6 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Comparison of Outcomes of antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial: a protocol for the pragmatic randomised study of appendicitis treatment.
INTRODUCTION: Several European studies suggest that some patients with appendicitis can be treated safely with antibiotics. A portion of patients eventually undergo appendectomy within a year, with 10%-15% failing to respond in the initial period and a similar additional proportion with suspected recurrent episodes requiring appendectomy. Nearly all patients with appendicitis in the USA are still treated with surgery. A rigorous comparative effectiveness trial in the USA that is sufficiently large and pragmatic to incorporate usual variations in care and measures the patient experience is needed to determine whether antibiotics are as good as appendectomy.
OBJECTIVES: The Comparing Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial for acute appendicitis aims to determine whether the antibiotic treatment strategy is non-inferior to appendectomy.
METHODS/ANALYSIS: CODA is a randomised, pragmatic non-inferiority trial that aims to recruit 1552 English-speaking and Spanish-speaking adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis. Participants are randomised to appendectomy or 10 days of antibiotics (including an option for complete outpatient therapy). A total of 500 patients who decline randomisation but consent to follow-up will be included in a parallel observational cohort. The primary analytic outcome is quality of life (measured by the EuroQol five dimension index) at 4 weeks. Clinical adverse events, rate of eventual appendectomy, decisional regret, return to work/school, work productivity and healthcare utilisation will be compared. Planned exploratory analyses will identify subpopulations that may have a differential risk of eventual appendectomy in the antibiotic treatment arm.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial was approved by the University of Washington\u27s Human Subjects Division. Results from this trial will be presented in international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02800785
Use of Immunosuppression and the Risk of Subsequent Overall or Cancer Mortality
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of all-cause and cancer mortality in association with immunosuppression. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study at ocular inflammatory disease (OID) subspecialty centers. We harvested exposure and covariate data retrospectively from clinic inception (earliest in 1979) through 2010 inclusive. Then we ascertained overall and cancer-specific mortalities by National Death Index linkage. We constructed separate Cox models to evaluate overall and cancer mortality for each class of immunosuppressant and for each individual immunosuppressant compared with person-time unexposed to any immunosuppression. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with non-infectious OID, excluding those with HIV infection or pre-existing cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (mostly infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept); antimetabolites (methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine); calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine); and alkylating agents (cyclophosphamide) were given when clinically indicated in this non-interventional cohort study. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall and cancer mortality. RESULTS: Over 187,151 person-years (median follow-up 10.0 years), during which 15,938 patients were at risk for mortality-we observed 1,970 deaths, 435 attributed to cancer. Both patients unexposed to immunosuppressants (Standardized Mortality Ratio (SMR)=0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-1.01) and those exposed to immunosuppressants but free of systemic inflammatory diseases (SID) (SMR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.95-1.14) had similar mortality risk to the US population. Comparing patients exposed to TNF inhibitors, antimetabolites, calcineurin inhibitors, and alkylating agents versus patients not exposed to any of these, we found that overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR)=0.88, 0.89, 0.90, 1.11) and cancer mortality (aHR=1.25, 0.89, 0.89, 1.23) were not significantly increased. These results were stable in sensitivity analyses whether excluding or including patients with SID, across 0-, 3- or 5-year lags, and across quartiles of immunosuppressant dose and duration. CONCLUSIONS: Our results, in a cohort where the indication for treatment was proven unassociated with mortality risk, found that commonly used immunosuppressants-especially the antimetabolites methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine; the TNF inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab, and cyclosporine-were not associated with increased overall and cancer mortality over a median cohort follow-up of 10.0 years. These results suggest safety of these agents with respect to overall and cancer mortality for patients treated with immunosuppression for a wide range of inflammatory diseases
Recommended from our members
Comparison of Outcomes of antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial: a protocol for the pragmatic randomised study of appendicitis treatment
IntroductionSeveral European studies suggest that some patients with appendicitis can be treated safely with antibiotics. A portion of patients eventually undergo appendectomy within a year, with 10%-15% failing to respond in the initial period and a similar additional proportion with suspected recurrent episodes requiring appendectomy. Nearly all patients with appendicitis in the USA are still treated with surgery. A rigorous comparative effectiveness trial in the USA that is sufficiently large and pragmatic to incorporate usual variations in care and measures the patient experience is needed to determine whether antibiotics are as good as appendectomy.ObjectivesThe Comparing Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial for acute appendicitis aims to determine whether the antibiotic treatment strategy is non-inferior to appendectomy.Methods/analysisCODA is a randomised, pragmatic non-inferiority trial that aims to recruit 1552 English-speaking and Spanish-speaking adults with imaging-confirmed appendicitis. Participants are randomised to appendectomy or 10 days of antibiotics (including an option for complete outpatient therapy). A total of 500 patients who decline randomisation but consent to follow-up will be included in a parallel observational cohort. The primary analytic outcome is quality of life (measured by the EuroQol five dimension index) at 4 weeks. Clinical adverse events, rate of eventual appendectomy, decisional regret, return to work/school, work productivity and healthcare utilisation will be compared. Planned exploratory analyses will identify subpopulations that may have a differential risk of eventual appendectomy in the antibiotic treatment arm.Ethics and disseminationThis trial was approved by the University of Washington's Human Subjects Division. Results from this trial will be presented in international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT02800785
A Randomized Trial Comparing Antibiotics with Appendectomy for Appendicitis.
