Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular risk in the PROspective study of pravastatin in the elderly at risk (PROSPER)

Variability in blood pressure predicts cardiovascular disease in young- and middle-aged subjects, but relevant data for older individuals are sparse. We analysed data from the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER) study of 5804 participants aged 70–82 years with a history of, or risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure (standard deviation) was determined using a minimum of five measurements over 1 year; an inception cohort of 4819 subjects had subsequent in-trial 3 years follow-up; longer-term follow-up (mean 7.1 years) was available for 1808 subjects. Higher systolic blood pressure variability independently predicted long-term follow-up vascular and total mortality (hazard ratio per 5 mmHg increase in standard deviation of systolic blood pressure = 1.2, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.4; hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.2, respectively). Variability in diastolic blood pressure associated with increased risk for coronary events (hazard ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.2–1.8 for each 5 mmHg increase), heart failure hospitalisation (hazard ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.8) and vascular (hazard ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.7) and total mortality (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1–1.5), all in long-term follow-up. Pulse pressure variability was associated with increased stroke risk (hazard ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 1.0–1.4 for each 5 mmHg increase), vascular mortality (hazard ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 1.0–1.3) and total mortality (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 1.0–1.2), all in long-term follow-up. All associations were independent of respective mean blood pressure levels, age, gender, in-trial treatment group (pravastatin or placebo) and prior vascular disease and cardiovascular disease risk factors. Our observations suggest variability in diastolic blood pressure is more strongly associated with vascular or total mortality than is systolic pressure variability in older high-risk subjects

GALA:an international multicentre randomised trial comparing general anaesthesia versus local anaesthesia for carotid surgery

BACKGROUND: Patients who have severe narrowing at or near the origin of the internal carotid artery as a result of atherosclerosis have a high risk of ischaemic stroke ipsilateral to the arterial lesion. Previous trials have shown that carotid endarterectomy improves long-term outcomes, particularly when performed soon after a prior transient ischaemic attack or mild ischaemic stroke. However, complications may occur during or soon after surgery, the most serious of which is stroke, which can be fatal. It has been suggested that performing the operation under local anaesthesia, rather than general anaesthesia, may be safer. Therefore, a prospective, randomised trial of local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy was proposed to determine whether type of anaesthesia influences peri-operative morbidity and mortality, quality of life and longer term outcome in terms of stroke-free survival. METHODS/DESIGN: A two-arm, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial with a recruitment target of 5000 patients. For entry into the study, in the opinion of the responsible clinician, the patient requiring an endarterectomy must be suitable for either local or general anaesthesia, and have no clear indication for either type. All patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic internal carotid stenosis for whom open surgery is advised are eligible. There is no upper age limit. Exclusion criteria are: no informed consent; definite preference for local or general anaesthetic by the clinician or patient; patient unlikely to be able to co-operate with awake testing during local anaesthesia; patient requiring simultaneous bilateral carotid endarterectomy; carotid endarterectomy combined with another operation such as coronary bypass surgery; and, the patient has been randomised into the trial previously. Patients are randomised to local or general anaesthesia by the central trial office. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients alive, stroke free (including retinal infarction) and without myocardial infarction 30 days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients alive and stroke free at one year; health related quality of life at 30 days; surgical adverse events, re-operation and re-admission rates; the relative cost of the two methods of anaesthesia; length of stay and intensive and high dependency bed occupancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00525237

Development of the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (Strond) Checklist: A Guideline for the Reporting of Incidence and Prevalence Studies in Neuroepidemiology

Background: Incidence and prevalence studies of neurologic disorders play an important role in assessing the burden of disease and planning services. However, the assessment of disease estimates is hindered by problems in reporting for such studies. Despite a growth in published reports, existing guidelines relate to analytical rather than descriptive epidemiologic studies. There are also no user-friendly tools (e.g., checklists) available for authors, editors, and peer reviewers to facilitate best practice in reporting of descriptive epidemiologic studies for most neurologic disorders. Objective: The Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) is a guideline that consists of recommendations and a checklist to facilitate better reporting of published incidence and prevalence studies of neurologic disorders. Methods: A review of previously developed guidance was used to produce a list of items required for incidence and prevalence studies in neurology. A 3-round Delphi technique was used to identify the “basic minimum items” important for reporting, as well as some additional “ideal reporting items.” An e-consultation process was then used in order to gauge opinion by external neuroepidemiologic experts on the appropriateness of the items included in the checklist. Findings: Of 38 candidate items, 15 items and accompanying recommendations were developed along with a user-friendly checklist. Conclusions: The introduction and use of the STROND checklist should lead to more consistent, transparent, and contextualized reporting of descriptive neuroepidemiologic studies resulting in more applicable and comparable findings and ultimately support better health care decisions

Individualised benefit-harm balance of aspirin as primary prevention measure - a good proof-of-concept, but could have been better ...

