The impact of early outcome events on the effect of tranexamic acid in post-partum haemorrhage: an exploratory subgroup analysis of the WOMAN trial.

BACKGROUND: In severe post-partum haemorrhage, death can occur within hours of bleeding onset so interventions to control the bleeding must be given immediately. In clinical trials of treatments for life-threatening bleeding, established treatments are given priority and the trial treatment is usually given last. However, enrolling patients in whom severe maternal morbidity or death is imminent or inevitable at the time of randomisation may dilute the effects of a trial treatment. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory analysis of data from the WOMAN trial, an international, randomised placebo-controlled trial of the effects of tranexamic acid on death and surgical intervention in 20,060 women with post-partum haemorrhage. We assessed the impact of early maternal death or hysterectomy due to exsanguination on the effect of tranexamic acid on each of these respective outcomes. We conducted repeated analyses excluding patients with these outcomes at increasing intervals from the time of randomisation. We quantified treatment effects using risk ratios (RR) and 99% confidence intervals (CI) and prepared cumulative failure plots. RESULTS: Among 14,923 women randomised within 3 h of delivery (7518 tranexamic acid and 7405 placebo), there were 216 bleeding deaths (1.5%) and 383 hysterectomies due to bleeding (2.8%). After excluding deaths from exsanguination at increasing time intervals following randomization, there was a significant reduction in the risk of death due to bleeding with tranexamic acid (RR = 0.41; 99% CI 0.19-0.89). However, after excluding hysterectomies at increasing time intervals post-randomization, there was no reduction in the risk of hysterectomy due to bleeding with tranexamic acid (RR = 0.79; 99% CI 0.33-1.86). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this analysis provide further evidence that tranexamic acid reduces the risk of death from exsanguination in women who experience postpartum haemorrhage. It is uncertain whether tranexamic acid reduces the risk of hysterectomy for bleeding after excluding early hysterectomies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN trial registration number ISRCTN76912190, 8 Dec 2008; ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00872469, 30 March 2009; PACTR number PACTR201007000192283, 9 Feb 2010; EudraCT number 2008-008441-38, 8 Dec 2010 (retrospectively registered)

Treatment for primary postpartum haemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Primary postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is one of the top five causes of maternal mortality in both developed and developing countries. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of any intervention used for the treatment of primary PPH. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing any interventions for the treatment of primary PPH. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed studies for eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. We contacted authors of the included studies to request more information. MAIN RESULTS: Ten randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with a total of 4052 participants fulfilled our inclusion criteria and were included in this review.Four RCTs (1881 participants) compared misoprostol with placebo given in addition to conventional uterotonics. Adjunctive use of misoprostol (in the dose of 600 to 1000 mcg) with simultaneous administration of additional uterotonics did not provide additional benefit for our primary outcomes including maternal mortality (risk ratio (RR) 6.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 50.85), serious maternal morbidity (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.31), admission to intensive care (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.11) or hysterectomy (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.16 to 5.41).  Two RCTs (1787 participants) compared 800 mcg sublingual misoprostol versus oxytocin infusion as primary PPH treatment; one trial included women who had received prophylactic uterotonics, and the other did not. Primary outcomes did not differ between the two groups, although women given sublingual misoprostol were more likely to have additional blood loss of at least 1000 mL (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.04 to 6.75). Misoprostol was associated with a significant increase in vomiting and shivering.Two trials attempted to test the effectiveness of estrogen and tranexamic acid, respectively, but were too small for any meaningful comparisons of pre-specified outcomes.One study compared lower segment compression but was too small to assess impact on primary outcomes.We did not identify any trials evaluating surgical techniques or radiological interventions for women with primary PPH unresponsive to uterotonics and/or haemostatics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials included in the current review were not adequately powered to assess impact on the primary outcome measures. Compared with misoprostol, oxytocin infusion is more effective and causes fewer side effects when used as first-line therapy for the treatment of primary PPH. When used after prophylactic uterotonics, misoprostol and oxytocin infusion worked similarly. The review suggests that among women who received oxytocin for the treatment of primary PPH, adjunctive use of misoprostol confers no added benefit.The role of tranexamic acid and compression methods requires further evaluation. Furthermore, future studies should focus on the best way to treat women who fail to respond to uterotonic therapy

Cost-effectiveness analysis of tranexamic acid for the treatment of traumatic brain injury, based on the results of the CRASH-3 randomised trial: a decision modelling approach

