Gemcitabine and carboplatin in intensively pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer

Background: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are increasingly exposed to anthracyclines and taxanes either during treatment of primary breast cancer or during initial therapy of metastatic disease. The combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin was therefore investigated as an anthracycline- and taxane-free treatment option. Patients and Methods: MBC patients previously treated with chemotherapy were enrolled in a multicenter phase II study. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8) and carboplatin (AUC 4 i.v. on day 1) applied every 3 weeks. Results: Thirty-nine patients were recruited, and a total of 207 treatment cycles were applied with a median of 5 cycles per patient. One complete response and 11 partial responses were observed for an overall response rate of 31% (95% CI: 17-48%). Twelve patients (31%) had stable disease. Median time to progression was 5.3 months (95% CI: 2.6-6.7 months) and median overall survival from start of treatment was 13.2 months (95% CI: 8.7-16.7 months). Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity included leukopenia (59%/5%), thrombo-cytopenia (26%/23%) and anemia (10%/0%). Nonhematological toxicity was rarely severe. Conclusion: Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and carboplatin is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment option for intensively pretreated patients with MBC. Due to a considerable incidence of severe thrombocytopenia it would be reasonable to consider starting gemcitabine at the lower dose level of 800 mg/m(2). Copyright (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

GRADE guidelines 17:Assessing the risk of bias associated with missing participant outcome data in a body of evidence

Objective: To provide GRADE guidance for assessing risk of bias across an entire body of evidence consequent on missing data for systematic reviews of both binary and continuous outcomes. Study Design and Setting: Systematic survey of published methodological research, iterative discussions, testing in systematic reviews, and feedback from the GRADE Working Group. Results: Approaches begin with a primary meta-analysis using a complete case analysis followed by sensitivity meta-analyses imputing, in each study, data for those with missing data, and then pooling across studies. For binary outcomes, we suggest use of "plausible worst case" in which review authors assume that those with missing data in treatment arms have proportionally higher event rates than those followed successfully. For continuous outcomes, imputed mean values come from other studies within the systematic review and the standard deviation (SD) from the median SDs of the control arms of all studies. Conclusions: If the results of the primary meta-analysis are robust to the most extreme assumptions viewed as plausible, one does not rate down certainty in the evidence for risk of bias due to missing participant outcome data. If the results prove not robust to plausible assumptions, one would rate down certainty in the evidence for risk of bias.</p

Gemcitabine and carboplatin in intensively pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer

Background: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are increasingly exposed to anthracyclines and taxanes either during treatment of primary breast cancer or during initial therapy of metastatic disease. The combination of gemcitabine and carboplatin was therefore investigated as an anthracycline- and taxane-free treatment option. Patients and Methods: MBC patients previously treated with chemotherapy were enrolled in a multicenter phase II study. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 1 and 8) and carboplatin (AUC 4 i.v. on day 1) applied every 3 weeks. Results: Thirty-nine patients were recruited, and a total of 207 treatment cycles were applied with a median of 5 cycles per patient. One complete response and 11 partial responses were observed for an overall response rate of 31% (95% CI: 17-48%). Twelve patients (31%) had stable disease. Median time to progression was 5.3 months (95% CI: 2.6-6.7 months) and median overall survival from start of treatment was 13.2 months (95% CI: 8.7-16.7 months). Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity included leukopenia (59%/5%), thrombo-cytopenia (26%/23%) and anemia (10%/0%). Nonhematological toxicity was rarely severe. Conclusion: Combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and carboplatin is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment option for intensively pretreated patients with MBC. Due to a considerable incidence of severe thrombocytopenia it would be reasonable to consider starting gemcitabine at the lower dose level of 800 mg/m(2). Copyright (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries

Background: The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decisionmaking. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent of dissemination bias we conducted a systematic review that determined the proportion of studies published as peerreviewed journal articles and investigated factors associated with full publication in cohorts of studies (i) approved by research ethics committees (RECs) or (ii) included in trial registries. Copyright:Methods and Findings: Four bibliographic databases were searched for methodological research projects (MRPs) without limitations for publication year, language or study location. The searches were supplemented by handsearching the references of included MRPs. We estimated the proportion of studies published using prediction intervals (PI) and a random effects meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were used to express associations between study characteristics and journal publication. Seventeen MRPs (23 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies approved by RECs; the proportion of published studies had a PI between 22% and 72% and the weighted pooled proportion when combining estimates would be 46.2% (95% CI 40.2%-52.4%, I2594.4%). Twenty-two MRPs (22 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies included in trial registries; the PI of the proportion published ranged from 13% to 90% and the weighted pooled proportion would be 54.2% (95% CI 42.0%-65.9%, I2598.9%). REC-approved studies with statistically significant results (compared with those without statistically significant results) were more likely to be published (pooled OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Phase-III trials were also more likely to be published than phase II trials (pooled OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6- 2.5). The probability of publication within two years after study completion ranged from 7% to 30%.Conclusions: A substantial part of the studies approved by RECs or included in trial registries remains unpublished. Due to the large heterogeneity a prediction of the publication probability for a future study is very uncertain. Non-publication of research is not a random process, e.g., it is associated with the direction of study findings. Our findings suggest that the dissemination of research findings is biased

