47 research outputs found
Use of Disease-Modifying Therapies in Pediatric Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the real-world effectiveness of newer disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) vs injectables in children with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). METHODS: In this retrospective, multicenter study, from the UK Childhood Inflammatory Demyelination Network, we identified children with RRMS receiving DMTs from January 2012 to December 2018. Clinical and paraclinical data were retrieved from the medical records. Annualized relapse rates (ARRs) before and on treatment, time to relapse, time to new MRI lesions, and change in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score were calculated. RESULTS: Of 103 children treated with DMTs, followed up for 3.8 years, relapses on treatment were recorded in 53/89 (59.5%) on injectables vs 8/54 (15%) on newer DMTs. The ARR was reduced from 1.9 to 1.1 on injectables (p < 0.001) vs 1.6 to 0.3 on newer DMTs (p = 0.002). New MRI lesions occurred in 77/89 (86.5%) of patients on injectables vs 26/54 (47%) on newer DMTs (p = 0.0001). Children on newer DMTs showed longer time to relapse, time to switch treatment, and time to new radiologic activity than patients on injectables (log-rank p < 0.01). After adjustment for potential confounders, multivariable analysis showed that injectables were associated with 12-fold increased risk of clinical relapse (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 12.12, 95% CI = 1.64-89.87, p = 0.015) and a 2-fold increased risk of new radiologic activity (adjusted HR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.08-7.13, p = 0.034) compared with newer DMTs. At 2 years from treatment initiation, 38/103 (37%) patients had MRI activity in the absence of clinical relapses. The EDSS score did not change during the follow-up, and only 2 patients had cognitive impairment. CONCLUSION: Newer DMTs were associated with a lower risk of clinical and radiologic relapses in patients compared with injectables. Our study adds weight to the argument for an imminent shift in practice toward the use of newer, more efficacious DMTs in the first instance. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that newer DMTs (oral or infusions) are superior to injectables (interferon beta/glatiramer acetate) in reducing both clinical relapses and radiologic activity in children with RRMS
Recommended from our members
Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.
Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707
Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19
IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.
Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.
RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570
e(31),(f) determination for PZT films using a conventional 'd(33)' meter
A new and simple method is described for the determination of the piezoelectric coefficients d(33,f) and e(31,f) for piezoelectric films deposited on substrates using a conventional point-loading 'd(33)' or 'Berlincourt' piezometer. An analytical mathematical model is developed which simulates the dynamical flexure of such films when a ring-supported sample is subject to central loading. Classical plate theory and elastic analysis are used to calculate the stresses in doped lead zirconate titanate (PZT) him for different radii of supporting rings, enabling both piezoelectric coefficients to be determined through a simple modification to the piezometer. The analytical model for the radial stresses has been evaluated in comparison with the results of finite element analysis and has shown a good correlation. The new measurement technique has been applied to both thick films of PZT and thin films of manganese-doped lead zirconate titanate (PMZT) on silicon substrates. The values of d(33,f) and e(31,f) obtained experimentally are found to be similar to these that have been determined by more elaborate methods
Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke
Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease