Protocol for a feasibility study of smoking cessation in the surgical pathway before major lung surgery: Project MURRAY

INTRODUCTION: Smoking prior to major thoracic surgery is the biggest risk factor for development of postoperative pulmonary complications, with one in five patients continuing to smoke before surgery. Current guidance is that all patients should stop smoking before elective surgery yet very few are offered specialist smoking cessation support. Patients would prefer support within the thoracic surgical pathway. No study has addressed the effectiveness of such an intervention in this setting on cessation. The overall aim is to determine in patients who undergo major elective thoracic surgery whether an intervention integrated (INT) into the surgical pathway improves smoking cessation rates compared with usual care (UC) of standard community/hospital based NHS smoking support. This pilot study will evaluate feasibility of a substantive trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Project MURRAY is a trial comparing the effectiveness of INT and UC on smoking cessation. INT is pharmacotherapy and a hybrid of behavioural support delivered by the trained healthcare practitioners (HCPs) in the thoracic surgical pathway and a complimentary web-based application. This pilot study will evaluate the feasibility of a substantive trial and study processes in five adult thoracic centres including the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. The primary objective is to establish the proportion of those eligible who agree to participate. Secondary objectives include evaluation of study processes. Analyses of feasibility and patient-reported outcomes will take the form of simple descriptive statistics and where appropriate, point estimates of effects sizes and associated 95% CIs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has obtained ethical approval from NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC number 19/WM/0097). Dissemination plan includes informing patients and HCPs; engaging multidisciplinary professionals to support a proposal of a definitive trial and submission for a full application dependent on the success of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04190966

RUBY-1: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the safety and tolerability of the novel oral factor Xa inhibitor darexaban (YM150) following acute coronary syndrome

AIMS: To establish the safety, tolerability and most promising regimen of darexaban (YM150), a novel, oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor, for prevention of ischaemic events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: In a 26-week, multi-centre, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study, 1279 patients with recent high-risk non-ST-segment or ST-segment elevation ACS received one of six darexaban regimens: 5 mg b.i.d., 10 mg o.d., 15 mg b.i.d., 30 mg o.d., 30 mg b.i.d., or 60 mg o.d. or placebo, on top of dual antiplatelet treatment. Primary outcome was incidence of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. The main efficacy outcome was a composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, systemic thromboembolism, and severe recurrent ischaemia. RESULTS: Bleeding rates were numerically higher in all darexaban arms vs. placebo (pooled HR: 2.275; 95% CI: 1.13–4.60, P = 0.022). Using placebo as reference (bleeding rate 3.1%), there was a dose–response relationship (P = 0.009) for increased bleeding with increasing darexaban dose (6.2, 6.5, and 9.3% for 10, 30, and 60 mg daily, respectively), which was statistically significant for 30 mg b.i.d. (P = 0.002). There was no decrease (indeed a numerical increase in the 30 and 60 mg dose arms) in efficacy event rates with darexaban, but the study was underpowered for efficacy. Darexaban showed good tolerability without signs of liver toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Darexaban when added to dual antiplatelet therapy after ACS produces an expected dose-related two- to four-fold increase in bleeding, with no other safety concerns but no signal of efficacy. Establishing the potential of low-dose darexaban in preventing major cardiac events after ACS requires a large phase III trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0099429

