Perioperative epidural analgesia and outcome after major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients

In a primary analysis of a large recently completed randomized trial in 915 high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, we found no difference in outcome between patients receiving perioperative epidural analgesia and those receiving IV opioids, apart from the incidence of respiratory failure. Therefore, we performed a selected number of predetermined subgroup analyses to identify specific types of patients who may have derived benefit from epidural analgesia. We found no difference in outcome between epidural and control groups in subgroups at increased risk of respiratory or cardiac complications or undergoing aortic surgery, nor in a subgroup with failed epidural block (all P > 0.05). There was a small reduction in the duration of postoperative ventilation (geometric mean [SD]: control group, 0.3 [6.5] h, versus epidural group, 0.2 [4.8] h, P = 0.048). No differences were found in length of stay in intensive care or in the hospital. There was no relationship between frequency of use of epidural analgesia in routine practice outside the trial and benefit from epidural analgesia in the trial. We found no evidence that perioperative epidural analgesia significantly influences major morbidity or mortality after major abdominal surgery.

Prevention of Venous Thrombosis by Warfarin after Permanent Transvenous Leads Implantation in High-Risk Patients

Background: The incidence of venous lesions following transvenous cardiac device implantation is high. Previous implantation of temporary leads ipsilateral to the permanent devices, and a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction have been associated with an increased risk of venous lesions, though the effects of preventive strategies remain controversial. This randomized trial examined the effects of warfarin in the prevention of these complications in high-risk patients. Method: Between February 2004 and September 2007, we studied 101 adults who underwent a first cardiac device implantation, and who had a left ventricular ejection fraction <= 0.40, or a temporary pacing system ipsilateral to the permanent implant, or both. After device implantation, the patients were randomly assigned to warfarin to a target international normalized ratio of 2.0-3.5, or to placebo. Clinical and laboratory evaluations were performed regularly up to 6 months postimplant. Venous lesions were detected at 6 months by digital subtraction venography. Results: Venous obstructions of various degrees were observed in 46 of the 92 patients (50.0%) who underwent venography. The frequency of venous obstructions was 60.4% in the placebo, versus 38.6% in the warfarin group (P = 0.018), corresponding to an absolute risk reduction of 22% (relative risk = 0.63; 95% confidence interval = 0.013-0.42). Conclusions: Warfarin prophylaxis lowered the frequency of venous lesions after transvenous devices implantation in high-risk patients. (PACE 2009; 32:S247-S251)

Myocardial infarction and type II diabetes - preferential treatment for high risk patients?

Objectives: To compare variability of blood glucose concentration in patients with type II diabetes with (cases) and without (controls) myocardial infarction. A secondary objective was identification of predictive factors for higher blood glucose on discharge from hospital. Design: A retrospective matched case-control study. Participants: Medical notes of 101 type II diabetic patients admitted with a myocardial infarction (MI) and 101 type II diabetic patients (controls) matched on gender and age with no MI were reviewed. Blood glucose concentrations over two consecutive 48-h periods were collected. Demographic data and therapy on admission/discharge were also collected. Results: Patient characteristics were comparable on recruitment excluding family history of cardiovascular disease (P =0.003), dyslipidaemia (P =0.004) and previous history of MI (P =0.007). Variability of blood glucose in cases was greater over the first 48 h compared with the second 48 h (P =0.03), and greater when compared with controls over the first 48 h (P =0.01). Cases with blood glucose on discharge >8.2 mmol / L (n =45) were less likely to have a history of previous MI (P =0.04), ischaemic heart disease (P =0.03) or hypertension (P =0.02). Conclusions: Type II diabetics with an MI have higher and more variable blood glucose concentrations during the first 48 h of admission. Only cardiovascular 'high risk' patients had target blood glucose set on discharge. The desirability of all MI patients with diabetes, having standardized-glucose infusions to reduce variability of blood glucose, should be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

Frequency of human bocavirus respiratory infections among at-risk patients in São Paulo, Brazil

