i diversi soggetti della ricerca e le risorse sinergie e dissinergie

n/

Simulation in neurology

n/

Factors influencing clinical trial site selection in Europe: the Survey of Attitudes towards Trial sites in Europe (the SAT-EU Study)

Objectives: Applications to run clinical trials in Europe fell 25% between 2007 and 2011. Costs, speed of approvals and shortcomings of European Clinical Trial Directive are commonly invoked to explain this unsatisfactory performance. However, no hard evidence is available on the actual weight of these factors or has it been previously investigated whether other criteria may also impact clinical trial site selection. Design: The Survey of Attitudes towards Trial sites in Europe (SAT-EU Study) was an anonymous, cross-sectional web-based survey that systematically assessed factors impacting European clinical trial site selection. It explored 19 factors across investigator-driven, hospital-driven and environment-driven criteria, and costs. It also surveyed perceptions of the European trial environment. Setting and participants: Clinical research organisations (CROs), academic clinical trial units (CTUs) and industry invited to respond. Outcome measures: Primary outcome: weight assigned to each factor hypothesised to impact trial site selection and trial incidence. Secondary outcome: desirability of European countries to run clinical trials. Results: Responses were obtained from 485 professionals in 34 countries: 49% from BioPharma, 40% from CTUs or CROs. Investigator-dependent, environment-dependent and hospital-dependent factors were rated highly important, costs being less important (p<0.0001). Within environment-driven criteria, pool of eligible patients, speed of approvals and presence of disease-management networks were significantly more important than costs or government financial incentives (p<0.0001). The pattern of response was consistent across respondent groupings (CTU vs CRO vs industry). Considerable variability was demonstrated in the perceived receptivity of countries to undertake clinical trials, with Germany, the UK and the Netherlands rated the best trial markets (p<0.0001). Conclusions: Investigator-dependent factors and ease of approval dominate trial site selection, while costs appear less important. Fostering competitiveness of European clinical research may not require additional government spending/incentives. Rather, harmonisation of approval processes, greater visibility of centres of excellence and reduction of ‘hidden’ indirect costs, may bring significantly more clinical trials to Europe

Discordances originated by multiple meta-analyses on interventions for myocardial infarction: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES: To clarify the impact of multiple (covering the same population, intervention, control, and outcomes) systematic reviews (SRs) on interventions for myocardial infarction (MI). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Clinical Evidence (BMJ Group) sections and related search strategies regarding MI were used to identify multiple SRs published between 1997 and 2007. Multiple SRs were classified as discordant if they featured conflicting results or interpretation of them. RESULTS: Thirty-six SRs (23.5% of 153 on the treatment or prevention of MI) were classified as multiple and grouped in 16 clusters [ie, at least two SRs with the same PICO (population, condition/disease, intervention, control) and at least one common outcome] exploring angioplasty, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, anticoagulants, antiplatelets, β-blockers, and stents. Complete agreement on statistically significant differences between interventions was found in 7 of 10 clusters with a shared composite outcome. Agreement was reduced when single outcomes were considered. Despite substantial variation and limited agreement in reporting of major outcomes, SRs agreed in their conclusions on the superiority of either the intervention or control in 14 of 16 clusters. Sources of minor discrepancies were found in terms of study and outcome selection, subgroup analyses, and interpretation of findings. CONCLUSION: Multiple SRs agreed in their qualitative conclusions but not on reporting and on analyses of hard outcomes. Discordance on significance of treatment effects was due to a combination of variation in design with inclusion of different studies and lack of precision for single hard outcomes compared with a composite outcome. Such inconsistencies among SRs could potentially slow the translation of SRs' results to clinical and public health decision making and suggest the need for a broader methodological and clinical agreement on their design

Ear lobe crease as a marker of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.

The possible relation between ear lobe crease (ELC) and coronary artery disease (CAD) was described for the first time by Frank in 1973 in a letter to the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine [1]. The author observed that 19 out of 20 patients with ELC had 1 or more risk factors for CAD, and he suggested that the presumptive relation should have been tested

Atherosclerosis, an historical approach [Aterosclerosi: ieri, oggi, domani]

The history of atherosclerosis represents a very interesting and intriguing charter of the history of medicine. Atherosclerosis was present even in the old age, as demonstrated by paleopathological studies. Starting from these observations, recent evidences highlighted the crucial role of inflammation in the genesis of atherosclerosis