Intra-arterial induction high-dose chemotherapy with cisplatin for oral and oropharyngeal cancer: long-term results

Intra-arterial (IA) chemotherapy for curative treatment of head and neck cancer experienced a revival in the last decade. Mainly, it was used in concurrent combination with radiation in organ-preserving settings. The modern method of transfemoral approach for catheterisation, superselective perfusion of the tumour-feeding vessel, and high-dose (150 mg m−2) administration of cisplatin with parallel systemic neutralisation with sodium thiosulphate (9 g m−2) made preoperative usage feasible. The present paper presents the results of a pilot study on a population of 52 patients with resectable stage 1–4 carcinomas of the oral cavity and the oropharynx, who were treated with one cycle of preoperative IA chemotherapy executed as mentioned above and radical surgery. There have been no interventional complications of IA chemotherapy, and acute side effects have been low. One tracheotomy had to be carried out due to swelling. The overall clinical local response has been 69%. There was no interference with surgery, which was carried out 3–4 weeks later. Pathological complete remission was assessed in 25%. The mean observation time was 3 years. A 3-year overall and disease-free survival was 82 and 69%, respectively, and at 5 years 77 and 59%, respectively. Survival results were compared to a treatment-dependent prognosis index for the same population. As a conclusion, it can be stated that IA high-dose chemotherapy with cisplatin and systemic neutralisation in a neoadjuvant setting should be considered a feasible, safe, and effective treatment modality for resectable oral and oropharyngeal cancer. The low toxicity of this local chemotherapy recommends usage especially in stage 1–2 patients. The potential of survival benefit as indicated by the comparison to the prognosis index should be controlled in a randomised study

Knowledge of dental academics about the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-country online survey.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a global pandemic affecting all aspects of life in all countries. We assessed COVID-19 knowledge and associated factors among dental academics in 26 countries. METHODS: We invited dental academics to participate in a cross-sectional, multi-country, online survey from March to April 2020. The survey collected data on knowledge of COVID-19 regarding the mode of transmission, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, protection, and dental treatment precautions as well as participants' background variables. Multilevel linear models were used to assess the association between dental academics' knowledge of COVID-19 and individual level (personal and professional) and country-level (number of COVID-19 cases/ million population) factors accounting for random variation among countries. RESULTS: Two thousand forty-five academics participated in the survey (response rate 14.3%, with 54.7% female and 67% younger than 46 years of age). The mean (SD) knowledge percent score was 73.2 (11.2) %, and the score of knowledge of symptoms was significantly lower than the score of knowledge of diagnostic methods (53.1 and 85.4%, P <  0.0001). Knowledge score was significantly higher among those living with a partner/spouse than among those living alone (regression coefficient (B) = 0.48); higher among those with PhD degrees than among those with Bachelor of Dental Science degrees (B = 0.48); higher among those seeing 21 to 30 patients daily than among those seeing no patients (B = 0.65); and higher among those from countries with a higher number of COVID-19 cases/million population (B = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: Dental academics had poorer knowledge of COVID-19 symptoms than of COVID-19 diagnostic methods. Living arrangements, academic degrees, patient load, and magnitude of the epidemic in the country were associated with COVD-19 knowledge among dental academics. Training of dental academics on COVID-19 can be designed using these findings to recruit those with the greatest need

Knowledge of dental academics about the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-country online survey

