Method for evaluating prediction models that apply the results of randomized trials to individual patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>The clinical significance of a treatment effect demonstrated in a randomized trial is typically assessed by reference to differences in event rates at the group level. An alternative is to make individualized predictions for each patient based on a prediction model. This approach is growing in popularity, particularly for cancer. Despite its intuitive advantages, it remains plausible that some prediction models may do more harm than good. Here we present a novel method for determining whether predictions from a model should be used to apply the results of a randomized trial to individual patients, as opposed to using group level results.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We propose applying the prediction model to a data set from a randomized trial and examining the results of patients for whom the treatment arm recommended by a prediction model is congruent with allocation. These results are compared with the strategy of treating all patients through use of a net benefit function that incorporates both the number of patients treated and the outcome. We examined models developed using data sets regarding adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and Dutasteride for benign prostatic hypertrophy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For adjuvant chemotherapy, we found that patients who would opt for chemotherapy even for small risk reductions, and, conversely, those who would require a very large risk reduction, would on average be harmed by using a prediction model; those with intermediate preferences would on average benefit by allowing such information to help their decision making. Use of prediction could, at worst, lead to the equivalent of an additional death or recurrence per 143 patients; at best it could lead to the equivalent of a reduction in the number of treatments of 25% without an increase in event rates. In the Dutasteride case, where the average benefit of treatment is more modest, there is a small benefit of prediction modelling, equivalent to a reduction of one event for every 100 patients given an individualized prediction.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The size of the benefit associated with appropriate clinical implementation of a good prediction model is sufficient to warrant development of further models. However, care is advised in the implementation of prediction modelling, especially for patients who would opt for treatment even if it was of relatively little benefit.</p

Tissue Specific Profiling of Females of Schistosoma japonicum by Integrated Laser Microdissection Microscopy and Microarray Analysis

Schistosomes are parasitic worms responsible for important human diseases in tropical and developing nations. There is urgent need to develop new drugs and vaccines to augment current treatments for this disease. In recent years, concerted efforts by many laboratories have led to extensive genetic sequencing of the parasites, and the publication of genome sequence for two agents of schistosomiasis appears imminent. This genetic information has revealed many molecules expressed by the schistosome parasites for which no functional information is available. This lack of information extends to ignorance of where in the complex multicellular schistosome parasites the genes are expressed. We integrated two molecular and cellular techniques to address these knowledge gaps. We used laser microdissection microscopy to dissect small but highly important tissues involved in nutrition and reproduction from sections of female Schistosoma japonicum. From these dissected tissues we then used a broad molecular biology method to identify the multiple genes active in these tissues. Our approach has allowed us to formulate the basis of a “gene atlas” for schistosome parasites, defining the expression repertoire of specific tissues. The better understanding of the roles of tissues in parasite biology, especially in development, reproduction and interactions with its human hosts, should promote future investigations into pathogenesis and control of these significant parasites

Potential health risks of complementary alternative medicines in cancer patients

Many cancer patients use complementary alternative medicines (CAMs) but may not be aware of the potential risks. There are no studies quantifying such risks, but there is some evidence of patient risk from case reports in the literature. A cross-sectional survey of patients attending the outpatient department at a specialist cancer centre was carried out to establish a pattern of herbal remedy or supplement use and to identify potential adverse side effects or drug interactions with conventional medicines. If potential risks were identified, a health warning was issued by a pharmacist. A total of 318 patients participated in the study. Of these, 164 (51.6%) took CAMs, and 133 different combinations were recorded. Of these, 10.4% only took herbal remedies, 42.1% only supplements and 47.6% a combination of both. In all, 18 (11.0%) reported supplements in higher than recommended doses. Health warnings were issued to 20 (12.2%) patients. Most warnings concerned echinacea in patients with lymphoma. Further warnings were issued for cod liver/fish oil, evening primrose oil, gingko, garlic, ginseng, kava kava and beta-carotene. In conclusion, medical practitioners need to be able to identify the potential risks of CAMs. Equally, patients should be encouraged to disclose their use. Also, more research is needed to quantify the actual health risks

Schedule-selective biochemical modulation of 5-fluorouracil in advanced colorectal cancer – a phase II study

BACKGROUND: 5-fluorouracil remains the standard therapy for patients with advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer. Pre-clinical studies have demonstrated the biological modulation of 5-fluorouracil by methotrexate and leucovorin. This phase II study was initiated to determine the activity and toxicity of sequential methotrexate – leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. METHODS: Ninety-seven patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were enrolled onto the study. Methotrexate – 30 mg/m(2) was administered every 6 hours for 6 doses followed by a 2 hour infusion of LV – 500 mg/m(2). Midway through the leucovorin infusion, patients received 5-fluorouracil – 600 mg/m(2). This constituted a cycle of therapy and was repeated every 2 weeks until progression. RESULTS: The median age was 64 yrs (34–84) and the Eastern Cooperative Group Oncology performance score was 0 in 37%, 1 in 55% and 2 in 8% of patients. Partial and complete responses were seen in 31% of patients with a median duration of response of 6.4 months. The overall median survival was 13.0 months. The estimated 1-year survival was 53.7%. Grade III and IV toxic effects were modest and included mucositis, nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: This phase II study supports previously reported data demonstrating the modest clinical benefit of 5-FU modulation utilizing methotrexate and leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ongoing studies evaluating 5-fluorouracil modulation with more novel agents (Irinotecan and/or oxaliplatin) are in progress and may prove encouraging

CD200 in CNS tumor-induced immunosuppression: the role for CD200 pathway blockade in targeted immunotherapy.

Immunological quiescence in the central nervous system (CNS) is a potential barrier to immune mediated anti-tumor response. One suppressive mechanism results from the interaction of parenchyma-derived CD200 and its receptor on myeloid cells. We suggest th