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Human Bocavirus (HBoV) has been described since 2005 as an etiological agent of respiratory virus infections. From 2001 to 2008 we investigated the etiology of HBoV among adults and children in different groups at risk of presenting complications arising from acute respiratory infection, the investigation was carried out in a tertiary hospital health care system in Brazil. METHODS: HBoV DNA was assayed in 598 respiratory samples from community and hospitalized patients by PCR. RESULTS: Of the 598 tested samples, 2.44% (8/328) of children, including five children with heart disease, and 0.4% (1/270) of adult bone-marrow-transplant were HBoV positive. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggested lower HBoV frequency among different at-risk patients and highlights the need to better understand the real role of HBoV among acute respiratory symptomatic patients.

A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: A simple prognostic model could help identify patients with pulmonary embolism who are at low risk of death and are candidates for outpatient treatment. METHODS: We randomly allocated 15,531 retrospectively identified inpatients who had a discharge diagnosis of pulmonary embolism from 186 Pennsylvania hospitals to derivation (67%) and internal validation (33%) samples. We derived our rule to predict 30-day mortality using classification tree analysis and patient data routinely available at initial examination as potential predictor variables. We used data from a European prospective study to externally validate the rule among 221 inpatients with pulmonary embolism. We determined mortality and nonfatal adverse medical outcomes across derivation and validation samples. RESULTS: Our final model consisted of 10 patient factors (age > or = 70 years; history of cancer, heart failure, chronic lung disease, chronic renal disease, and cerebrovascular disease; and clinical variables of pulse rate > or = 110 beats/min, systolic blood pressure < 100 mm Hg, altered mental status, and arterial oxygen saturation < 90%). Patients with none of these factors were defined as low risk. The 30-day mortality rates for low-risk patients were 0.6%, 1.5%, and 0% in the derivation, internal validation, and external validation samples, respectively. The rates of nonfatal adverse medical outcomes were less than 1% among low-risk patients across all study samples. CONCLUSIONS: This simple prediction rule accurately identifies patients with pulmonary embolism who are at low risk of short-term mortality and other adverse medical outcomes. Prospective validation of this rule is important before its implementation as a decision aid for outpatient treatment.

On-pump beating heart coronary surgery for high risk patients requiring emergency multiple coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) with aortic cross-clamping and cardioplegic arrest remains the method of choice for patients requiring standard myocardial revascularization. Therefore, very high-risk patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome, unstable angina, onset of cardiac decompensation and requiring emergency multiple myocardial revascularization, can have a poor outcome. The on-pump beating heart technique can reduce the mortality and the morbidity in such a selected group of patients and this report describes our clinical experience. METHODS: Out of 290 patients operated for CABG from January 2005 to January 2006, 25 (8.6%) selected high-risk patients suffering from life threatening coronary syndrome (mean age 69 +/- 7 years) and requiring emergency multiple myocardial revascularization, underwent on-pump beating heart surgery. The mean pre-operative left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 27 +/- 8%. The majority of them (88%) suffered of tri-vessel coronary disease and 6 (24%) had a left main stump disease. Nine patients (35%) were on severe cardiac failure and seven among them (28%) received a pre-operative intra-aortic balloon pump. The pre-operative EuroScore rate was equal or above 8 in 18 patients (73%). RESULTS: All patients underwent on-pump-beating heart coronary revascularization. The mean number of graft/patient was 2.9 +/- 0.6 and the internal mammary artery was used in 23 patients (92%). The mean CPB time was 84 +/- 19 minutes. Two patients died during the recovery stay in the intensive care unit, and there were no postoperative myocardial infarctions between the survivors. Eight patients suffered of transitorily renal failure and 1 patient developed a sternal wound infection. The mean hospital stay was 12 +/- 7 days. The follow-up was complete for all 23 patients survived at surgery and the mean follow-up time was 14 +/- 5 months. One patient died during the follow-up for cardiac arrest and 2 patients required an implantable cardiac defibrillator. One year after surgery they all had a standard trans-thoracic echocardiogram showing a mean LVEF rate of 36 +/- 11.8%. CONCLUSION: Standard on-pump arrested heart coronary surgery has higher mortality and morbidity in emergencies. The on-pump beating heart myocardial revascularization seems to be a valid alternative for the restricted and selected cohort of patients suffering from life threatening coronary syndrome and requiring multiple emergency CABG.

