Effect of lower sodium intake on health: systematic review and meta-analyses

Objective To assess the effect of decreased sodium intake on blood pressure, related cardiovascular diseases, and potential adverse effects such as changes in blood lipids, catecholamine levels, and renal function. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Latin American and Caribbean health science literature database, and the reference lists of previous reviews. Study selection Randomised controlled trials and prospective cohort studies in non-acutely ill adults and children assessing the relations between sodium intake and blood pressure, renal function, blood lipids, and catecholamine levels, and in non-acutely ill adults all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Study appraisal and synthesis Potential studies were screened independently and in duplicate and study characteristics and outcomes extracted. When possible we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of lower sodium intake using the inverse variance method and a random effects model. We present results as mean differences or risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals. Results We included 14 cohort studies and five randomised controlled trials reporting all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, stroke, or coronary heart disease; and 37 randomised controlled trials measuring blood pressure, renal function, blood lipids, and catecholamine levels in adults. Nine controlled trials and one cohort study in children reporting on blood pressure were also included. In adults a reduction in sodium intake significantly reduced resting systolic blood pressure by 3.39 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 2.46 to 4.31) and resting diastolic blood pressure by 1.54 mm Hg (0.98 to 2.11). When sodium intake was 0.05). There were insufficient randomised controlled trials to assess the effects of reduced sodium intake on mortality and morbidity. The associations in cohort studies between sodium intake and all cause mortality, incident fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease, and coronary heart disease were non-significant (P>0.05). Increased sodium intake was associated with an increased risk of stroke (risk ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.43), stroke mortality (1.63, 1.27 to 2.10), and coronary heart disease mortality (1.32, 1.13 to 1.53). In children, a reduction in sodium intake significantly reduced systolic blood pressure by 0.84 mm Hg (0.25 to 1.43) and diastolic blood pressure by 0.87 mm Hg (0.14 to 1.60). Conclusions High quality evidence in non-acutely ill adults shows that reduced sodium intake reduces blood pressure and has no adverse effect on blood lipids, catecholamine levels, or renal function, and moderate quality evidence in children shows that a reduction in sodium intake reduces blood pressure. Lower sodium intake is also associated with a reduced risk of stroke and fatal coronary heart disease in adults. The totality of evidence suggests that most people will likely benefit from reducing sodium intake

How Psychiatry Journals Support the Unbiased Translation of Clinical Research. A Cross-Sectional Study of Editorial Policies

Introduction: Reporting guidelines (e. g. CONSORT) have been developed as tools to improve quality and reduce bias in reporting research findings. Trial registration has been recommended for countering selective publication. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) encourages the implementation of reporting guidelines and trial registration as uniform requirements (URM). For the last two decades, however, biased reporting and insufficient registration of clinical trials has been identified in several literature reviews and other investigations. No study has so far investigated the extent to which author instructions in psychiatry journals encourage following reporting guidelines and trial registration. Method: Psychiatry Journals were identified from the 2011 Journal Citation Report. Information given in the author instructions and during the submission procedure of all journals was assessed on whether major reporting guidelines, trial registration and the ICMJE's URM in general were mentioned and adherence recommended. Results: We included 123 psychiatry journals (English and German language) in our analysis. A minority recommend or require 1) following the URM (21%), 2) adherence to reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE (23%, 7%, 4%), or 3) registration of clinical trials (34%). The subsample of the top-10 psychiatry journals (ranked by impact factor) provided much better but still improvable rates. For example, 70% of the top-10 psychiatry journals do not ask for the specific trial registration number. Discussion: Under the assumption that better reported and better registered clinical research that does not lack substantial information will improve the understanding, credibility, and unbiased translation of clinical research findings, several stakeholders including readers (physicians, patients), authors, reviewers, and editors might benefit from improved author instructions in psychiatry journals. A first step of improvement would consist in requiring adherence to the broadly accepted reporting guidelines and to trial registration