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made

Exploring haemodynamics of haemodialysis using extrema points analysis model

Background: Haemodialysis is a form of renal replacement therapy used to treat patients with end stage renal failure. It is becoming more appreciated that haemodialysis patients exhibit higher rates of multiple end organ damage compared to the general population. There is also a strong emerging evidence that haemodialysis itself causes circulatory stress. We aimed at examining haemodynamic patterns during haemodialysis using a new model and test that model against a normal control. Methods: We hypothesised that blood pressures generated by each heart beat constantly vary between local peaks and troughs (local extrema), the frequency and amplitude of which is regulated to maintain optimal organ perfusion. We also hypothesised that such model could reveal multiple haemodynamic aberrations during HD. Using a non-invasive cardiac output monitoring device (Finometer®) we compared various haemodynamic parameters using the above model between a haemodialysis patient during a dialysis session and an exercised normal control after comparison at rest. Results: Measurements yielded 29,751 data points for each haemodynamic parameter. Extrema points frequency of mean arterial blood pressure was higher in the HD subject compared to the normal control (0.761Hz IQR 0.5-0.818 vs 0.468Hz IQR 0.223-0.872, P < 0.0001). Similarly, extrema points frequency of systolic blood pressure was significantly higher in haemodialysis compared to normal. In contrary, the frequency of extrema points for TPR was higher in the normal control compared to HD (0.947 IQR 0.520-1.512 vs 0.845 IQR 0.730-1.569, P < 0.0001) with significantly higher amplitudes. Conclusion: Haemodialysis patients potentially exhibit an aberrant haemodynamic behaviour characterised by higher extrema frequencies of mean arterial blood pressure and lower extrema frequencies of total peripheral resistance. This, in theory, could lead to higher variation in organ perfusion and may be detrimental to vulnerable vascular beds

Against pragmatism: on efficacy, effectiveness and the real world

Explanatory and pragmatic trials represent ends of a continuum of attitudes about clinical trial design. Recent literature argues that pragmatic trials are more informative about clinical care in the real world. Although there is place for more pragmatic studies to inform clinical practice and health policy decision-making, we are concerned that it is generally under-appreciated that extrapolating the results of broadly inclusive pragmatic trials to the care of real patients may often be as problematic as extrapolating the results of narrowly focused explanatory or efficacy trials. Simplistic interpretation of pragmatic trials runs the risk of driving harmful policies

Methodological criteria for the assessment of moderators in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials : a consensus study

Background: Current methodological guidelines provide advice about the assessment of sub-group analysis within RCTs, but do not specify explicit criteria for assessment. Our objective was to provide researchers with a set of criteria that will facilitate the grading of evidence for moderators, in systematic reviews. Method: We developed a set of criteria from methodological manuscripts (n = 18) using snowballing technique, and electronic database searches. Criteria were reviewed by an international Delphi panel (n = 21), comprising authors who have published methodological papers in this area, and researchers who have been active in the study of sub-group analysis in RCTs. We used the Research ANd Development/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness method to assess consensus on the quantitative data. Free responses were coded for consensus and disagreement. In a subsequent round additional criteria were extracted from the Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook, and the process was repeated. Results: The recommendations are that meta-analysts report both confirmatory and exploratory findings for subgroups analysis. Confirmatory findings must only come from studies in which a specific theory/evidence based apriori statement is made. Exploratory findings may be used to inform future/subsequent trials. However, for inclusion in the meta-analysis of moderators, the following additional criteria should be applied to each study: Baseline factors should be measured prior to randomisation, measurement of baseline factors should be of adequate reliability and validity, and a specific test of the interaction between baseline factors and interventions must be presented. Conclusions: There is consensus from a group of 21 international experts that methodological criteria to assess moderators within systematic reviews of RCTs is both timely and necessary. The consensus from the experts resulted in five criteria divided into two groups when synthesising evidence: confirmatory findings to support hypotheses about moderators and exploratory findings to inform future research. These recommendations are discussed in reference to previous recommendations for evaluating and reporting moderator studies

Statistical analysis plan for the ‘Triple Antiplatelets for Reducing Dependency after Ischaemic Stroke’ (TARDIS) trial