A clinical prognostic model for the identification of low-risk patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism and active cancer.

BACKGROUND: Physicians need a specific risk-stratification tool to facilitate safe and cost-effective approaches to the management of patients with cancer and acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The objective of this study was to develop a simple risk score for predicting 30-day mortality in patients with PE and cancer by using measures readily obtained at the time of PE diagnosis. METHODS: Investigators randomly allocated 1,556 consecutive patients with cancer and acute PE from the international multicenter Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica to derivation (67%) and internal validation (33%) samples. The external validation cohort for this study consisted of 261 patients with cancer and acute PE. Investigators compared 30-day all-cause mortality and nonfatal adverse medical outcomes across the derivation and two validation samples. RESULTS: In the derivation sample, multivariable analyses produced the risk score, which contained six variables: age > 80 years, heart rate ≥ 110/min, systolic BP < 100 mm Hg, body weight < 60 kg, recent immobility, and presence of metastases. In the internal validation cohort (n = 508), the 22.2% of patients (113 of 508) classified as low risk by the prognostic model had a 30-day mortality of 4.4% (95% CI, 0.6%-8.2%) compared with 29.9% (95% CI, 25.4%-34.4%) in the high-risk group. In the external validation cohort, the 18% of patients (47 of 261) classified as low risk by the prognostic model had a 30-day mortality of 0%, compared with 19.6% (95% CI, 14.3%-25.0%) in the high-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: The developed clinical prediction rule accurately identifies low-risk patients with cancer and acute PE.

Managing hypertension in high-risk patients: lessons and promises from the STRATHE and ADVANCE trials.

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension represents a cost-effective way of preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. To benefit maximally from antihypertensive treatment, blood pressure should be brought to below 140/90 mmHg in every hypertensive patient, and even lower (< 130/80 mmHg) if diabetes or renal disease co-exists. Such targets cannot usually be reached using monotherapies. This is especially true in patients who present with a high cardiovascular risk. The co-administration of two agents acting by different mechanisms considerably increases the blood pressure control rate. Such combinations are not only efficacious, but are also well tolerated, and some fixed low-dose combinations even have a placebo-like tolerability. This is the case for the preparation containing the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril (2 mg) and the diuretic indapamide (0.625 mg), a fixed low-dose combination that has been shown in controlled trials to be more effective than monotherapies in reducing albuminuria, regressing cardiac hypertrophy and improving the stiffness of large arteries. Using this combination to initiate antihypertensive therapy has been shown in a double-blind trial (Strategies of Treatment in Hypertension: Evaluation; STRATHE) to normalize blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg) in significantly more patients (62%) than a sequential monotherapy approach based on atenolol, losartan and amlodipine (49%) and a stepped-care strategy based on valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide (47%), with no difference between the three arm groups in terms of tolerability. An ongoing randomized trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation; ADVANCE) is a study with a 2 x 2 factorial design assessing the effects of the fixed-dose perindopril-indapamide combination and of the intensive gliclazide modified release-based glucose control regimen in type 2 diabetic patients, with or without hypertension. A total of 11 140 patients were randomly selected. Within the first 6 weeks of treatment (run-in phase), the perindopril-indapamide combination lowered blood pressure from 145/81 +/- 22/11 mmHg (mean +/- SD) to 137/78 +/- 20/10 mmHg. Fixed-dose combinations are becoming more and more popular for the management of hypertension, and are even proposed by hypertension guidelines as a first-line option to treat hypertensive patients.

Validation of a clinical algorithm to identify low-risk patients with pulmonary embolism.