Introduction An estimated 69 million traumatic brain injuries (TBI) occur each year worldwide, with most in low-income and middle-income countries. The CRASH-3 randomised trial found that intravenous administration of tranexamic acid within 3 hours of injury reduces head injury deaths in patients sustaining a mild or moderate TBI. We examined the cost-effectiveness of tranexamic acid treatment for TBI. Methods A Markov decision model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment with and without tranexamic acid, in addition to current practice. We modelled the decision in the UK and Pakistan from a health service perspective, over a lifetime time horizon. We used data from the CRASH-3 trial for the risk of death during the trial period (28 days) and patient quality of life, and data from the literature to estimate costs and long-term outcomes post-TBI. We present outcomes as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 2018 costs in pounds for the UK, and US dollars for Pakistan. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per QALY gained were estimated, and compared with country specific cost-effective thresholds. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results Tranexamic acid was highly cost-effective for patients with mild TBI and intracranial bleeding or patients with moderate TBI, at £4288 per QALY in the UK, and US$24 per QALY in Pakistan. Tranexamic acid was 99% and 98% cost-effective at the cost-effectiveness thresholds for the UK and Pakistan, respectively, and remained cost-effective across all deterministic sensitivity analyses. Tranexamic acid was even more cost-effective with earlier treatment administration. The cost-effectiveness for those with severe TBI was uncertain. Conclusion Early administration of tranexamic acid is highly cost-effective for patients with mild or moderate TBI in the UK and Pakistan, relative to the cost-effectiveness thresholds used. The estimated ICERs suggest treatment is likely to be cost-effective across all income settings globally

Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease.

Dehydration is an important cause of death in patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD). Parenteral fluids are often required in patients with fluid requirements in excess of their oral intake. The peripheral intravenous route is the most commonly used method of parenteral access, but inserting and maintaining an intravenous line can be challenging in the context of EVD. Therefore it is important to consider the advantages and disadvantages of different routes for achieving parenteral access (e.g. intravenous, intraosseous, subcutaneous and intraperitoneal). To compare the reliability, ease of use and speed of insertion of different parenteral access methods. We ran the search on 17 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily, Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic + Embase (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), clinicaltrials.gov and screened reference lists. Randomised controlled trials comparing different parenteral routes for the infusion of fluids or medication. Two review authors examined the titles and abstracts of records obtained by searching the electronic databases to determine eligibility. Two review authors extracted data from the included trials and assessed the risk of bias. Outcome measures of interest were success of insertion; time required for insertion; number of insertion attempts; number of dislodgements; time period with functional access; local site reactions; clinicians' perception of ease of administration; needlestick injury to healthcare workers; patients' discomfort; and mortality. For trials involving the administration of fluids we also collected data on the volume of fluid infused, changes in serum electrolytes and markers of renal function. We rated the quality of the evidence as 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low' according to the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: success of insertion, time required for insertion, number of dislodgements, volume of fluid infused and needlestick injuries. We included 17 trials involving 885 participants. Parenteral access was used to infuse fluids in 11 trials and medications in six trials. None of the trials involved patients with EVD. Intravenous and intraosseous access was compared in four trials; intravenous and subcutaneous access in 11; peripheral intravenous and intraperitoneal access in one; saphenous vein cutdown and intraosseous access in one; and intraperitoneal with subcutaneous access in one. All of the trials assessing the intravenous method involved peripheral intravenous access.We judged few trials to be at low risk of bias for any of the assessed domains.Compared to the intraosseous group, patients in the intravenous group were more likely to experience an insertion failure (risk ratio (RR) 3.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.39 to 6.33; n = 242; GRADE rating: low). We did not pool data for time to insertion but estimates from the trials suggest that inserting intravenous access takes longer (GRADE rating: moderate). Clinicians judged the intravenous route to be easier to insert (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61; n = 182). A larger volume of fluids was infused via the intravenous route (GRADE rating: moderate). There was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcomes, including adverse events.Compared to the subcutaneous group, patients in the intravenous group were more likely to experience an insertion failure (RR 14.79, 95% CI 2.87 to 76.08; n = 238; GRADE rating: moderate) and dislodgement of the device (RR 3.78, 95% CI 1.16 to 12.34; n = 67; GRADE rating: low). Clinicians also judged the intravenous route as being more difficult to insert and patients were more likely to be agitated in the intravenous group. Patients in the intravenous group were more likely to develop a local infection and phlebitis, but were less likely to develop erythema, oedema or swelling than those in the subcutaneous group. A larger volume of fluids was infused into patients via the intravenous route. There was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcome.There were insufficient data to reliably determine if the risk of insertion failure differed between the saphenous vein cutdown (SVC) and intraosseous method (RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 31.13; GRADE rating: low). Insertion using SVC took longer than the intraosseous method (MD 219.60 seconds, 95% CI 135.44 to 303.76; GRADE rating: moderate). There were no data and therefore there was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcome.There were insufficient data to reliably determine the relative effects of intraperitoneal or central intravenous access relative to any other parenteral access method. There are several different ways of achieving parenteral access in patients who are unable meet their fluid requirements with oral intake alone. The quality of the evidence, as assessed using the GRADE criteria, is somewhat limited because of the lack of adequately powered trials at low risk of bias. However, we believe that there is sufficient evidence to draw the following conclusions: if peripheral intravenous access can be achieved easily, this allows infusion of larger volumes of fluid than other routes; but if this is not possible, the intraosseous and subcutaneous routes are viable alternatives. The subcutaneous route may be suitable for patients who are not severely dehydrated but in whom ongoing fluid losses cannot be met by oral intake.A film to accompany this review can be viewed here (http://youtu.be/ArVPzkf93ng)