RARE-Bestpractices: a platform for sharing best practices for the management of rare diseases

From 7th European Conference on Rare Diseases and Orphan Products (ECRD 2014).Rare diseases; clinical practice guidelines; recommendations. RARE-Bestpractices (http://www.rarebestpractices.eu) is a 4-year project (2013-2016) funded by the EC FP7. The project aims at improving clinical management of patients with rare diseases (RD) and at narrowing the existing gap in quality of healthcare among countries. Methods: RARE-Bestpractices (http://www.rarebestpractices.eu) involves 9 EU countries, including 15 partners from academic institutions, governmental bodies, patient organizations and networks, which will exploit the added value of integrating different contributions and viewpoints. The platform is developed involving both experts in RD research as well as experts in clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and systematic reviews. Results: Project expected outputs include: 1) identification of challenges to be considered in deriving high quality standards for CPG on RD; 2) transparent procedures and criteria for the evaluation of CPG and their collection in a publicly searchable database; 3) identification of notation criteria to improve user understandability and implementation of CPG; 4) production of mechanisms to assess RD clinical research needs; 5) development of training activities targeted to key stakeholders to disseminate process and tools for developing and evaluating CPG; 6) the publication of a new scientific journal (http://rarejournal.org). Discussion: RARE-Bestpractices addresses the demands from both patients and health care providers for updated and high quality CPG on RD. The project will meet the requirements laid down by to the Directive 2011/24/EU, which endorses EU MS to develop European Reference Networks (ERNs) for RD; in fact, one main criterion for ERNs should be the competence to produce CPG and actively disseminate them among Centers of Expertise.N

fanconi s anemia and other hereditary bone marrow failure syndromes

Inherited bone marrow failure syndromes (IBMFS) are a heterogeneous group of rare blood disorders due to hematopoiesis impairment, with different clinical presentations and pathogenic mechanisms

Predicting negative health outcomes in older general practice patients with chronic illness: Rationale and development of the PROPERmed harmonized individual participant data database.

The prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy increases significantly with age and are associated with negative health consequences. However, most current interventions to optimize medication have failed to show significant effects on patient-relevant outcomes. This may be due to ineffectiveness of interventions themselves but may also reflect other factors: insufficient sample sizes, heterogeneity of population. To address this issue, the international PROPERmed collaboration was set up to obtain/synthesize individual participant data (IPD) from five cluster-randomized trials. The trials took place in Germany and The Netherlands and aimed to optimize medication in older general practice patients with chronic illness. PROPERmed is the first database of IPD to be drawn from multiple trials in this patient population and setting. It offers the opportunity to derive prognostic models with increased statistical power for prediction of patient-relevant outcomes resulting from the interplay of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This may help patients from this heterogeneous group to be stratified according to risk and enable clinicians to identify patients that are likely to benefit most from resource/time-intensive interventions. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the rationale behind PROPERmed collaboration, characteristics of the included studies/participants, development of the harmonized IPD database and challenges faced during this process

Predicting negative health outcomes in older general practice patients with chronic illness: Rationale and development of the PROPERmed harmonized individual participant data database.

The prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy increases significantly with age and are associated with negative health consequences. However, most current interventions to optimize medication have failed to show significant effects on patient-relevant outcomes. This may be due to ineffectiveness of interventions themselves but may also reflect other factors: insufficient sample sizes, heterogeneity of population. To address this issue, the international PROPERmed collaboration was set up to obtain/synthesize individual participant data (IPD) from five cluster-randomized trials. The trials took place in Germany and The Netherlands and aimed to optimize medication in older general practice patients with chronic illness. PROPERmed is the first database of IPD to be drawn from multiple trials in this patient population and setting. It offers the opportunity to derive prognostic models with increased statistical power for prediction of patient-relevant outcomes resulting from the interplay of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This may help patients from this heterogeneous group to be stratified according to risk and enable clinicians to identify patients that are likely to benefit most from resource/time-intensive interventions. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the rationale behind PROPERmed collaboration, characteristics of the included studies/participants, development of the harmonized IPD database and challenges faced during this process

Drug Repurposing: A Systematic Approach to Evaluate Candidate Oral Neuroprotective Interventions for Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis

Objective: To develop and implement an evidence based framework to select, from drugs already licenced, candidate oral neuroprotective drugs to be tested in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Design: Systematic review of clinical studies of oral putative neuroprotective therapies in MS and four other neurodegenerative diseases with shared pathological features, followed by systematic review and meta-analyses of the in vivo experimental data for those interventions. We presented summary data to an international multi-disciplinary committee, which assessed each drug in turn using pre-specified criteria including consideration of mechanism of action. Results: We identified a short list of fifty-two candidate interventions. After review of all clinical and pre-clinical evidence we identified ibudilast, riluzole, amiloride, pirfenidone, fluoxetine, oxcarbazepine, and the polyunsaturated fatty-acid class (Linoleic Acid, Lipoic acid; Omega-3 fatty acid, Max EPA oil) as lead candidates for clinical evaluation. Conclusions: We demonstrate a standardised and systematic approach to candidate identification for drug rescue and repurposing trials that can be applied widely to neurodegenerative disorders