Summary Background: We previously derived a clinical prognostic algorithm to identify patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) who are at low-risk of short-term mortality who could be safely discharged early or treated entirely in an outpatient setting. Objectives: To externally validate the clinical prognostic algorithm in an independent patient sample. Methods: We validated the algorithm in 983 consecutive patients prospectively diagnosed with PE at an emergency department of a university hospital. Patients with none of the algorithm's 10 prognostic variables (age >/= 70 years, cancer, heart failure, chronic lung disease, chronic renal disease, cerebrovascular disease, pulse >/= 110/min., systolic blood pressure < 100 mm Hg, oxygen saturation < 90%, and altered mental status) at baseline were defined as low-risk. We compared 30-day overall mortality among low-risk patients based on the algorithm between the validation and the original derivation sample. We also assessed the rate of PE-related and bleeding-related mortality among low-risk patients. Results: Overall, the algorithm classified 16.3% of patients with PE as low-risk. Mortality at 30 days was 1.9% among low-risk patients and did not differ between the validation and the original derivation sample. Among low-risk patients, only 0.6% died from definite or possible PE, and 0% died from bleeding. Conclusions: This study validates an easy-to-use, clinical prognostic algorithm for PE that accurately identifies patients with PE who are at low-risk of short-term mortality. Low-risk patients based on our algorithm are potential candidates for less costly outpatient treatment.

Transapical aortic valve replacement in extreme-risk patients: outcome, risk factors and mid-term results.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provides good results in selected high-risk patients. However, it is unclear whether this procedure carries advantages in extreme-risk profile patients with logistic EuroSCORE above 35%. METHODS: From January 2009 to July 2011, of a total number of 92 transcatheter aortic valve procedures performed, 40 'extreme-risk' patients underwent transapical TAVR (TA-TAVR) (EuroSCORE above 35%). Variables were analysed as risk factors for hospital and mid-term mortality, and a 2-year follow-up (FU) was obtained. RESULTS: The mean age was: 81 ± 10 years. Twelve patients (30%) had chronic pulmonary disease, 32 (80%) severe peripheral vascular disease, 14 (35%) previous cardiac surgery, 19 (48%) chronic renal failure (2 in dialysis), 7 (17%) previous stroke (1 with disabilities), 3 (7%) a porcelain aorta and 12 (30%) were urgent cases. Mean left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 49 ± 13%, and mean logistic EuroSCORE was 48 ± 11%. Forty stent-valves were successfully implanted with six Grade-1 and one Grade-2 paravalvular leakages (success rate: 100%). Hospital mortality was 20% (8 patients). Causes of death following the valve academic research consortium (VARC) definitions were: life-threatening haemorrhage (1), myocardial infarction (1), sudden death (1), multiorgan failure (2), stroke (1) and severe respiratory dysfunction (2). Major complications (VARC definitions) were: myocardial infarction for left coronary ostium occlusion (1), life-threatening bleeding (2), stroke (2) and acute kidney injury with dialysis (2). Predictors for hospital mortality were: conversion to sternotomy, life-threatening haemorrhage, postoperative dialysis and long intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Variables associated with hospital mortality were: conversion to sternotomy (P = 0.03), life-threatening bleeding (P = 0.02), acute kidney injury with dialysis (P = 0.03) and prolonged ICU stay (P = 0.02). Mean FU time was 24 months: actuarial survival estimates for all-cause mortality at 6 months, 1 year, 18 months and 2 years were 68, 57, 54 and 54%, respectively. Patients still alive at FU were in good clinical condition, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class 1-2 and were never rehospitalized for cardiac decompensation. CONCLUSIONS: TA-TAVR in extreme-risk patients carries a moderate risk of hospital mortality. Severe comorbidities and presence of residual paravalvular leakages affect the mid-term survival, whereas surviving patients have an acceptable quality of life without rehospitalizations for cardiac decompensation.

Lack of extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in high-risk patients undergoing major orthopaedic or major cancer surgery. Electronic Assessment of VTE Prophylaxis in High-Risk Surgical Patients at Discharge from Swiss Hospitals (ESSENTIAL).

