Pulmonary arterial hypertension outcomes upon endothelin-1 receptor antagonist switch to macitentan

Objectives: To assess whether switching patients with suboptimally controlled pulmonary arterial hypertension from bosentan or ambrisentan to macitentan would improve six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance and World Health Organization functional class. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of 37 patients from a single center. Patients were separated into three heterogeneous treatment groups and followed for 18 months: switch group (n¼14): patients switched to macitentan from bosentan/ambrisentan; added group (n¼11): patients who began macitentan as de novo therapy (n¼5) or who added macitentan to an existing sildenafil regimen (n¼6); and control group (n¼12): patients for whom sildenafil and/or bosentan/ambrisentan therapy was unchanged. Results: Mortality was observed in two patients (one each, switch and added groups). Patients in the control group had one hospital admission and 100% survival. There was significant improvement in functional class for the switch and added groups. Statistically significant improvement was observed in 6MWT distance in the added group alone. Overall, 92% of patients continued macitentan throughout the study. Conclusion: Macitentan was well tolerated. For bosentan/ambrisentan-treated patients with suboptimally controlled pulmonary arterial hypertension, switching to macitentan may facilitate an improvement in functional class

The impact of the 2022 Ukraine/Russian conflict on cancer clinical trials

Since the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, clinical trial conduct has become extremely challenging due to damage to the healthcare infrastructure and patient displacement. This current study aimed to estimate the number of cancer clinical trials at risk of impact from the conflict. A descriptive analysis and narrative review were completed using data from cancer clinical trials with sites in Russia or Ukraine using the ‘clinical trials.gov’ online database between February 2022 and May 2022. There were 508 clinical trials involving sites in Ukraine or Russia. Most were multinational studies (470 of 508; 93 %). The majority of studies were phase 3 (344 of 508; 68 %) and these also had the largest sample sizes (median 624, range 12–5637). The most common tumour types were lung (128 of 508; 25 %), urogenital (94 of 508; 19 %) and breast (78 of 508; 15 %). A meaningful number of trials had curative intent (129 of 508; 25 %). The most common intervention was immunotherapy-related (218 of 508; 43 %), followed by other targeted therapy (185 of 508; 36 %). Ukraine and Russia are both large centres for global clinical trial activity. The invasion of Ukraine may result in underpowering of international clinical trial results with loss of future recruitment sites for both countries

Is Landscape Context Important for Riparian Conservation? Birds in Grassy Woodland

An important challenge for riparian management is to determine the extent to which landscape context influences the faunal assemblages of riparian habitats. We examined this challenge in the variegated landscapes of southeastern Queensland, Australia where riparian vegetation is surrounded by both extensive grazing and intensive cropping. We investigated whether riparian habitats adjacent to different landuses support similar bird assemblages. Three types of riparian habitat condition were sampled (uncleared ungrazed; uncleared grazed; cleared grazed) in four different land-use contexts (ungrazed woodland; grazed woodland; native pasture; crop) although only six of the twelve possible treatment combinations were available. Eighty percent of bird species responded significantly to changes in both riparian habitat condition and landscape context, while fewer than 50% of species were significantly influenced by landscape context alone. The influence of landscape context on the bird assemblage increased as the surrounding land use became more intensive (e.g. woodland to native pasture to crop). Riparian zones have been shown to have consistently high biodiversity values relative to their extent. These findings suggest it is not enough to conserve riparian habitats alone, conservation and restoration plans must also take into consideration landscape context, particularly when that context is intensively used land

Maternal sildenafil for severe fetal growth restriction (STRIDER): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial

Background Severe early-onset fetal growth restriction can lead to a range of adverse outcomes including fetal or neonatal death, neurodisability, and lifelong risks to the health of the affected child. Sildenafil, a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, potentiates the actions of nitric oxide, which leads to vasodilatation of the uterine vessels and might improve fetal growth in utero. Methods We did this superiority, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 19 fetal medicine units in the UK. We used random computer allocation (1:1) to assign women with singleton pregnancies between 22 weeks and 0 days' gestation and 29 weeks and 6 days' gestation and severe early-onset fetal growth restriction to receive either sildenafil 25 mg three times daily or placebo until 32 weeks and 0 days' gestation or delivery. We stratified women by site and by their gestational age at randomisation (before week 26 and 0 days or at week 26 and 0 days or later). We defined fetal growth restriction as a combination of estimated fetal weight or abdominal circumference below tenth percentile and absent or reversed end-diastolic blood flow in the umbilical artery on Doppler velocimetry. The primary outcome was the time from randomisation to delivery, measured in days. This study is registered with BioMed Central, number ISRCTN 39133303. Findings Between Nov 21, 2014, and July 6, 2016, we recruited 135 women and randomly assigned 70 women to sildenafil and 65 women to placebo. We found no difference in the median randomisation to delivery interval between women assigned to sildenafil (17 days [IQR 7–24]) and women assigned to placebo (18 days [8–28]; p=0·23). Livebirths (relative risk [RR] 1·06, 95% CI 0·84 to 1·33; p=0·62), fetal deaths (0·89, 0·54 to 1·45; p=0·64), neonatal deaths (1·33, 0·54 to 3·28; p=0·53), and birthweight (−14 g,–100 to 126; p=0·81) did not differ between groups. No differences were found for any other secondary outcomes. Eight serious adverse events were reported during the course of the study (six in the placebo group and two in the sildenafil group); none of these were attributed to sildenafil. Interpretation Sildenafil did not prolong pregnancy or improve pregnancy outcomes in severe early-onset fetal growth restriction and therefore it should not be prescribed for this indication outside of research studies with explicit participants' consent. Funding National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. METHODS: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29-146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0- 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25-1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39-1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65-1·60]; p=0·92). INTERPRETATION: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation

Mythmaking in medical education and medical practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite the emergence of evidence-based medicine, gaps in medical knowledge are filled by tradition, common sense, and experience, giving rise to medical myths. METHODS: We explored the origins of and evidence related to four medical myths: patients with shellfish allergies should not receive intravenous contrast, patients with atrial fibrillation of less than 48hours\u27 duration do not require anticoagulation before cardioversion, patients with suspected meningitis should have a computed tomography (CT) scan before a lumbar puncture, and patients with respiratory disease should not receive β-blockers. We conducted a literature review to describe each myth\u27s origins and the quality of supporting evidence. RESULTS: All patients with allergies, including but not limited to seafood allergies, are at an increased risk for anaphylactoid reactions to radiocontrast. No conclusive studies indicate that patients with atrial fibrillation of less than 48hours\u27 duration do not require anticoagulation before cardioversion. A CT scan before lumbar puncture in suspected acute bacterial meningitis is a clinically inefficient precaution. β-blockers can be safely used in patients with respiratory disease and may even prevent cardiac events in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: These familiar myths have maintained prominent roles in medical thinking because they represent wisdom passed down from eminent sources, they teach physiology and medical skills, and they offer physicians a sense of control in the face of uncertainty. In addition to providing scientific evidence, changing physicians\u27 practice requires acknowledging that even meticulous care cannot always avert bad outcomes