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic therapy has been proposed as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of appendicitis.
METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, nonblinded, noninferiority, randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy (10-day course) with appendectomy in patients with appendicitis at 25 U.S. centers. The primary outcome was 30-day health status, as assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire (scores range from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better health status; noninferiority margin, 0.05 points). Secondary outcomes included appendectomy in the antibiotics group and complications through 90 days; analyses were prespecified in subgroups defined according to the presence or absence of an appendicolith.
RESULTS: In total, 1552 adults (414 with an appendicolith) underwent randomization; 776 were assigned to receive antibiotics (47% of whom were not hospitalized for the index treatment) and 776 to undergo appendectomy (96% of whom underwent a laparoscopic procedure). Antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of 30-day EQ-5D scores (mean difference, 0.01 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.001 to 0.03). In the antibiotics group, 29% had undergone appendectomy by 90 days, including 41% of those with an appendicolith and 25% of those without an appendicolith. Complications were more common in the antibiotics group than in the appendectomy group (8.1 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.98); the higher rate in the antibiotics group could be attributed to those with an appendicolith (20.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 5.69; 95% CI, 2.11 to 15.38) and not to those without an appendicolith (3.7 vs. 3.5 per 100 participants; rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.45 to 2.43). The rate of serious adverse events was 4.0 per 100 participants in the antibiotics group and 3.0 per 100 participants in the appendectomy group (rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.50).
CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of appendicitis, antibiotics were noninferior to appendectomy on the basis of results of a standard health-status measure. In the antibiotics group, nearly 3 in 10 participants had undergone appendectomy by 90 days. Participants with an appendicolith were at a higher risk for appendectomy and for complications than those without an appendicolith. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; CODA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02800785.)
Recommended from our members
Perception of Treatment Success and Impact on Function with Antibiotics or Appendectomy for Appendicitis
ObjectiveTo compare secondary patient reported outcomes of perceptions of treatment success and function for patients treated for appendicitis with appendectomy vs. antibiotics at 30 days.Summary background dataThe Comparison of Outcomes of antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy trial found antibiotics noninferior to appendectomy based on 30-day health status. To address questions about outcomes among participants with lower socioeconomic status, we explored the relationship of sociodemographic and clinical factors and outcomes.MethodsWe focused on 4 patient reported outcomes at 30 days: high decisional regret, dissatisfaction with treatment, problems performing usual activities, and missing >10 days of work. The randomized (RCT) and observational cohorts were pooled for exploration of baseline factors. The RCT cohort alone was used for comparison of treatments. Logistic regression was used to assess associations.ResultsThe pooled cohort contained 2062 participants; 1552 from the RCT. Overall, regret and dissatisfaction were low whereas problems with usual activities and prolonged missed work occurred more frequently. In the RCT, those assigned to antibiotics had more regret (Odd ratios (OR) 2.97, 95% Confidence intervals (CI) 2.05-4.31) and dissatisfaction (OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.25-3.12), and reported less missed work (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.27-0.56). Factors associated with function outcomes included sociodemographic and clinical variables for both treatment arms. Fewer factors were associated with dissatisfaction and regret.ConclusionsOverall, participants reported high satisfaction, low regret, and were frequently able to resume usual activities and return to work. When comparing treatments for appendicitis, no single measure defines success or failure for all people. The reported data may inform discussions regarding the most appropriate treatment for individuals.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785