Stent Design, Restenosis and Recurrent Stroke After Carotid Artery Stenting in the International Carotid Stenting Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Open-cell carotid artery stents are associated with a higher peri-procedural stroke risk than closed-cell stents. However, the effect of stent design on long-term durability of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is unknown. We compared the medium- to long-term risk of restenosis and ipsilateral stroke between patients treated with open-cell stents versus closed-cell stents in the ICSS (International Carotid Stenting Study). METHODS: Patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis were randomized to CAS or endarterectomy and followed with duplex ultrasound for a median of 4.0 years. We analyzed data from patients with completed CAS procedures, known stent design, and available ultrasound follow-up. The primary outcome, moderate or higher restenosis (≥50%) was defined as a peak systolic velocity of >1.3 m/s on ultrasound or occlusion of the treated internal carotid artery and analyzed with interval-censored models. RESULTS: Eight hundred fifty-five patients were allocated to CAS. Seven hundred fourteen patients with completed CAS and known stent design were included in the current analysis. Of these, 352 were treated with open-cell and 362 with closed-cell stents. Moderate or higher restenosis occurred significantly less frequently in patients treated with open-cell (n=113) than closed-cell stents (n=154; 5-year risks were 35.5% versus 46.0%; unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53–0.88). There was no significant difference in the risk of severe restenosis (≥70%) after open-cell stenting (n=27) versus closed-cell stenting (n=43; 5-year risks, 8.6% versus 12.7%; unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.37–1.05). The risk of ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days after treatment was similar with open-cell and closed-cell stents (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.35–1.75). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate or higher restenosis after CAS occurred less frequently in patients treated with open-cell stents than closed-cell stents. However, both stent designs were equally effective at preventing recurrent stroke during follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.isrctn.com/. Unique identifier: ISRCTN25337470

Patterns in blood pressure medication use in US incident dialysis patients over the first 6 months.

BACKGROUND: Several observational studies have evaluated the effect of a single exposure window with blood pressure (BP) medications on outcomes in incident dialysis patients, but whether BP medication prescription patterns remain stable or a single exposure window design is adequate to evaluate effect on outcomes is unclear. METHODS: We described patterns of BP medication prescription over 6 months after dialysis initiation in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients, stratified by cardiovascular comorbidity, diabetes, and other patient characteristics. The cohort included 13,072 adult patients (12,159 hemodialysis, 913 peritoneal dialysis) who initiated dialysis in Dialysis Clinic, Inc., facilities January 1, 2003-June 30, 2008, and remained on the original modality for at least 6 months. We evaluated monthly patterns in BP medication prescription over 6 months and at 12 and 24 months after initiation. RESULTS: Prescription patterns varied by dialysis modality over the first 6 months; substantial proportions of patients with prescriptions for beta-blockers, renin angiotensin system agents, and dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in month 6 no longer had prescriptions for these medications by month 24. Prescription of specific medication classes varied by comorbidity, race/ethnicity, and age, but little by sex. The mean number of medications was 2.5 at month 6 in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluates BP medication patterns in both hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients over the first 6 months of dialysis. Our findings highlight the challenges of assessing comparative effectiveness of a single BP medication class in dialysis patients. Longitudinal designs should be used to account for changes in BP medication management over time, and designs that incorporate common combinations should be considered

Interactions between the adducin 2 gene and antihypertensive drug therapies in determining blood pressure in people with hypertension

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>As part of the NHLBI Family Blood Pressure Program, the Genetic Epidemiology Network of Arteriopathy (GENOA) recruited 575 sibships (n = 1583 individuals) from Rochester, MN who had at least two hypertensive siblings diagnosed before age 60. Linkage analysis identified a region on chromosome 2 that was investigated using 70 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) typed in 7 positional candidate genes, including adducin 2 (<it>ADD2</it>).</p> <p>Method</p> <p>To investigate whether blood pressure (BP) levels in these hypertensives (n = 1133) were influenced by gene-by-drug interactions, we used cross-validation statistical methods (i.e., estimating a model for predicting BP levels in one subgroup and testing it in a different subgroup). These methods greatly reduced the chance of false positive findings.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Eight SNPs in <it>ADD2 </it>were significantly associated with systolic BP in untreated hypertensives (p-value < 0.05). Moreover, we also identified SNPs associated with gene-by-drug interactions on systolic BP in drug-treated hypertensives. The TT genotype at SNP rs1541582 was associated with an average systolic BP of 133 mmHg in the beta-blocker subgroup and 148 mmHg in the diuretic subgroup after adjusting for overall mean differences among drug classes.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings suggest that hypertension candidate gene variation may influence BP responses to specific antihypertensive drug therapies and measurement of genetic variation may assist in identifying subgroups of hypertensive patients who will benefit most from particular antihypertensive drug therapies.</p

