Comparative Effectiveness of Oxaliplatin vs Non–Oxaliplatin-containing Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage III Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND: The addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) improves survival of patients with stage III colon cancer in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). However, RCT participants are younger, healthier, and less racially diverse than the general cancer population. Thus, the benefit of oxaliplatin outside RCTs is uncertain. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients younger than 75 years with stage III colon cancer who received chemotherapy within 120 days of surgical resection were identified from five observational data sources—the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry linked to Medicare claims (SEER–Medicare), the New York State Cancer Registry (NYSCR) linked to Medicaid and Medicare claims, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Outcomes Database, and the Cancer Care Outcomes Research & Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS). Overall survival (OS) was compared among patients treated with oxaliplatin vs non–oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall survival for 4060 patients diagnosed during 2004–2009 was compared with pooled data from five RCTs (the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoinTs [ACCENT] group, n = 8292). Datasets were juxtaposed but not combined using Kaplan–Meier curves. Covariate and propensity score adjusted proportional hazards models were used to calculate adjusted survival hazard ratios (HR). Stratified analyses examined effect modifiers. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The survival advantage associated with the addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant 5-FU was evident across diverse practice settings (3-year OS: RCTs, 86% [n = 1273]; SEER–Medicare, 80% [n = 1152]; CanCORS, 88% [n = 129]; NYSCR–Medicaid, 82% [n = 54]; NYSCR–Medicare, 79% [n = 180]; and NCCN, 86% [n = 438]). A statistically significant improvement in 3-year overall survival was seen in the largest cohort, SEER–Medicare, and in the NYSCR–Medicare cohort (non–oxaliplatin-containing vs oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant therapy, adjusted HR of death: pooled RCTs: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.92, P = .002; SEER–Medicare: HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.82, P < .001; NYSCR–Medicare patients aged ≥65 years: HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.90, P = .02). The association between oxaliplatin treatment and better survival was maintained in older and minority group patients, as well as those with higher comorbidity. CONCLUSION: The addition of oxaliplatin to 5-FU appears to be associated with better survival among patients receiving adjuvant colon cancer treatment in the community

Estabilização segmentar da coluna lombar nas lombalgias: uma revisão bibliográfica e um programa de exercícios

No tratamento de lombalgias, exercícios tradicionais de fortalecimento dos músculos abdominais e extensores do tronco têm sido alvo de críticas por submeter a coluna vertebral a altas cargas de trabalho, aumentando o risco de nova lesão. Estudos recentes comprovam a eficácia da estabilização segmentar como tratamento para a lombalgia, sendo menos lesiva por ser realizada em posição neutra. Pesquisas sugerem que, sem a ativação correta dos estabilizadores profundos do tronco, as recidivas do quadro álgico são notadas com muita freqüência. Este estudo procedeu à revisão da literatura sobre o tratamento das lombalgias mediante estabilização da coluna e propõe exercícios para seu tratamento baseados na estabilização segmentar lombar. Na base PubMed, por meio dos descritores estabilização lombar, multífido lombar, transverso do abdome e os equivalentes em inglês, foram selecionados 47 artigos e livros publicados entre 1984 e 2006. A literatura estabelece um elo entre lombalgia e escasso controle dos músculos profundos do tronco, em especial o multífido lombar e o transverso do abdome; estudos também indicam os músculos quadrado lombar e diafragma como estabilizadores lombares. Propõem-se assim exercícios de contrações isométricas sincronizadas, sutis e específicas, que atuam diretamente no alívio da dor por meio do aumento da estabilidade do segmento vertebral.When treating low-back pain, traditional exercises for strengthening abdomen and trunk erector muscles have been criticised for their submitting spinal structures to high loads, thereby increasing the risk of new injury. Recent studies have pointed to the effectiveness of segmental stabilisation in treating low-back pain, less damaging since it is done in neutral position. Current research suggests that, unless the trunk deep stabilizers are correctly activated, recurrence of pain is more often noticed. This is a review of 47 articles and books published between 1984 and 2006, resulting from a search in PubMed database by means of key words lumbar stabilization, lumbar multifidus and transversus abdominis muscles. Literature has established a link between low-back pain and poor control of deep trunk muscles, particularly the lumbar multifidus and transversus abdominis muscles; some studies also point out the quadratus lumborum and diaphragm muscles as lumbar stabilizers. By drawing on the reviewed material, we suggest exercises of subtle and specific synchronized isometric contractions for these lumbar stabilisers, which act directly upon pain relief by increasing lumbar spine stability

Racial, ethnic, and affluence differences in elderly patients' use of teaching hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the role of race, ethnicity, and affluence in elderly patients' use of teaching hospitals when they have that option. METHODS: Using a novel data set of 787,587 Medicare patients newly diagnosed with serious illness in 1993, we look at how sociodemographic factors influence whether patients use a teaching hospital for their initial hospitalization for their disease. We use hierarchical linear models to take into account differences in the availability of teaching hospitals to different groups. These models look within groups of people who live in the same county and ask what demographic factors make an individual within that county more or less likely to use a teaching hospital. RESULTS: We find that blacks are much more likely than whites to use teaching hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 1.75; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.73 to 1.77). However, Hispanics and Asian-Americans are less likely to use teaching hospitals than are whites (Hispanic OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.97; Asian-American OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.97). Medicaid patients are less likely to use teaching hospitals (given their opportunities) than are non-Medicaid recipients (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90 to 0.92). And we find a curvilinear relationship with affluence, with those in the poorest and those in the wealthiest neighborhoods most likely to use a teaching hospital. CONCLUSION: The use of teaching hospitals is more complex that heretofore appreciated. Understanding why some groups do not go to teaching hospitals could be important for the health of those groups and of teaching hospitals.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61409/1/02.I.Farr.Christakis.JGIM.pd