433 research outputs found

    Reporting of harm in randomized controlled trials evaluating stents for percutaneous coronary intervention

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this study was to assess the reporting of harm in randomized controlled trials evaluating stents for percutaneous coronary intervention.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study design was a methodological systematic review of randomized controlled trials. The data sources were MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All reports of randomized controlled trials assessing stent treatment for coronary disease published between January 1, 2003, and September 30, 2008 were selected.</p> <p>A standardized abstraction form was used to extract data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>132 articles were analyzed. Major cardiac adverse events (death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stroke) were reported as primary or secondary outcomes in 107 reports (81%). However, 19% of the articles contained no data on cardiac events. The mode of data collection of adverse events was given in 29 reports (22%) and a definition of expected adverse events was provided in 47 (36%). The length of follow-up was reported in 95 reports (72%). Assessment of adverse events by an adjudication committee was described in 46 reports (35%), and adverse events were described as being followed up for 6 months in 24% of reports (n = 32), between 7 to 12 months in 42% (n = 55) and for more than 1 year in 4% (n = 5). In 115 reports (87%), numerical data on the nature of the adverse events were reported per treatment arm. Procedural complications were described in 30 articles (23%). The causality of adverse events was reported in only 4 articles.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Several harm-related data were not adequately accounted for in articles of randomized controlled trials assessing stents for percutaneous coronary intervention.</p> <p>Trials Registration</p> <p>Trials manuscript: 5534201182098351 (T80802P)</p

    Association of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with morbidity and mortality in patients with peripheral artery disease: insights from the EUCLID trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are at increased risk of developing lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) and suffering PAD-related morbidity and mortality. However, the effect and burden of COPD on patients with PAD is less well defined. This post hoc analysis from EUCLID aimed to analyze the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE) in patients with PAD and concomitant COPD compared with those without COPD, and to describe the adverse events specific to patients with COPD. Methods: EUCLID randomized 13,885 patients with symptomatic PAD to monotherapy with either ticagrelor or clopidogrel for the prevention of MACE. In this analysis, MACE, MALE, mortality, and adverse events were compared between groups with and without COPD using unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Of the 13,883 patients with COPD status available at baseline, 11% (n=1538) had COPD. Patients with COPD had a higher risk of MACE (6.02 vs 4.29 events/100 patient-years; p< 0.001) due to a significantly higher risk of myocardial infarction (MI) (3.55 vs 1.85 events/100 patient-years; p< 0.001) when compared with patients without COPD. These risks persisted after adjustment (MACE: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11– 1.52; p< 0.001; MI: aHR 1.45, 95% CI 1.18– 1.77; p< 0.001). However, patients with COPD did not have an increased risk of MALE or major bleeding. Patients with COPD were more frequently hospitalized for dyspnea and pneumonia (2.66 vs 0.9 events/100 patient-years; aHR 2.77, 95% CI 2.12– 3.63; p< 0.001) and more frequently discontinued study drug prematurely (19.36 vs 12.54 events/100 patient-years; p< 0.001; aHR 1.34, 95% CI 1.22– 1.47; p< 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with comorbid PAD and COPD, the risks of MACE, respiratory-related adverse events, and premature study drug discontinuation were higher when compared with patients without COPD. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01732822

    Potential health impacts of heavy metals on HIV-infected population in USA.

    Get PDF
    Noninfectious comorbidities such as cardiovascular diseases have become increasingly prevalent and occur earlier in life in persons with HIV infection. Despite the emerging body of literature linking environmental exposures to chronic disease outcomes in the general population, the impacts of environmental exposures have received little attention in HIV-infected population. The aim of this study is to investigate whether individuals living with HIV have elevated prevalence of heavy metals compared to non-HIV infected individuals in United States. We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2010 to compare exposures to heavy metals including cadmium, lead, and total mercury in HIV infected and non-HIV infected subjects. In this cross-sectional study, we found that HIV-infected individuals had higher concentrations of all heavy metals than the non-HIV infected group. In a multivariate linear regression model, HIV status was significantly associated with increased blood cadmium (p=0.03) after adjusting for age, sex, race, education, poverty income ratio, and smoking. However, HIV status was not statistically associated with lead or mercury levels after adjusting for the same covariates. Our findings suggest that HIV-infected patients might be significantly more exposed to cadmium compared to non-HIV infected individuals which could contribute to higher prevalence of chronic diseases among HIV-infected subjects. Further research is warranted to identify sources of exposure and to understand more about specific health outcomes