Multivariable risk prediction can greatly enhance the statistical power of clinical trial subgroup analysis

BACKGROUND: When subgroup analyses of a positive clinical trial are unrevealing, such findings are commonly used to argue that the treatment's benefits apply to the entire study population; however, such analyses are often limited by poor statistical power. Multivariable risk-stratified analysis has been proposed as an important advance in investigating heterogeneity in treatment benefits, yet no one has conducted a systematic statistical examination of circumstances influencing the relative merits of this approach vs. conventional subgroup analysis. METHODS: Using simulated clinical trials in which the probability of outcomes in individual patients was stochastically determined by the presence of risk factors and the effects of treatment, we examined the relative merits of a conventional vs. a "risk-stratified" subgroup analysis under a variety of circumstances in which there is a small amount of uniformly distributed treatment-related harm. The statistical power to detect treatment-effect heterogeneity was calculated for risk-stratified and conventional subgroup analysis while varying: 1) the number, prevalence and odds ratios of individual risk factors for risk in the absence of treatment, 2) the predictiveness of the multivariable risk model (including the accuracy of its weights), 3) the degree of treatment-related harm, and 5) the average untreated risk of the study population. RESULTS: Conventional subgroup analysis (in which single patient attributes are evaluated "one-at-a-time") had at best moderate statistical power (30% to 45%) to detect variation in a treatment's net relative risk reduction resulting from treatment-related harm, even under optimal circumstances (overall statistical power of the study was good and treatment-effect heterogeneity was evaluated across a major risk factor [OR = 3]). In some instances a multi-variable risk-stratified approach also had low to moderate statistical power (especially when the multivariable risk prediction tool had low discrimination). However, a multivariable risk-stratified approach can have excellent statistical power to detect heterogeneity in net treatment benefit under a wide variety of circumstances, instances under which conventional subgroup analysis has poor statistical power. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that under many likely scenarios, a multivariable risk-stratified approach will have substantially greater statistical power than conventional subgroup analysis for detecting heterogeneity in treatment benefits and safety related to previously unidentified treatment-related harm. Subgroup analyses must always be well-justified and interpreted with care, and conventional subgroup analyses can be useful under some circumstances; however, clinical trial reporting should include a multivariable risk-stratified analysis when an adequate externally-developed risk prediction tool is available

Effect of Anti-Obesity Drug on Cardiovascular Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND: Anti-obesity drugs are widely used to prevent the complications of obesity, however, the effects of anti-obesity drugs on cardiovascular risk factors are unclear at the present time. We carried out a comprehensively systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of anti-obesity drugs on cardiovascular risk factors. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We systematically searched Medline, EmBase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists of articles and proceedings of major meetings for relevant literatures. We included randomized placebo-controlled trials that reported the effects of anti-obesity drugs on cardiovascular risk factors compared to placebo. Overall, orlistat produced a reduction of 2.39 kg (95%CI-3.34 to -1.45) for weight, a reduction of 0.27 mmol/L (95%CI: -0.36 to -0.17) for total cholesterol, a reduction of 0.21 mmol/L (95%CI: -0.30 to -0.12) for LDL, a reduction of 0.12 mmol/L (95%CI: -0.20 to -0.04) for fasting glucose, 1.85 mmHg reduction (95%CI: -3.30 to -0.40) for SBP, and a reduction of 1.49 mmHg (95%CI: -2.39 to -0.58) for DBP. Sibutramine only showed effects on weight loss and triglycerides reduction with statistical significances. Rimonabant was associated with statistically significant effects on weight loss, SBP reduction and DBP reduction. No other significantly different effects were identified between anti-obesity therapy and placebo. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: We identified that anti-obesity therapy was associated with a decrease of weight regardless of the type of the drug. Orlistat and rimonabant could lead to an improvement on cardiovascular risk factors. However, Sibutramine may have a direct effect on cardiovascular risk factors

The effect of ABCA1 gene polymorphisms on ischaemic stroke risk and relationship with lipid profile

