Factors Affecting Blood Pressure Variability: Lessons Learned from Two Systematic Reviews of Randomized Controlled Trials

Systematic reviews can often reveal much more than the original objective of the work. The objectives of this retrospective analysis were to answer three basic questions about blood pressure variability: 1) Does blood pressure entry criterion have an effect on baseline blood pressure variability? 2) Do thiazide diuretics have a significant effect on blood pressure variability? and 3) Does systolic blood pressure vary to the same degree as diastolic blood pressure? This analysis of blood pressure variability is based on resting standardized research setting BP readings from two systematic reviews evaluating blood pressure lowering efficacy of thiazide diuretics from double blind randomized controlled trials in 33,611 patients with primary hypertension. The standard deviation reported in trials was the focus of the research and the unit of analysis. When a threshold systolic or diastolic blood pressure value is used to determine entry into a trial, baseline variability is significantly decreased, systolic from 14.0 to 9.3 mmHg and diastolic from 8.4 to 5.3 mmHg. Thiazides do not change BP variability as the standard deviation and coefficient of variation of systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure did not differ between thiazide and placebo groups at end of treatment. The coefficient of variation of systolic blood pressure was significantly greater than the coefficient of variation of diastolic blood pressure. Entry criterion decreases the baseline blood pressure variability. Treatment with a thiazide diuretic does not affect blood pressure variability. Systolic blood pressure varies to a greater degree than diastolic blood pressure

Phase II, Open-label, Single-arm, Multicenter Study to Assess the Activity and Safety of Alectinib as Neoadjuvant Treatment in Surgically Resectable Stage III ALK-positive NSCLC: ALNEO Trial

Background: Alectinib is a potent anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) which is currently used in the first-line setting of advanced ALK+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Despite favorable results in the metastatic setting, the activity of alectinib in locally-advanced ALK+ NSCLC as a neoadjuvant treatment remains to be assessed. We report the case of a patient with stage IIIA ALK+ NSCLC (cT2aN2) who received alectinib as neoadjuvant treatment, achieving major pathological response (MPR) at pathologic examination. Hence we present the treatment rationale and study design of a phase II, open-label, single-arm, multicenter clinical trial (ALNEO study, EUDRACT number 2020-003432-25). Materials and Methods: Patients with potentially resectable stage III ALK+ NSCLC (any T with N2, T4N0-1) will be registered to receive oral alectinib 600 mg twice daily for 2 cycles of 4 weeks each (8 weeks totally) during the neoadjuvant phase. After definitive surgery, patients will enter in the adjuvant setting, during which they will receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily for 24 cycles (96 weeks). The primary endpoint is MPR, defined as ≤10% residual viable tumor cells histologically detected in the resected primary tumor and all resected lymph nodes after surgery. Secondary endpoints include pathological complete response, objective response, event-free survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, adverse events. Conclusions: Our case report supports the feasibility of alectinib as neoadjuvant treatment. ALNEO study will further explore the activity and safety of this novel treatment strategy

Authors' reply to Lee and colleagues

Non peer reviewe

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Prognostic value of [18F]FDG PET/CT parameters in surgically resected primary lung adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience

Objective: To evaluate the prognostic role of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) measured by FDG–positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) in patients with primary lung adenocarcinoma undergoing surgical resection. Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing curative surgery for primary lung adenocarcinoma at the Thoracic Surgery Unit of the University Hospital of Parma between January 2009 and December 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. The cutoff point of each continuous PET parameter was determined through receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index, using overall survival (OS) as the classification status. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were applied to evaluate the association between OS and potential prognostic variables, including SUVmax, MTV, and TLG. Results: A total of 193 patients were considered eligible for this study. The mean 5-year OS rate was 70.5 ± 3.5%. Acinar and lepidic patterns were more frequently associated with absent or low (<2.5) SUVmax values [18F]FDG uptake. At univariate analysis, male sex, advanced stage, micropapillary and solid pattern, lymphatic, blood vessels and pleural invasion, high SUVmax, MTV, and TLG were significantly associated with poorer OS. Multivariate analyses revealed that only sex, stage, and TLG were independent factors for OS, with male sex, stage 3+4, and high TLG value (p = 0.041) significantly associated with poorer OS. Conclusions: In this study, [18F]FDG PET/CT parameters SUVmax, MTV, and TLG were prognostic factors in patients with surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma, able to predict OS and helping to further stratify these patients into prognostic subsets. Elevated TLG was also an independent predictor for shorter OS