Allogeneic stem cell transplant in adult patients with acute myelogenous leukemia: a systematic analysis of international guidelines and recommendations

In patients with acute myelogenous leukemia, published guidelines and treatment recommendations are usually the basis for starting the work-up process for allogeneic transplant. However, only consistent recommendations would allow a standardized clinical practice. We conducted a comprehensive systematic literature search to identify and evaluate the best available evidence from controlled clinical trials. In addition, recommendations given by leading organizations in the USA and Europe were analyzed. The following aspects were selected for systematic comparison: factors for risk assessment and categorization, role of type of donor, significance of allogeneic transplant in first or second complete remission and in relapse/progressive disease; and role of reduced intensity conditioning regimens. In conclusion, the recommendations for the use of allogeneic transplant given by the literature and by published guidelines are inconsistent and will need clarification.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

Electroencephalographic topography measures of experienced utility

Economic theory distinguishes two concepts of utility: decision utility, objectively quantifiable by choices, and experienced utility, referring to the satisfaction by an obtainment. To date, experienced utility is typically measured with subjective ratings. This study intended to quantify experienced utility by global levels of neuronal activity. Neuronal activity was measured by means of electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to gain and omission of graded monetary rewards at the level of the EEG topography in human subjects. A novel analysis approach allowed approximating psychophysiological value functions for the experienced utility of monetary rewards. In addition, we identified the time windows of the event-related potentials (ERP) and the respective intracortical sources, in which variations in neuronal activity were significantly related to the value or valence of outcomes. Results indicate that value functions of experienced utility and regret disproportionally increase with monetary value, and thus contradict the compressing value functions of decision utility. The temporal pattern of outcome evaluation suggests an initial (∼250 ms) coarse evaluation regarding the valence, concurrent with a finer-grained evaluation of the value of gained rewards, whereas the evaluation of the value of omitted rewards emerges later. We hypothesize that this temporal double dissociation is explained by reward prediction errors. Finally, a late, yet unreported, reward-sensitive ERP topography (∼500 ms) was identified. The sources of these topographical covariations are estimated in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, the medial frontal gyrus, the anterior and posterior cingulate cortex and the hippocampus/amygdala. The results provide important new evidence regarding “how,” “when,” and “where” the brain evaluates outcomes with different hedonic impact.

E.A.O. guidelines for the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry 2011. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration at the Medical University of Warsaw

Diagnostics imaging is an essential component of patient selection and treatment planning in oral rehabilitation by means of osseointegrated implants. In 2002, the EAO produced and published guidelines on the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. Since that time, there have been significant developments in both the application of cone beam computed tomography as well as in the range of surgical and prosthetic applications that can potentially benefit from its use. However, medical exposure to ionizing radiation must always be justified and result in a net benefit to the patient. The as low a dose as is reasonably achievable principle must also be applied taking into account any alternative techniques that might achieve the same objectives. This paper reports on current EAO recommendations arising from a consensus meeting held at the Medical University of Warsaw (2011) to update these guidelines. Radiological considerations are detailed, including justification and optimization, with a special emphasis on the obligations that arise for those who prescribe or undertake such investigations. The paper pays special attention to clinical indications and radiographic diagnostic considerations as well as to future developments and trends.