1-platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (FIP1L1-PDGFRA) mutation-positive, and 29 of 168 patients tested (17%) had a demonstrable aberrant or clonal T-cell population. Corticosteroid monotherapy induced complete or partial responses at 1 month in 85% (120/141) of patients with most remaining on maintenance doses (median, 10 mg prednisone equivalent daily for 2 months to 20 years). Hydroxyurea and IFN-alpha (used in 64 and 46 patients, respectively) were also effective, but their use was limited by toxicity. Imatinib (used in 68 patients) was more effective in patients with the FIP1L1-PDGFRA mutation (88%) than in those without (23%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study, the largest clinical analysis of patients with HES to date, not only provides useful information for clinicians but also should stimulate prospective trials to optimize treatment of HES.

[Neuromonitoring and neuroprotection in cardiac anaesthesia. Nationwide survey conducted by the Cardiac Anaesthesia Working Group of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine]

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this nationwide survey carried out in department of cardiac anesthesia in Germany was to identify current practice with regard to neuromonitoring und neuroprotection. METHODOLOGY: The data are based on a questionnaire sent out to all departments of cardiac anesthesia in Germany between October 2007 und January 2008. The anonymized questionnaire contained 26 questions about the practice of preoperative evaluation of cerebral vessels, intra-operative use of neuromonitoring, the nature und application of cerebral protective measures, perfusion management during cardiopulmonary bypass, postoperative evaluation of neurological status, and training in the field of cerebral monitoring. RESULTS: Of the 80 mailed questionnaires 55% were returned and 90% of department evaluated cerebral vessels preoperatively with duplex ultrasound. The methods used for intra-operative neuromonitoring are electroencephalography (EEG, 60%) for type A dissections (38.1%), for elective surgery on the thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aorta (34.1% and 31.6%, respectively) and in carotid surgery (43.2%) near infrared spectroscopy (40%), evoked potentials (30%) and transcranial Doppler sonography (17.5%), with some centers using combined methods. In most departments the central nervous system is not subjected to monitoring during bypass surgery, heart valve surgery, or minimally invasive surgery. Cerebral protective measures used comprise patient cooling on cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB 100%), extracorporeal cooling of the head (65%) and the administration of corticosteroids (58%), barbiturates (50%) and antiepileptic drugs (10%). Neuroprotective anesthesia consists of administering inhalation anesthetics (32.5%; sevoflurane 76.5%) and intravenous anesthesia (20%; propofol and barbiturates each accounting for 46.2%). Of the departments 72.5% cool patients as a standard procedure for surgery involving cardiovascular arrest and 37.5% during all surgery using CPB. In 84.6% of department CPB flow equals calculated cardiac output (CO) under normothermia, while the desired mean arterial pressure (MAP) varies between 60 and 70 mmHg (43.9%) and between 50 and 60 mmHg (41.5%), respectively. At body temperatures less than 18 degrees C CPB flow is reduced below the calculated CO (70%) while 27% of departments use normothermic flow rates. The preferred MAP under hypothermia is between 50 and 60 mmHg (59%). The results of intra-operative neuromonitoring are documented on the anesthesia record (77%). In 42.5% of the departments postoperative neurological function is estimated by the anesthesiologist. Continuing education sessions pertaining to neuromonitoring are organized on a regular basis in 32.5% of the departments and in 37.5% individual physicians are responsible for their own neuromonitoring education. CONCLUSION: The present survey data indicate that neuromonitoring and neuroprotective therapy during CPB is not standardized in cardiac anesthesiology departments in Germany. The systemic use of available methods to implement multimodal neuromonitoring would be desirable.

Japanese-US common-arm analysis of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a model for assessing population-related pharmacogenomics

PURPOSE To explore whether population-related pharmacogenomics contribute to differences in patient outcomes between clinical trials performed in Japan and the United States, given similar study designs, eligibility criteria, staging, and treatment regimens. METHODS We prospectively designed and conducted three phase III trials (Four-Arm Cooperative Study, LC00-03, and S0003) in advanced-stage, non-small-cell lung cancer, each with a common arm of paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Genomic DNA was collected from patients in LC00-03 and S0003 who received paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve, 6). Genotypic variants of CYP3A4, CYP3A5, CYP2C8, NR1I2-206, ABCB1, ERCC1, and ERCC2 were analyzed by pyrosequencing or by PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism. Results were assessed by Cox model for survival and by logistic regression for response and toxicity. Results Clinical results were similar in the two Japanese trials, and were significantly different from the US trial, for survival, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and anemia. There was a significant difference between Japanese and US patients in genotypic distribution for CYP3A4*1B (P = .01), CYP3A5*3C (P = .03), ERCC1 118 (P < .0001), ERCC2 K751Q (P < .001), and CYP2C8 R139K (P = .01). Genotypic associations were observed between CYP3A4*1B for progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.94; P = .04) and ERCC2 K751Q for response (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.83; P = .02). For grade 4 neutropenia, the HR for ABCB1 3425C-->T was 1.84 (95% CI, 0.77 to 4.48; P = .19). CONCLUSION Differences in allelic distribution for genes involved in paclitaxel disposition or DNA repair were observed between Japanese and US patients. In an exploratory analysis, genotype-related associations with patient outcomes were observed for CYP3A4*1B and ERCC2 K751Q. This common-arm approach facilitates the prospective study of population-related pharmacogenomics in which ethnic differences in antineoplastic drug disposition are anticipated.

Better conduct of clinical trials: the control group in critical care trials

OBJECTIVE: To review trial design issues related to control groups. DESIGN: Review of the literature with specific reference to critical care trials. MAIN RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Performing randomized controlled trials in the critical care setting presents specific problems: studies include patients with rapidly lethal conditions, the majority of intensive care patients suffer from syndromes rather than from well-definable diseases, the severity of such syndromes cannot be precisely assessed, and the treatment consists of interacting therapies. Interactions between physiology, pathophysiology, and therapies are at best marginally understood and may have a major impact on study design and interpretation of results. Selection of the right control group is crucial for the interpretation and clinical implementation of results. Studies comparing new interventions with current ones or different levels of current treatments have the problem of the necessity of defining "usual care." Usual care controls without any constraints typically include substantial heterogeneity. Constraints in the usual therapy may help to reduce some variation. Inclusion of unrestricted usual care groups may help to enhance safety. Practice misalignment is a novel problem in which patients receive a treatment that is the direct opposite of usual care, and occurs when fixed-dose interventions are used in situations where care is normally titrated. Practice misalignment should be considered in the design and interpretation of studies on titrated therapies.