Extended pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis beyond discharge is recommended for patients undergoing high-risk surgery. We prospectively investigated prophylaxis in 1,046 consecutive patients undergoing major orthopaedic (70%) or major cancer surgery (30%) in 14 Swiss hospitals. Appropriate in-hospital prophylaxis was used in 1,003 (96%) patients. At discharge, 638 (61%) patients received prescription for extended pharmacological prophylaxis: 564 (77%) after orthopaedic surgery, and 74 (23%) after cancer surgery (p < 0.001). Patients with knee replacement (94%), hip replacement (81%), major trauma (80%), and curative arthroscopy (73%) had the highest prescription rates for extended VTE prophylaxis; the lowest rates were found in patients undergoing major surgery for thoracic (7%), gastrointestinal (19%), and hepatobiliary (33%) cancer. The median duration of prescribed extended prophylaxis was longer in patients with orthopaedic surgery (32 days, interquartile range 14-40 days) than in patients with cancer surgery (23 days, interquartile range 11-30 days; p<0.001). Among the 278 patients with an extended prophylaxis order after hip replacement, knee replacement, or hip fracture surgery, 120 (43%) received a prescription for at least 35 days, and among the 74 patients with an extended prophylaxis order after major cancer surgery, 20 (27%) received a prescription for at least 28 days. In conclusion, approximately one quarter of the patients with major orthopaedic surgery and more than three quarters of the patients with major cancer surgery did not receive prescription for extended VTE prophylaxis. Future effort should focus on the improvement of extended VTE prophylaxis, particularly in patients undergoing major cancer surgery.

Pulmonary embolism severity index and troponin testing for the selection of low-risk patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism.

Summary Background: The combination of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and troponin testing could help physicians identify appropriate patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) for early hospital discharge. Methods: This prospective cohort study included a total of 567 patients from a single center registry with objectively confirmed acute symptomatic PE. On the basis of the PESI, each patient was classified into 1 of 5 classes (I to V). At the time of hospital admission, patients had troponin I (cTnI) levels measured. The endpoint of the study was all-cause mortality within 30 days after diagnosis. We calculated the mortality rates in 4 patient groups: group 1: PESI class I-II plus cTnI <0.1 ng mL(-1); group 2: PESI classes III-V plus cTnI <0.1 ng mL(-1); group 3: PESI classes I-II plus cTnI >/= 0.1 ng mL(-1); and group 4: PESI classes III-V plus cTnI >/= 0.1 ng mL(-1). Results: The study cohort had a 30-day mortality of 10% (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.6 to 12.5%). Mortality rates in the 4 groups were 1.3%, 14.2%, 0% and 15.4%, respectively. Compared to non-elevated cTnl, the low-risk PESI had a higher negative predictive value (NPV) (98.9% vs 90.8%) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) (0.1 vs 0.9) for predicting mortality. The addition of non-elevated cTnI to low-risk PESI did not improve the NPV or the NLR compared to either test alone. Conclusions: Compared to cTnl testing, PESI classification more accurately identified patients with PE who are at low risk of all-cause death within 30-days of presentation.

PERC rule to exclude the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in emergency low-risk patients: study protocol for the PROPER randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism (PE) in the emergency department (ED) is crucial. As emergency physicians fear missing this potential life-threatening condition, PE tends to be over-investigated, exposing patients to unnecessary risks and uncertain benefit in terms of outcome. The Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC) is an eight-item block of clinical criteria that can identify patients who can safely be discharged from the ED without further investigation for PE. The endorsement of this rule could markedly reduce the number of irradiative imaging studies, ED length of stay, and rate of adverse events resulting from both diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Several retrospective and prospective studies have shown the safety and benefits of the PERC rule for PE diagnosis in low-risk patients, but the validity of this rule is still controversial. We hypothesize that in European patients with a low gestalt clinical probability and who are PERC-negative, PE can be safely ruled out and the patient discharged without further testing. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a controlled, cluster randomized trial, in 15 centers in France. Each center will be randomized for the sequence of intervention periods: a 6-month intervention period (PERC-based strategy) followed by a 6-month control period (usual care), or in reverse order, with 2 months of "wash-out" between the 2 periods. Adult patients presenting to the ED with a suspicion of PE and a low pre test probability estimated by clinical gestalt will be eligible. The primary outcome is the percentage of failure resulting from the diagnostic strategy, defined as diagnosed venous thromboembolic events at 3-month follow-up, among patients for whom PE has been initially ruled out. DISCUSSION: The PERC rule has the potential to decrease the number of irradiative imaging studies in the ED, and is reported to be safe. However, no randomized study has ever validated the safety of PERC. Furthermore, some studies have challenged the safety of a PERC-based strategy to rule-out PE, especially in Europe where the prevalence of PE diagnosed in the ED is high. The PROPER study should provide high-quality evidence to settle this issue. If it confirms the safety of the PERC rule, physicians will be able to reduce the number of investigations, associated subsequent adverse events, costs, and ED length of stay for patients with a low clinical probability of PE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02375919 .