CRASH2 in Germany [ISRCTN86750102]

ABSTRACT: In June 2005, the Study Centre of the German Surgical Society (SDGC) in Heidelberg, Germany, agreed to participate in the investigator initiated trial CRASH2. Regulatory and administrative affairs within Germany were assigned to the Coordination Centre for Clinical Trials (KKS) at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. For more than nine months the KKS and the SDGC have been trying to procure a separate insurance for CRASH2 in Germany. Unfortunately, these attempts have not been successful, yet. One major reason is the way in which German authorities and authorities of some other countries have interpreted the EU Directive (Directive 2001/20/EC) with regards to the need for "adequate" indemnity for clinical trials. The indemnity insurance for CRASH2 procured by the LSHTM for all participating hospitals throughout the world (except for the USA) did not comply with the limits required by the federal German drug law (AMG)

Risk factors for blood transfusion in traumatic and postpartum hemorrhage patients: Analysis of the CRASH-2 and WOMAN trials.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage is a leading cause of death after trauma and childbirth. In response to severe hemorrhage, bleeding patients often receive transfusions of red blood cells, plasma, platelets, or other blood components. We examined risk factors for transfusion in acute severe bleeding in two trials of over 20,000 patients to better understand factors associated with transfusion likelihood. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort analysis of data from the CRASH-2 and WOMAN trials, two multinational trials that recruited patients with traumatic and postpartum hemorrhage, respectively. For each trial, we examined the effect of 10 factors on blood transfusion likelihood. Univariate and multivariate Poisson regressions were used to analyze the relationship between risk factors and blood transfusion. RESULTS: Of the 20,207 traumatic hemorrhage patients, 10,232 (51%) received blood components. Of the 20,060 women with postpartum hemorrhage, 10,958 (55%) received blood components. For patients who suffered from traumatic hemorrhage, those greater than three hours from injury to hospitalization were more likely to be transfused (ARR 1.37; 95% CI, 1.20-1.56). Postpartum hemorrhage patients had an increased likelihood of transfusion if they gave birth outside the hospital (ARR 1.30; 95% CI 1.22-1.39), gave birth more than three hours before hospitalization (ARR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01-1.17), had a Caesarean section (ARR 1.16; 95% CI 1.08-1.25), and if they had any identifiable causes of hemorrhage other than uterine atony. CONCLUSION: Several risk factors are associated with an increased likelihood of transfusion in traumatic and postpartum hemorrhage patients. Altering modifiable factors, by reducing time from injury or childbirth to hospitalization, for example, might be able to reduce transfusions and their complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRASH-2 is registered as ISRCTN86750102, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00375258 and South African Clinical Trial Register DOH-27-0607-1919. WOMAN is registered as ISRCTN76912190, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00872469, PACTR201007000192283, and EudraCT number 2008-008441-38

魚類筋肉の示す終生成長と遺伝子発現の転写調節機構に関する研究

学位の種別: 課程博士審査委員会委員 : （主査）東京大学教授 浅川 修一, 北里大学教授 渡部 終五, 東京大学教授 金子 豊二, 東京大学教授 潮 秀樹, 東京大学准教授 木下 滋晴University of Tokyo(東京大学

Use of tranexamic acid in major trauma: a sex-disaggragated analysis of the Clinical Randomisation of an Antifibrinolytic in Significant Haemorrhage (CRASH-2 and CRASH-3) trials and UK trauma registry (Trauma and Audit Research Network) data.