Background: COVID-19 is a global pandemic affecting all aspects of life in all countries. We assessed COVID-19 knowledge and associated factors among dental academics in 26 countries. Methods: We invited dental academics to participate in a cross-sectional, multi-country, online survey from March to April 2020. The survey collected data on knowledge of COVID-19 regarding the mode of transmission, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, protection, and dental treatment precautions as well as participants’ background variables. Multilevel linear models were used to assess the association between dental academics’ knowledge of COVID-19 and individual level (personal and professional) and country-level (number of COVID-19 cases/ million population) factors accounting for random variation among countries. Results: Two thousand forty-five academics participated in the survey (response rate 14.3%, with 54.7% female and 67% younger than 46 years of age). The mean (SD) knowledge percent score was 73.2 (11.2) %, and the score of knowledge of symptoms was significantly lower than the score of knowledge of diagnostic methods (53.1 and 85.4%, P &lt; 0.0001). Knowledge score was significantly higher among those living with a partner/spouse than among those living alone (regression coefficient (B) = 0.48); higher among those with PhD degrees than among those with Bachelor of Dental Science degrees (B = 0.48); higher among those seeing 21 to 30 patients daily than among those seeing no patients (B = 0.65); and higher among those from countries with a higher number of COVID-19 cases/million population (B = 0.0007). Conclusions: Dental academics had poorer knowledge of COVID-19 symptoms than of COVID-19 diagnostic methods. Living arrangements, academic degrees, patient load, and magnitude of the epidemic in the country were associated with COVD-19 knowledge among dental academics. Training of dental academics on COVID-19 can be designed using these findings to recruit those with the greatest need

Perceived preparedness of dental academic institutions to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-country survey

Dental academic institutions are affected by COVID-19. We assessed the perceived COVID19 preparedness of these institutions and the characteristics of institutions with greater perceived preparedness. An international cross-sectional survey of dental academics was conducted from March to August 2020 to assess academics’ and institutional attributes, perceived preparedness, and availability of infection prevention and control (IPC) equipment. Principal component analysis (PCA) identified perceived preparedness components. Multilevel linear regression analysis assessed the association between perceived preparedness and fixed effect factors (academics’ and institutions’ attributes) with countries as random effect variable. Of the 1820 dental academics from 28 countries, 78.4% worked in public institutions and 75.2% reported temporary closure. PCA showed five components: clinic apparel, measures before and after patient care, institutional policies, and availability of IPC equipment. Significantly less perceived preparedness was reported in lower-middle income (LMICs) (B = −1.31, p = 0.006) and upper-middle income (UMICs) (B = −0.98, p = 0.02) countries than in high-income countries (HICs), in teaching only (B = −0.55, p &lt; 0.0001) and in research only (B = −1.22, p = 0.003) than teaching and research institutions and in institutions receiving ≤100 patients daily than those receiving &gt;100 patients (B = −0.38, p &lt; 0.0001). More perceived preparedness was reported by academics with administrative roles (B = 0.59, p &lt; 0.0001). Academics from low-income countries (LICs) and LMICs reported less availability of clinic apparel, IPC equipment, measures before patient care, and institutional policies but more measures during patient care. There was greater perceived preparedness in HICs and institutions with greater involvement in teaching, research, and patient care

Behavior change due to COVID-19 among dental academics-The theory of planned behavior: Stresses, worries, training, and pandemic severity

Objective: COVID-19 pandemic led to major life changes. We assessed the psychological impact of COVID-19 on dental academics globally and on changes in their behaviors. Methods: We invited dental academics to complete a cross-sectional, online survey from March to May 2020. The survey was based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). The survey collected data on participants’ stress levels (using the Impact of Event Scale), attitude (fears, and worries because of COVID-19 extracted by Principal Component Analysis (PCA), perceived control (resulting from training on public health emergencies), norms (country-level COVID-19 fatality rate), and personal and professional backgrounds. We used multilevel regression models to assess the association between the study outcome variables (frequent handwashing and avoidance of crowded places) and explanatory variables (stress, attitude, perceived control and norms). Results: 1862 academics from 28 countries participated in the survey (response rate = 11.3%). Of those, 53.4% were female, 32.9% were <46 years old and 9.9% had severe stress. PCA extracted three main factors: fear of infection, worries because of professional responsibilities, and worries because of restricted mobility. These factors had significant dosedependent association with stress and were significantly associated with more frequent handwashing by dental academics (B = 0.56, 0.33, and 0.34) and avoiding crowded places (B = 0.55, 0.30, and 0.28). Low country fatality rates were significantly associated with more handwashing (B = -2.82) and avoiding crowded places (B = -6.61). Training on public health emergencies was not significantly associated with behavior change (B = -0.01 and -0.11). Conclusions: COVID-19 had a considerable psychological impact on dental academics. There was a direct, dose-dependent association between change in behaviors and worries but no association between these changes and training on public health emergencies. More change in behaviors was associated with lower country COVID-19 fatality rates. Fears and stresses were associated with greater adoption of preventive measures against the pandemic

