Pentraxin-3 as a Marker of Advanced Atherosclerosis Results from the Bruneck, ARMY and ARFY Studies

PubMed ID: 22319633This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment versus best medical treatment alone for spontaneous severe deep supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage:a randomised controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether decompressive craniectomy improves clinical outcome for people with spontaneous severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The SWITCH trial aimed to assess whether decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment in these patients improves outcome at 6 months compared to best medical treatment alone.METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, assessor-blinded trial conducted in 42 stroke centres in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland, adults (18-75 years) with a severe intracerebral haemorrhage involving the basal ganglia or thalamus were randomly assigned to receive either decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment or best medical treatment alone. The primary outcome was a score of 5-6 on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 180 days, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov, NCT02258919, and is completed.FINDINGS: SWITCH had to be stopped early due to lack of funding. Between Oct 6, 2014, and April 4, 2023, 201 individuals were randomly assigned and 197 gave delayed informed consent (96 decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment, 101 best medical treatment). 63 (32%) were women and 134 (68%) men, the median age was 61 years (IQR 51-68), and the median haematoma volume 57 mL (IQR 44-74). 42 (44%) of 95 participants assigned to decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 55 (58%) assigned to best medical treatment alone had an mRS of 5-6 at 180 days (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0·77, 95% CI 0·59 to 1·01, adjusted risk difference [aRD] -13%, 95% CI -26 to 0, p=0·057). In the per-protocol analysis, 36 (47%) of 77 participants in the decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment group and 44 (60%) of 73 in the best medical treatment alone group had an mRS of 5-6 (aRR 0·76, 95% CI 0·58 to 1·00, aRD -15%, 95% CI -28 to 0). Severe adverse events occurred in 42 (41%) of 103 participants receiving decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 41 (44%) of 94 receiving best medical treatment.INTERPRETATION: SWITCH provides weak evidence that decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment might be superior to best medical treatment alone in people with severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The results do not apply to intracerebral haemorrhage in other locations, and survival is associated with severe disability in both groups.FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Inselspital Stiftung, and Boehringer Ingelheim.</p

Decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment versus best medical treatment alone for spontaneous severe deep supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage: a randomised controlled clinical trial

Background It is unknown whether decompressive craniectomy improves clinical outcome for people with spontaneous severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The SWITCH trial aimed to assess whether decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment in these patients improves outcome at 6 months compared to best medical treatment alone. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, assessor-blinded trial conducted in 42 stroke centres in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland, adults (18–75 years) with a severe intracerebral haemorrhage involving the basal ganglia or thalamus were randomly assigned to receive either decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment or best medical treatment alone. The primary outcome was a score of 5–6 on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 180 days, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov , NCT02258919 , and is completed. Findings SWITCH had to be stopped early due to lack of funding. Between Oct 6, 2014, and April 4, 2023, 201 individuals were randomly assigned and 197 gave delayed informed consent (96 decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment, 101 best medical treatment). 63 (32%) were women and 134 (68%) men, the median age was 61 years (IQR 51–68), and the median haematoma volume 57 mL (IQR 44–74). 42 (44%) of 95 participants assigned to decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 55 (58%) assigned to best medical treatment alone had an mRS of 5–6 at 180 days (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0·77, 95% CI 0·59 to 1·01, adjusted risk difference [aRD] −13%, 95% CI −26 to 0, p=0·057). In the per-protocol analysis, 36 (47%) of 77 participants in the decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment group and 44 (60%) of 73 in the best medical treatment alone group had an mRS of 5–6 (aRR 0·76, 95% CI 0·58 to 1·00, aRD −15%, 95% CI −28 to 0). Severe adverse events occurred in 42 (41%) of 103 participants receiving decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 41 (44%) of 94 receiving best medical treatment. Interpretation SWITCH provides weak evidence that decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment might be superior to best medical treatment alone in people with severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The results do not apply to intracerebral haemorrhage in other locations, and survival is associated with severe disability in both groups. Funding Swiss National Science Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Inselspital Stiftung, and Boehringer Ingelheim