Kamele und Zucker . Transsahara-Handel zwischen Tschad und Libyen

Karawanenwege durchzogen und durchziehen seit Jahrhunderten die Sahara. Die vorliegende Arbeit zielt darauf ab, den gegenwärtigen, überregionalen Transsahara-Handel in der Region der heutigen Länder Tschad, Sudan und Libyen zu beschreiben und darzustellen. Ausgehend von der historischen Wadai-Benghazi-Route, ihren Entwicklungen und den Veränderungen in den letzten einhundert Jahren besteht das Ziel der Arbeit in der Ergründung der sozioökonomischen Situation Anfang des 21. Jahrhunderts. In der Untersuchung dieser Frage wurde deutlich, dass die heutige Form der Handelsverbindung primär das Resultat von soziopolitischen Netzwerken ist und damit Ähnlichkeit zu historischen Handelsverbindungen aufzeigt. In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden historische, ökologische, politische und wirtschaftliche Hintergründe für die Etablierung der neuen Händlerelite der Zaghawa aufgezeigt, die es verstand, neue Handelsnetzwerke zu knüpfen, bestehende Verbindungen neu zu beleben und weiter zu entwickeln, so dass sich dadurch neue Formen von wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen und zuletzt auch neue Wegstrecken ergeben konnten. Die Untersuchungen im unmittelbaren Umfeld von dem Darfur-Konflikt zeigten deutlich auf, wie stark überregionale Handelsgeschäfte an politische Faktoren geknüpft sind und wie wichtig es ist, Handelsverbindungen den aktuellen Veränderungen unmittelbar und flexibel anzupassen. Der Schwerpunkt der Arbeit liegt auf einer detaillierten, ethnographischen Beschreibung der notwendigen Vorbereitungen, der Organisation, der Durchführung und der Abläufe innerhalb des gegenwärtigen, überregionalen Kamelhandels sowie den Kommunikationssträngen, den Schwierigkeiten und den Chancen innerhalb des Handelsgeschäftes. Das Kamel, das in den letzten Jahren eine Transformation von einem Transportmittel zur gehandelten Ware durchlaufen hat, ist in dem überregionalen Handel zwischen Tschad und Libyen weiterhin ein wichtiger Bestandteil. Im zweiten Teil der Arbeit wird die Bedeutung des Zuckers als Handelsgut (als zweite wichtige Ware neben dem Handelsgut Kamel) für die einzelnen Haushalte, die Gesellschaft und den Markt untersucht. Anhand einer ausführlichen Marktanalyse des tschadischen Marktes Tiné zeigt sich die Bedeutsamkeit dieses Handelsgutes sogar anhand der Marktstruktur, so dass abschließend der Frage nachgegangen wird, wie die Handelswaren Kamele und Zucker, die hier vornehmlich gegen einander getauscht werden, im Verhältnis zueinander stehen und welche Wichtigkeit sie für diese Region besitzen. Die Arbeit beruht auf einer insgesamt 20-monatigen ethnologischen Feldforschung im Tschad, im Sudan und in Libyen, die zwischen 2003 und 2007 durchgeführt wurde. In sechs Feldaufenthalten sowie bei der Begleitung von zwei überregionalen Karawanen wurden quantitative sowie qualitative Daten erhoben

Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase III Study of Weekly versus Standard Docetaxel plus Doxorubicin (D4) for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose: Previous phase II studies have indicated a greatly reduced hematotoxicity of docetaxel-based regimens administered on weekly schedules. The present trial was initiated to compare the toxicity and efficacy of weekly docetaxel versus its standard 3-weekly application in combination with doxorubicin. Methods: Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease were recruited. Inclusion criteria were age = grade 3 was observed in the standard arm of the D4 study compared to the weekly schedule (per-patient analysis: 61.9% q3w vs. 65.1% q1w; p > 0.05). Grade 3 and grade 4 fever, diarrhea, and infections occurred more frequently in the standard arm, whereas neurotoxicity and skin/nail disorders were observed more frequently in the weekly arm. Except for fever, none of these differences reached a level of significance. Dose delays, dose reductions, and the rate of omitted doses were increased in the weekly arm. The overall response rate was 44.2% in the weekly arm compared to 52.4% in the standard arm (p = 0.52). Time to progression was 6.2 (q1w) versus 10.3 (q3w) months (p = 0.36), and overall survival was 20.5 (q1w) versus 28.7 (q3w) months (p = 0.98). Conclusion: The present data support the feasibility of both weekly and 3-weekly application of docetaxel in combination with doxorubicin. Nevertheless, given that leukopenia was similar in both arms and the efficacy parameters were at least numerically inferior with the weekly schedule, standard 3-weekly application seems to be preferable for patients requiring combination chemotherapy. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Base

Prospective Multicenter Randomized Phase III Study of Weekly versus Standard Docetaxel (D2) for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

Purpose: Previous phase II studies have indicated a greatly reduced hematotoxicity of docetaxel-based regimens administered on weekly schedules. The present trial was initiated to randomly compare the toxicity and efficacy of weekly docetaxel versus its standard 3-weekly application. Methods: Patients previously untreated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease were recruited. Patients aged >60 years or with a Karnofsky Perfomance Status (KPS) of 60-80% were eligible for the D2 study. Patients were randomized to receive docetaxel either on a 3-weekly {[}75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (q3w)] or on a weekly (30 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15; q4w) schedule. Treatment was continued until a maximum of 8 cycles, unacceptable toxicity, or disease progression. All patients received standard corticosteroid prophylaxis. Results: Since statistical significance for the primary endpoint (toxicity) was achieved in the interim analysis, the study was closed according to the study protocol (102 of 162 patients). Compared to the standard arm, leukopenia >= grade 3 was a rare event in the weekly arm of the D2 study (per-patient analysis: 4.2% q1w vs. 51.9% q3w; p < 0.0001). No difference was observed between the 2 schedules regarding the occurrence of anemia or thrombocytopenia. With regard to non-hematological toxicity, there was a higher incidence of skin/nail and hepatological toxicity with the weekly schedule, whereas neurotoxicity was observed more often in the standard arm. The rate of omitted doses was significantly increased in the weekly arm (8.6% q1w vs. 0% q3w). The overall response rate was 22.9% in the weekly arm compared to 42.6% in the standard arm (p = 0.039). Time to progression was 5.4 (q1w) versus 6.3 (q3w) months (p = 0.91), and overall survival was 22.7 (q1w) versus 15.8 (q3w) months (p = 0.24). Conclusion: The present data support the feasibility of both weekly and 3-weekly application of docetaxel. As expected, severe leukopenia seems avoidable in weekly scheduled single-agent docetaxel and may serve as an important treatment option, particularly in elderly patients and patients with a reduced performance status. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Base