Perceived Preparedness of Dental Academic Institutions to Cope with the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multi-Country Survey

Dental academic institutions are affected by COVID-19. We assessed the perceived COVID-19 preparedness of these institutions and the characteristics of institutions with greater perceived preparedness. An international cross-sectional survey of dental academics was conducted from March to August 2020 to assess academics’ and institutional attributes, perceived preparedness, and availability of infection prevention and control (IPC) equipment. Principal component analysis (PCA) identified perceived preparedness components. Multilevel linear regression analysis assessed the association between perceived preparedness and fixed effect factors (academics’ and institutions’ attributes) with countries as random effect variable. Of the 1820 dental academics from 28 countries, 78.4% worked in public institutions and 75.2% reported temporary closure. PCA showed five components: clinic apparel, measures before and after patient care, institutional policies, and availability of IPC equipment. Significantly less perceived preparedness was reported in lower-middle income (LMICs) (B = −1.31, p = 0.006) and upper-middle income (UMICs) (B = −0.98, p = 0.02) countries than in high-income countries (HICs), in teaching only (B = −0.55, p &lt; 0.0001) and in research only (B = −1.22, p = 0.003) than teaching and research institutions and in institutions receiving ≤100 patients daily than those receiving &gt;100 patients (B = −0.38, p &lt; 0.0001). More perceived preparedness was reported by academics with administrative roles (B = 0.59, p &lt; 0.0001). Academics from low-income countries (LICs) and LMICs reported less availability of clinic apparel, IPC equipment, measures before patient care, and institutional policies but more measures during patient care. There was greater perceived preparedness in HICs and institutions with greater involvement in teaching, research, and patient care

Ustekinumab as Induction and Maintenance Therapy for Crohn’s Disease

BACKGROUND Ustekinumab, a monoclonal antibody to the p40 subunit of interleukin-12 and inter-leukin-23, was evaluated as an intravenous induction therapy in two populations with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease. Ustekinumab was also evaluated as subcutaneous maintenance therapy. METHODS We randomly assigned patients to receive a single intravenous dose of ustekinumab (either 130 mg or approximately 6 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo in two induction trials. The UNITI-1 trial included 741 patients who met the criteria for primary or secondary nonresponse to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists or had unacceptable side effects. The UNITI-2 trial included 628 patients in whom conventional therapy failed or unacceptable side effects occurred. Patients who completed these induction trials then participated in IM-UNITI, in which the 397 patients who had a response to ustekinumab were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous maintenance injections of 90 mg of ustekinumab (either every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks) or placebo. The primary end point for the induction trials was a clinical response at week 6 (defined as a decrease from baseline in the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score of ≥100 points or a CDAI score <150). The primary end point for the maintenance trial was remission at week 44 (CDAI score <150). RESULTS The rates of response at week 6 among patients receiving intravenous ustekinumab at a dose of either 130 mg or approximately 6 mg per kilogram were significantly higher than the rates among patients receiving placebo (in UNITI-1, 34.3%, 33.7%, and 21.5%, respectively, with P≤0.003 for both comparisons with placebo; in UNITI-2, 51.7%, 55.5%, and 28.7%, respectively, with P<0.001 for both doses). In the groups receiving maintenance doses of ustekinumab every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks, 53.1% and 48.8%, respectively, were in remission at week 44, as compared with 35.9% of those receiving placebo (P = 0.005 and P = 0.04, respectively). Within each trial, adverse-event rates were similar among treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease, those receiving intravenous ustekinumab had a significantly higher rate of response than did those receiving placebo. Subcutaneous ustekinumab maintained remission in patients who had a clinical response to induction therapy. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01369329, NCT01369342, and NCT01369355.