Additive Intraocular Pressure Reduction Effect of Fixed Combination of Maleate Timolol 0.5%/Dorzolamide 2% (Cosopt) on Monotherapy With Latanoprost (Xalatan) in Patients With Elevated Intraocular Pressure A Prospective, 4-week, Open-label, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

Purpose: To evaluate the additive effect of dorzolamide/timolol fixed combination in patients under monotherapy with latanoprost. Patients and Methods: In this prospective, 4-week, randomized, open-label controlled clinical trial, patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension, which presented at least 15% intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction after a minimum period of 15 days of monotherapy with latanoprost and whose IOP level was considered above the established target-IOP level were randomized to receive fixed combination of timolol/dorzolamide twice daily in one of eyes. The fellow eye was kept under monotherapy and was included in the control group. A modified diurnal tension curve (mDTC) followed by the water drinking test were performed in the baseline and week 4 visits to evaluate IOP profile between groups. Results: Forty-nine per-protocol patients were analyzed. After latanoprost monotherapy run-in period, IOP levels were significantly reduced (P<0.001) in both control and study groups to 15.34 +/- 2.96 mm Hg and 15.24 +/- 2.84 mm Hg (30.8% and 32.2% IOP reduction, respectively; P=0.552). At week 4, mean baseline diurnal IOP levels were 15.60 +/- 3.09 and 14.44 +/- 3.03 (7.4% difference; P=0.01). Mean baseline IOP modified diurnal tension curve peak after latanoprost run-in period were 17.47 +/- 3.68 mm Hg and 17.02 +/- 3.35 mm Hg (control and study eyes, respectively; P=0.530). At week 4 visit, mean water-drinking test peaks were significantly reduced in the study eye group in comparison with the control group: 19.02 +/- 3.81 mm Hg and 20.39 +/- 4.19 mm Hg, respectively (6.7% reduction; P=0.039). Conclusions: In our sample, dorzolamide 2%/timolol 0.5% fixed combination as add-on therapy in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension under monotherapy with latanoprost with IOP already in mid-teens levels may further enhance pressure reduction.

Standardizing assessment of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials. Status of OMERACT Toxicity Working Group March 2000: Towards a common understanding of comparative toxicity/safety profiles for antirheumatic therapies

This paper describes the background and current status of an OMERACT facilitated effort to improve the consistency of adverse event reporting in rheumatology clinical trials, The overall goal is the development of an adverse event assessment tool that would provide a basis for use of common terminology and improve the consistency of reporting severity of side effects within rheumatology clinical trials and during postmarketing surveillance. The resulting Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria Index encompassed the following organ systems: allergic/immunologic, cardiac, ENT, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, neuropsychiatric, ophthalmologic, pulmonary and skin/integument. Before this tool is widely accepted, its validity, consistency, and feasibility need to be assessed in clinical trials.

Patient based method of assessing adverse events in clinical trials in rheumatology: the revised Stanford Toxicity Index

We describe the progress towards developing a patient rated toxicity index that meets all of the patient-important attributes defined by the OMERACT Drug Safety Working Party, These attributes are frequency, severity. importance to patient, importance to the clinician, impact on economics, impact on activities, and integration of adverse effects with benefits. The Stanford Toxicity Index (STI) has been revised to collect all attributes with the exception of impact on activities. However, since the STI is a part of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). impact on activities is collected by the HAQ. In particular, a new question asks patients to rate overall satisfaction, taking into consideration both benefits and adverse effects. The nest step in the development of this tool is to ensure that the STI meets the OMERACT filter of truth, discrimination, and feasibility. Although truth and feasibility have been confirmed by comparisons within the ARAMIS database, discrimination needs to be assessed in clinical trials.

Randomisation in clinical trials

Randomisation is the process of assigning clinical trial participants to treatment groups. Randomisation gives each participant a known (usually equal) chance of being assigned to any of the groups. Successful randomisation requires that group assignment cannot be predicted in advance.

Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations

Objective. To provide recommendations for the core outcome domains that should be considered by investigators conducting clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments for chronic pain. Development of a core set of outcome domains would facilitate comparison and pooling of data, encourage more complete reporting of outcomes, simplify the preparation and review of research proposals and manuscripts, and allow clinicians to make informed decisions regarding the risks and benefits of treatment. Methods. Under the auspices of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT), 27 specialists from academia. governmental agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry participated in a consensus meeting and identified core outcome domains that should be considered in clinical trials of treatments for chronic pain. Conclusions. There was a consensus that chronic pain clinical trials should assess outcomes representing six core domains: (1) pain, (2) physical functioning, (3) emotional functioning, (4) participant ratings of improvement and satisfaction with treatment, (5) symptoms and adverse events, (6) participant disposition (e.g. adherence to the treatment regimen and reasons for premature withdrawal from the trial). Although consideration should be given to the assessment of each of these domains, there may be exceptions to the general recommendation to include all of these domains in chronic pain trials. When this occurs, the rationale for not including domains should be provided. It is not the intention of these recommendations that assessment of the core domains should be considered a requirement for approval of product applications by regulatory agencies or that a treatment must demonstrate statistically significant effects for all of the relevant core domains to establish evidence of its efficacy. (C) 2003 International Association for the Study of Pain.

Outcome variables for osteoarthritis clinical trials: the OMERACT-OARSI set of responder criteria

Improvement in analysis and reporting results of osteoarthritis (OA) clinical trials has been recently obtained because of harmonization and standardization of the selection of outcome variables (OMERACT 3 and OARSI). Moreover, OARSI has recently proposed the OARSI responder criteria. This composite index permits presentation of results of symptom modifying clinical trials in OA based on individual patient responses (responder yes/no). The 2 organizations (OMERACT and OARSI) established. a task force aimed at evaluating: (1) the variability of observed placebo and active treatment effects using the OARSI responder criteria; and (2) the possibility of proposing a simplified set of criteria. The conclusions of the task force were presented and discussed during the OMERACT 6 conference, where a simplified set of responder criteria (OMERACT-OARSI set of criteria) was proposed.

Modeling in-Hospital Patient Survival During the First 28 Days After Intensive Care Unit Admission: a Prognostic Model for Clinical Trials in General Critically Ill Patients

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to develop a model for estimating patient 28-day in-hospital mortality using 2 different statistical approaches. DESIGN: The study was designed to develop an outcome prediction model for 28-day in-hospital mortality using (a) logistic regression with random effects and (b) a multilevel Cox proportional hazards model. SETTING: The study involved 305 intensive care units (ICUs) from the basic Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) 3 cohort. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 17138) were from the SAPS 3 database with follow-up data pertaining to the first 28 days in hospital after ICU admission. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The database was divided randomly into 5 roughly equal-sized parts (at the ICU level). It was thus possible to run the model-building procedure 5 times, each time taking four fifths of the sample as a development set and the remaining fifth as the validation set. At 28 days after ICU admission, 19.98% of the patients were still in the hospital. Because of the different sampling space and outcome variables, both models presented a better fit in this sample than did the SAPS 3 admission score calibrated to vital status at hospital discharge, both on the general population and in major subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Both statistical methods can be used to model the 28-day in-hospital mortality better than the SAPS 3 admission model. However, because the logistic regression approach is specifically designed to forecast 28-day mortality, and given the high uncertainty associated with the assumption of the proportionality of risks in the Cox model, the logistic regression approach proved to be superior.

Experimental chemotherapy of Schistosomiasis III: laboratory and clinical trials with trichlorphone, an organophosphorus compound

Oogram studies have been carried out on mice, hamsters, and Cebus morikeys experimentally infected with Schistosoma mansoni and treated with trichlorphone (0,0-dimethyl 1-hydroxy-2, 2, 2-trichloroethylphosphonate). In mice, despite a slight hepatic shift of schistosomes, all animais presented oogram changes when dosed, per os, at the schedules of 200, and 100 mg/kg/day × 7. In hamsters, antischistosomal activity could be detected only at toxic leveis. In monkeys, trichlorphone showed insignificant action even after oral administration of 30 mg/kg/day for 10 consecutive days. In 5 volunteers, a sharp drop in cholinesterase plasma level was observed 24 hours after a single oral dose of 7.5 mg/kg. However, cholinesterase levels returned to the initial values within a period of 11 to 27 days. Trichlorphone was then administered to 12 schistosome patients (7.5 mg/kg/day, every fort- night, × 5). One month after therapy, interruption of egg laying was observed in 6 patients. Late parasitological control showed that all treated patients continued to pass viable S. mansoni eggs with their stools.