Scientific value of systematic reviews: survey of editors of core clinical journals.

BACKGROUND: Synthesizing research evidence using systematic and rigorous methods has become a key feature of evidence-based medicine and knowledge translation. Systematic reviews (SRs) may or may not include a meta-analysis depending on the suitability of available data. They are often being criticised as 'secondary research' and denied the status of original research. Scientific journals play an important role in the publication process. How they appraise a given type of research influences the status of that research in the scientific community. We investigated the attitudes of editors of core clinical journals towards SRs and their value for publication.¦METHODS: We identified the 118 journals labelled as "core clinical journals" by the National Library of Medicine, USA in April 2009. The journals' editors were surveyed by email in 2009 and asked whether they considered SRs as original research projects; whether they published SRs; and for which section of the journal they would consider a SR manuscript.¦RESULTS: The editors of 65 journals (55%) responded. Most respondents considered SRs to be original research (71%) and almost all journals (93%) published SRs. Several editors regarded the use of Cochrane methodology or a meta-analysis as quality criteria; for some respondents these criteria were premises for the consideration of SRs as original research. Journals placed SRs in various sections such as "Review" or "Feature article". Characterization of non-responding journals showed that about two thirds do publish systematic reviews.¦DISCUSSION: Currently, the editors of most core clinical journals consider SRs original research. Our findings are limited by a non-responder rate of 45%. Individual comments suggest that this is a grey area and attitudes differ widely. A debate about the definition of 'original research' in the context of SRs is warranted

Tamoxifen for the management of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Tamoxifen has emerged as a potential management option for gynecomastia and breast pain due to non-steroidal antiandrogens, and it is considered an alternative to surgery or radiotherapy. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the benefits and harms of tamoxifen, in comparison to other treatment options, for either the prophylaxis or treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in prostate cancer patients. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists, the abstracts of three major conferences and three trial registers to identify ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two authors independently screened the articles identified, assessed the trial quality and extracted data. The protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42011001320; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO). RESULTS: Four studies were identified. Tamoxifen significantly reduced the risk of suffering from gynecomastia (risk ratio 9RR0 0.10, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.22) or breast pain (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17) at six months compared to untreated controls. Tamoxifen also showed a significant benefit for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58) and breast pain (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.64) when compared to anastrozole after a median of 12 months. One study showed a significant benefit of tamoxifen for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.65) and breast pain (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.65) when compared with radiotherapy at six months. Radiotherapy increased the risk of suffering from nipple erythema and skin irritation, but there were no significant differences for any other adverse events (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The currently available evidence suggests good efficacy of tamoxifen for the prevention and treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens. The impact of tamoxifen therapy on long-term adverse events, disease progression and survival remains unclear. Further large, well-designed RCTs, including long-term follow-ups, are warranted. Also, the optimal dose needs to be clarified

PRECEPT: an evidence assessment framework for infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control

Decisions in public health should be based on the best available evidence, reviewed and appraised using a rigorous and transparent methodology. The Project on a Framework for Rating Evidence in Public Health (PRECEPT) defined a methodology for evaluating and grading evidence in infectious disease epidemiology, prevention and control that takes different domains and question types into consideration. The methodology rates evidence in four domains: disease burden, risk factors, diagnostics and intervention. The framework guiding it has four steps going from overarching questions to an evidence statement. In step 1, approaches for identifying relevant key areas and developing specific questions to guide systematic evidence searches are described. In step 2, methodological guidance for conducting systematic reviews is provided; 15 study quality appraisal tools are proposed and an algorithm is given for matching a given study design with a tool. In step 3, a standardised evidence-grading scheme using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology is provided, whereby findings are documented in evidence profiles. Step 4 consists of preparing a narrative evidence summary. Users of this framework should be able to evaluate and grade scientific evidence from the four domains in a transparent and reproducible way.Funding Agencies|European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) [2012/040, 2014/008]</p