Rationale: Antiplatelet agents such as aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole are effective in reducing the risk of recurrence after a stroke. Importantly, the risk of recurrence is highest immediately after the index event while antiplatelets cause bleeding. Aims and/or hypothesis: The ‘Triple Antiplatelets for Reducing Dependency after Ischaemic Stroke’ (TARDIS) trial is testing whether short-term intensive antiplatelet therapy is safe and effective in reducing the early risk of recurrence as compared with standard guideline-based therapy. Design: TARDIS is an international multi-center prospective randomized open-label blinded–end-point trial, with funding from the UK Health Technology Assessment program. Patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack are randomized within 48 h to intensive/triple antiplatelet therapy or guideline antiplatelets taken for one-month. Patients or relatives give written informed (proxy) consent and all sites have research ethics approval. Analyses will be done by intention-to-treat. Study Outcome: The primary outcome is shift in stroke recurrent events and their severity, assessed using the modified Rankin Scale, at three-months. Discussion: This paper and attachment describe the trial’s statistical analysis plan, as developed from the protocol during recruitment and prior to unblinding of data. The statistical analysis plan contains design and methods for analyses, and unpopulated tables and figures for the primary and baseline publications. The data from the trial will provide the first large-scale randomized evidence for the use of intensive antiplatelet therapy for preventing recurrence after acute stroke and transient ischemic attack

Utilization of a deoxynucleoside diphosphate substrate by HIV reverse transcriptase

Background: Deoxynucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs) are the normal substrates for DNA sysnthesis is catalyzed by polymerases such as HIV-1 reverse transcriptase (RT). However, substantial amounts of deoxynucleoside diphosphates (dNDPs) are also present in the cell. Use of dNDPs in HIV-1 DNA sysnthesis could have significant implications for the efficacy of nucleoside RT inhibitors such as AZT which are first line therapeutics fro treatment of HIV infection. Our earlier work on HIV-1 reverse transcriptase (RT) suggested that the interaction between the γ phosphate of the incoming dNTP and RT residue K65 in the active site is not essential for dNTP insertion, implying that this polymerase may be able to insert dNPs in addition to dNTPs. Methodology/Principal Findings: We examined the ability of recombinant wild type (wt) and mutant RTs with substitutions at residue K65 to utilize a dNDP substrate in primer extension reactions. We found that wild type HIV-1 RT indeed catalyzes incorporation of dNDP substrates whereas RT with mutations of residue K645 were unable to catalyze this reaction. Wild type HIV-1 RT also catalyzed the reverse reaction, inorganic phosphate-dependent phosphorolysis. Nucleotide-mediated phosphorolytic removal of chain-terminating 3′-terminal nucleoside inhibitors such as AZT forms the basis of HIV-1 resistance to such drugs, and this removal is enhanced by thymidine analog mutations (TAMs). We found that both wt and TAM-containing RTs were able to catalyze Pi-mediated phosphorolysis of 3′-terminal AZT at physiological levels of Pi with an efficacy similar to that for ATP-dependent AZT-excision. Conclusion: We have identified two new catalytic function of HIV-1 RT, the use of dNDPs as substrates for DNA synthesis, and the use of Pi as substrate for phosphorolytic removal of primer 3′-terminal nucleotides. The ability to insert dNDPs has been documented for only one other DNA polymerase The RB69 DNA polymerase and the reverse reaction employing inorganic phosphate has not been documented for any DNA polymerase. Importantly, our results show that Pi-mediated phosphorolysis can contribute to AZT resistance and indicates that factors that influence HIV resistance to AZT are more complex than previously appreciated. © 2008 Garforth et al

Cumulative subgroup analysis to reduce waste in clinical research for individualised medicine

Background: Although subgroup analyses in clinical trials may provide evidence for individualised medicine, their conduct and interpretation remain controversial. Methods: Subgroup effect can be defined as the difference in treatment effect across patient subgroups. Cumulative subgroup analysis refers to a series of repeated pooling of subgroup effects after adding data from each of related trials chronologically, to investigate the accumulating evidence for subgroup effects. We illustrated the clinical relevance of cumulative subgroup analysis in two case studies using data from published individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses. Computer simulations were also conducted to examine the statistical properties of cumulative subgroup analysis. Results: In case study 1, an IPD meta-analysis of 10 randomised trials (RCTs) on beta blockers for heart failure reported significant interaction of treatment effects with baseline rhythm. Cumulative subgroup analysis could have detected the subgroup effect 15 years earlier, with five fewer trials and 71% less patients, than the IPD meta-analysis which first reported it. Case study 2 involved an IPD meta-analysis of 11 RCTs on treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension that reported significant subgroup effect by aetiology. Cumulative subgroup analysis could have detected the subgroup effect 6 years earlier, with three fewer trials and 40% less patients than the IPD meta-analysis. Computer simulations have indicated that cumulative subgroup analysis increases the statistical power and is not associated with inflated false positives. Conclusions: To reduce waste of research data, subgroup analyses in clinical trials should be more widely conducted and adequately reported so that cumulative subgroup analyses could be timely performed to inform clinical practice and further research