Identification of Low-Risk Patients with Acute Symptomatic Pulmonary Embolism for Outpatient Therapy.

RATIONALE: Patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) deemed to be at low risk for early complications might be candidates for partial or complete outpatient treatment. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a clinical prediction rule that accurately identifies patients with PE and low risk of short-term complications and to compare its prognostic ability with two previously validated models (i.e., the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index [PESI] and the Simplified PESI [sPESI]) METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression of a large international cohort of patients with PE prospectively enrolled in the RIETE (Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica) registry. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All-cause mortality, recurrent PE, and major bleeding up to 10 days after PE diagnosis were determined. Of 18,707 eligible patients with acute symptomatic PE, 46 (0.25%) developed recurrent PE, 203 (1.09%) bled, and 471 (2.51%) died. Predictors included in the final model were chronic heart failure, recent immobilization, recent major bleeding, cancer, hypotension, tachycardia, hypoxemia, renal insufficiency, and abnormal platelet count. The area under receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.78) for the RIETE score, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for PESI (P < 0.05), and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.73) for sPESI (P < 0.05). Our RIETE score outperformed the prognostic value of PESI in terms of net reclassification improvement (P < 0.001), integrated discrimination improvement (P < 0.001), and sPESI (net reclassification improvement, P < 0.001; integrated discrimination improvement, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We built a new score, based on widely available variables, that can be used to identify patients with PE at low risk of short-term complications, assisting in triage and potentially shortening duration of hospital stay.

Postoperative Adjuvant Lapatinib and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Maintenance Lapatinib Monotherapy in High-Risk Patients With Resected Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: This multicenter phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lapatinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor/ErbB2 inhibitor, administered concomitantly with chemoradiotherapy and as maintenance monotherapy in patients with high-risk surgically treated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected stage II to IVA SCCHN, with a surgical margin ≤ 5 mm and/or extracapsular extension, were randomly assigned to chemoradiotherapy (66 Gy total radiation dose and cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) per day administered on days 1, 22, and 43) plus placebo or lapatinib (1,500 mg per day) before and during chemoradiotherapy, followed by 12 months of maintenance monotherapy. RESULTS: Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled (lapatinib, n = 346; placebo, n = 342). With a median follow-up time of 35.3 months, the study ended early because of the apparent plateauing of disease-free survival (DFS) events. Median DFS assessed by an independent review committee was 53.6 months and not reached for lapatinib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.43). Investigator-assessed results confirmed the independent review committee assessment. No significant differences in DFS by human papillomavirus status or overall survival were observed between treatment arms. Similar numbers of patients in both treatment arms experienced adverse events (AEs), with more patients in the lapatinib arm than the placebo arm experiencing serious AEs (48% v 40%, respectively). The most commonly observed treatment-related AEs were diarrhea and rash, both predominantly in the lapatinib arm. CONCLUSION: Addition of lapatinib to chemoradiotherapy and its use as long-term maintenance therapy does not offer any efficacy benefits and had additional toxicity compared with placebo in patients with surgically treated high-risk SCCHN.