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Ischaemic stroke is a common disorder with genetic and environmental components contributing to overall risk. Atherothromboembolic abnormalities, which play a crucial role in the pathogenesis of ischaemic stroke, are often the end result of dysregulation of lipid metabolism. The ATP Binding Cassette Transporter (<it>ABCA1</it>) is a key gene involved in lipid metabolism. It encodes the cholesterol regulatory efflux protein which mediates the transfer of cellular phospholipids and cholesterol to acceptor apolipoproteins such as apolipoprotein A-I (ApoA-I). Common polymorphisms in this gene affect High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) and Apolipoprotein A-I levels and so influence the risk of atherosclerosis. This study has assessed the distribution of <it>ABCA1 </it>polymorphisms and haplotype arrangements in patients with ischaemic stroke and compared them to an appropriate control group. It also examined the relationship of these polymorphisms with serum lipid profiles in cases and controls.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We studied four common polymorphisms in <it>ABCA1 </it>gene: G/A-L158L, G/A-R219K, G/A-G316G and G/A-R1587K in 400 Caucasian ischaemic stroke patients and 487 controls. Dynamic Allele Specific Hybridisation (DASH) was used as the genotyping assay.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Genotype and allele frequencies of all polymorphisms were similar in cases and controls, except for a modest difference in the <it>ABCA1 </it>R219K allele frequency (P-value = 0.05). Using the PHASE2 program, haplotype frequencies for the four loci (158, 219, 316, and 1587) were estimated in cases and controls. There was no significant difference in overall haplotypes arrangement in patients group compared to controls (p = 0.27). 2211 and 1211 haplotypes (1 = common allele, 2 = rare allele) were more frequent in cases (p = 0.05). Adjusted ORs indicated 40% and 46% excess risk of stroke for these haplotypes respectively. However, none of the adjusted ORs were statistically significant. Individuals who had R219K "22" genotype had a higher LDL level (p = 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our study does not support a major role for the <it>ABCA1 </it>gene as a risk factor for ischaemic stroke. Some haplotypes may confer a minor amount of increased risk or protection. Polymorphisms in this gene may influence serum lipid profile.</p

An analysis of national target groups for monovalent 2009 pandemic influenza vaccine and trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines in 2009-10 and 2010-11

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Vaccination is generally considered to be the best primary prevention measure against influenza virus infection. Many countries encourage specific target groups of people to undertake vaccination, often with financial subsidies or a priority list. To understand differential patterns of national target groups for influenza vaccination before, during and after the 2009 influenza pandemic, we reviewed and analyzed the country-specific policies in the corresponding time periods.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Information on prioritized groups targeted to receive seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines was derived from a multi-step internet search of official health department websites, press releases, media sources and academic journal articles. We assessed the frequency and consistency of targeting 20 different groups within populations which are associated with age, underlying medical conditions, role or occupations among different countries and vaccines. Information on subsidies provided to specific target groups was also extracted.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We analyzed target groups for 33 (seasonal 2009 and 2009-10 vaccines), 72 (monovalent pandemic 2009-10 vaccine) and 34 (seasonal 2010 and 2010-11 vaccines) countries. In 2009-10, the elderly, those with chronic illness and health care workers were common targets for the seasonal vaccine. Comparatively, the elderly, care home residents and workers, animal contacts and close contacts were less frequently targeted to receive the pandemic vaccine. Pregnant women, obese persons, essential community workers and health care workers, however, were more commonly targeted. After the pandemic, pregnant women, obese persons, health care and care home workers, and close contacts were more commonly targeted to receive the seasonal vaccine compared to 2009-10, showing continued influence from the pandemic. Many of the countries provided free vaccines, partial subsidies, reimbursements or national health insurance coverage to specific target groups and over one-third of the countries offered universal subsidy regarding the pandemic vaccine. There was also some inconsistency between countries in target groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Differences in target groups between countries may reflect variable objectives as well as uncertainties regarding the transmission dynamics, severity and age-specific immunity against influenza viruses before and after vaccination. Clarification on these points is essential to elucidate optimal and object-oriented vaccination strategies.</p