Developing clinical trials in the portuguese family medicine : challenges and opportunities in the European context

RESUMO: Introdução: A hipótese colocada nesta tese é a de que poderia haver um número bastante mais elevado de ensaios clínicos na medicina familiar portuguesa se os obstáculos fossem removidos e as oportunidades exploradas de modo adequado. Contexto: Em Portugal existe uma nova geração de Médicos de Família que está a assumir postos de trabalho um pouco por todo o país e que é aceite como sendo a mais bem preparada geração de sempre. Métodos: Busca na MEDLINE. Leitura de artigos na única publicação científica dedicada à Medicina Geral e Familiar – RPMGF. Consulta em livros portugueses de política da saúde e acerca do Plano Nacional de Saúde. O INFARMED foi contactado e relatórios seus sobre ensaios clínicos foram analisados. Os Médicos de Família portugueses foram contactados e convidados a responder a questionários. Além disso, quinze personalidades da Medicina Portuguesa foram chamadas a sugerir soluções. Resultados: De acordo com dados do INFARMED, de 2006 a 2011 houve apenas quatro centros de saúde envolvidos em ensaios clínicos. Em Portugal: Existe um número pouco significativo de ensaios académicos; Praticamente não há infraestruturas de suporte ou treino; Os registos clínicos eletrónicos são usados de forma ineficiente; a investigação é fracamente ligada às carreiras médicas; há isolamento interno e externo; a já complexa regulamentação da União Europeia é complicada ainda mais; há um subfinanciamento da Investigação Clínica. Os Médicos de Família portugueses estão disponíveis para participar ativamente numa mudança. Discussão: Com os presentes resultados o diagnóstico para a presente situação é claramente negativo. Felizmente existem muito boas oportunidades para melhorar. Conclusão/Recomendações: Tempo, dinheiro e apoio têm de ser fornecidos aos Médicos de Família portugueses. É nesse sentido que são fornecidas vinte recomendações para obter uma verdadeira mudança no panorama dos Ensaios Clínicos na Medicina Familiar portuguesa.-------------ABSTRACT: Introduction: The hypothesis of this thesis is that there could be a much greater number of Clinical Trials in Portuguese Family Medicine if obstacles were removed and opportunities explored properly. Background: In Portugal there is a new generation of Family Doctors that is assuming permanent positions all over the country and is accepted to be the most well prepared generation ever. Methods: Search on MEDLINE. Relevant articles were also identified in the only jornal dedicated to Portuguese Family Medicine, RPMGF. A search was made on Portuguese health policy textbooks and national health plan policy. INFARMED was also contacted and their reports about Clinical Trials were analysed. Portuguese Family Doctors themselves were contacted and invited to answer questionnaires. Besides that, fifteen key opinion leaders related to Portuguese Medicine were approached for solutions. Results: According to INFARMED data, from 2006 to 2011 there were only four health centres involved in clinical trials. In Portugal there is: A negligible number of academic trials; almost no support infrastructures or training; inefficiently used electronic health records; a research weakly linked to medical careers; an uninformed isolation internally and externally; an already complex European Union regulation that is compounded even more; Scarce funding for clinical research. Portuguese Family Doctors are keen to actively participate in a change. Discussion: With the present results the diagnosis for the current situation is clearly negative. Fortunately there are very good opportunities to improve. Conclusion/Recommendations: Time, money and support must be given to Portuguese Family Doctors. In this context, twenty recommendations are provided intending to promote a true change in Portuguese Family Medicine Clinical Trials panorama.

Guidelines on how to assess the validity of results presented in subgroup analysis of clinical trials

In observational studies, identification of associations within particular subgroups is the usual method of investigation. As an exploratory method, it is the bread and butter of epidemiological research. Nearly everything that has been learned in epidemiology has been derived from the analysis of subgroups. In a randomized clinical trial, the entire purpose is the comparison of the test subjects and the controls, and when there is particular interest in the results of treatment in a certain section of trial participants, a subgroup analysis is performed. These subgroups are examined to see if they are liable to a greater benefit or risk from treatment. Thus, analyzing patient subsets is a natural part of the process of improving therapeutic knowledge through clinical trials. Nevertheless, the reliability of subgroup analysis can often be poor because of problems of multiplicity and limitations in the numbers of patients studied. The naive interpretation of the results of such examinations is a cause of great confusion in the therapeutic literature. We emphasize the need for readers to be aware that inferences based on comparisons between subgroups in randomized clinical trials should be approached more cautiously than those based on the main comparison. That is, subgroup analysis results derived from a sound clinical trial are not necessarily valid; one must not jump to conclusions and accept the validity of subgroup analysis results without an appropriate judgment.