Chemical PARP Inhibition Enhances Growth of Arabidopsis and Reduces Anthocyanin Accumulation and the Activation of Stress Protective Mechanisms

Poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) post-translationally modifies proteins through the addition of ADP-ribose polymers, yet its role in modulating plant development and stress responses is only poorly understood. The experiments presented here address some of the gaps in our understanding of its role in stress tolerance and thereby provide new insights into tolerance mechanisms and growth. Using a combination of chemical and genetic approaches, this study characterized phenotypes associated with PARP inhibition at the physiological level. Molecular analyses including gene expression analysis, measurement of primary metabolites and redox metabolites were used to understand the underlying processes. The analysis revealed that PARP inhibition represses anthocyanin and ascorbate accumulation under stress conditions. The reduction in defense is correlated with enhanced biomass production. Even in unstressed conditions protective genes and molecules are repressed by PARP inhibition. The reduced anthocyanin production was shown to be based on the repression of transcription of key regulatory and biosynthesis genes. PARP is a key factor for understanding growth and stress responses of plants. PARP inhibition allows plants to reduce protection such as anthocyanin, ascorbate or Non-Photochemical-Quenching whilst maintaining high energy levels likely enabling the observed enhancement of biomass production under stress, opening interesting perspectives for increasing crop productivity

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

Decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment versus best medical treatment alone for spontaneous severe deep supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage: a randomised controlled clinical trial

Background: It is unknown whether decompressive craniectomy improves clinical outcome for people with spontaneous severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The SWITCH trial aimed to assess whether decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment in these patients improves outcome at 6 months compared to best medical treatment alone. Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, assessor-blinded trial conducted in 42 stroke centres in Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland, adults (18–75 years) with a severe intracerebral haemorrhage involving the basal ganglia or thalamus were randomly assigned to receive either decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment or best medical treatment alone. The primary outcome was a score of 5–6 on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 180 days, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov, NCT02258919, and is completed. Findings: SWITCH had to be stopped early due to lack of funding. Between Oct 6, 2014, and April 4, 2023, 201 individuals were randomly assigned and 197 gave delayed informed consent (96 decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment, 101 best medical treatment). 63 (32%) were women and 134 (68%) men, the median age was 61 years (IQR 51–68), and the median haematoma volume 57 mL (IQR 44–74). 42 (44%) of 95 participants assigned to decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 55 (58%) assigned to best medical treatment alone had an mRS of 5–6 at 180 days (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0·77, 95% CI 0·59 to 1·01, adjusted risk difference [aRD] −13%, 95% CI −26 to 0, p=0·057). In the per-protocol analysis, 36 (47%) of 77 participants in the decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment group and 44 (60%) of 73 in the best medical treatment alone group had an mRS of 5–6 (aRR 0·76, 95% CI 0·58 to 1·00, aRD −15%, 95% CI −28 to 0). Severe adverse events occurred in 42 (41%) of 103 participants receiving decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment and 41 (44%) of 94 receiving best medical treatment. Interpretation: SWITCH provides weak evidence that decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment might be superior to best medical treatment alone in people with severe deep intracerebral haemorrhage. The results do not apply to intracerebral haemorrhage in other locations, and survival is associated with severe disability in both groups. Funding: Swiss National Science Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Inselspital Stiftung, and Boehringer Ingelheim

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

Beyond numbers: valuing quality teaching in business education. Volume 2: case studies

This paper documents the individual institutional experiences of the Beyond numbers: valuing quality teaching project. Five universities participated in the project through their respective project team member. Each member of the team wrote the story of their institution's involvement in the project and each of these has been presented as an institutional 'case study'. Each story begins by providing background information about the university and the business organisational unit that is core to the study. This context statement is followed by a summary of the findings of the preliminary staff and student focus groups conducted at each institution. The focus group information was utilised to decide on the appropriate strategy or strategies for enhancing perceptions of quality teaching which could most appropriately be trialled at each institution. Each story continues with an outline of the chosen trial activity or activities and discussion of the implementation. Lessons learnt from the trial activities and suggestions for sustainability of the initiatives are also presented