    Enabled plays key roles in embryonic epithelial morphogenesis in Drosophila

    Get PDF
    Studies in cultured cells and in vitro have identified many actin regulators and begun to define their mechanisms of action. Among these are Enabled (Ena)/VASP proteins, anti-Capping proteins that influence fibroblast migration, growth cone motility, and keratinocyte cell adhesion in vitro. However, partially redundant family members in mammals and maternal Ena contribution i

    Systematic adjudication of myocardial infarction end-points in an international clinical trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Clinical events committees (CEC) are used routinely to adjudicate suspected end-points in cardiovascular trials, but little information has been published about the various processes used. We reviewed results of the CEC process used to identify and adjudicate suspected end-point (post-enrolment) myocardial infarction (MI) in the large Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (Eptifibatide) Therapy (PURSUIT) trial. METHODS: The PURSUIT trial randomised 10,948 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive eptifibatide or placebo. A central adjudication process was established prospectively to identify all suspected MIs and adjudicate events based on protocol definitions of MI. Suspected MIs were identified by systematic review of data collection forms, cardiac enzyme results, and electrocardiograms. Two physicians independently reviewed all suspected events. If they disagreed whether a MI had occurred, a committee of cardiologists adjudicated the case. RESULTS: The CEC identified 5005 patients with suspected infarction (46%), of which 1415 (28%) were adjudicated as end-point infarctions. As expected, the process identified more end-point events than did the site investigators. Absolute and relative treatment effects of eptifibatide were smaller when using CEC-determined MI rates rather than site investigator-determined rates. The site-investigator reporting of MI and the CEC assessment of MI disagreed in 20% of the cases reviewed by the CEC. CONCLUSIONS: End-point adjudication by a CEC is important, to provide standardised, systematic, independent, and unbiased assessment of end-points, particularly in trials that span geographic regions and clinical practice settings. Understanding the CEC process used is important in the interpretation of trial results and event rates

    Disagreements between central clinical events committee and site investigator assessments of myocardial infarction endpoints in an international clinical trial: review of the PURSUIT study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Limited information has been published regarding how specific processes for event adjudication can affect event rates in trials. We reviewed nonfatal myocardial infarctions (MIs) reported by site investigators in the international Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (Eptifibatide) Therapy (PURSUIT) trial and those adjudicated by a central clinical events committee (CEC) to determine the reasons for differences in event rates. METHODS: The PURSUIT trial randomised 10,948 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive eptifibatide or placebo. The primary end-point was death or post-enrolment MI at 30 days as assessed by the CEC; this end-point was also constructed using site-reported events. The CEC identified suspected MIs by systematic review of clinical, cardiac enzyme, and electrocardiographic data. RESULTS: The CEC identified 5005 (46%) suspected events, of which 1415 (28%) were adjudicated as MI. The site investigator and CEC assessments of whether a MI had occurred disagreed in 983 (20%) of the 5005 patients with suspected MI, mostly reflecting site misclassification of post-enrolment MIs (as enrolment MIs) or underreported periprocedural MIs. Patients for whom the CEC and site investigator agreed that no end-point MI had occurred had the lowest mortality at 30 days and between 30 days and 6 months, and those with agreement that a MI had occurred had the highest mortality. CONCLUSION: CEC adjudication provides a standard, systematic, independent, and unbiased assessment of end-points, particularly for trials that span geographic regions and clinical practice settings. Understanding the review process and reasons for disagreement between CEC and site investigator assessments of MI is important to design future trials and interpret event rates between trials
    • …
    corecore