Women are less likely than men to receive some emergency treatments. This study examines whether the effect of tranexamic acid (TXA) on mortality in trauma patients varies by sex and whether the receipt of TXA by trauma patients varies by sex. First, we conducted a sex-disaggregated analysis of data from the Clinical Randomisation of an Antifibrinolytic in Significant Haemorrhage (CRASH)-2 and CRASH-3 trials. We used interaction tests to determine whether the treatment effect varied by sex. Second, we examined data from the Trauma and Audit Research Network (TARN) to explore sex differences in the receipt of TXA. We used logistic regression models to estimate the odds ratio for receipt of TXA in females compared with males. Results are reported as n (%), risk ratios (RR), and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Overall, 20 211 polytrauma patients (CRASH-2) and 12 737 patients with traumatic brain injuries (CRASH-3) were included in our analysis. TXA reduced the risk of death in females (RR=0.69 [0.52-0.91]) and in males (RR=0.80 [0.71-0.90]) with no significant heterogeneity by sex (P=0.34). We examined TARN data for 216 364 patients aged ≥16 yr with an Injury Severity Score ≥9 with 98 879 (46%) females and 117 485 (54%) males. TXA was received by 7198 (7.3% [7.1-7.4%]) of the females and 19 697 (16.8% [16.6-17.0%]) of the males (OR=0.39 [0.38-0.40]). The sex difference in the receipt of TXA increased with increasing age. Administration of TXA to patients with bleeding trauma reduces mortality to a similar extent in women and men, but women are substantially less likely to be treated with TXA

Physiologically based modelling of tranexamic acid pharmacokinetics following intravenous, intramuscular, sub-cutaneous and oral administration in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic drug that reduces surgical blood loss and death due to bleeding after trauma and post-partum haemorrhage. Treatment success is dependent on early intervention and rapid systemic exposure to TXA. The requirement for intravenous (IV) administration can in some situations limit accessibility to TXA therapy. Here we employ physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling (PBPK) to evaluate if adequate TXA exposure maybe achieved when given via different routes of administration. METHODS: A commercially available PBPK software (GastroPlus®) was used to model published TXA pharmacokinetics. IV, oral and intramuscular (IM) models were developed using healthy volunteer PK data from twelve different single dose regimens (n=48 participants). The model was verified using separate IV and oral validation datasets (n=26 participants). Oral, IM and sub-cutaneous (SQ) dose finding simulations were performed. RESULTS: Across the different TXA regimens evaluated TXA plasma concentrations varied from 0.1 to 94.0 µg/mL. Estimates of the total plasma clearance of TXA ranged from 0.091 to 0.104 L/h/kg, oral bioavailability from 36 to 67 % and Tmax from 2.6 to 3.2 and 0.4 to 1.0 hours following oral and intramuscular administration respectively. Variability in the observed TXA PK could be captured through predictable demographic effects on clearance, combined with intestinal permeability and stomach transit time following oral administration and muscle blood flow and muscle/plasma partition coefficients following intra-muscular dosing. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that intramuscular administration is the non-intravenous route of administration with the most potential for achieving targeted TXA exposures. Plasma levels following an IM dose of 1000 mg TXA are predicted to exceed 15 mg/mL in < 15 minutes and be maintained above this level for approximately 3 hours, achieving systemic exposure (AUC0-6) of 99 to 105 µg*hr/mL after a single dose. Well-designed clinical trials to verify these predictions and confirm the utility of intramuscular TXA are recommended

Artificial membrane-binding proteins stimulate oxygenation of stem cells during engineering of large cartilage tissue

Restricted oxygen diffusion can result in central cell necrosis in engineered tissue, a problem that is exacerbated when engineering large tissue constructs for clinical application. Here we show that pre-treating human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) with synthetic membrane-active myoglobin-polymer–surfactant complexes can provide a reservoir of oxygen capable of alleviating necrosis at the centre of hyaline cartilage. This is achieved through the development of a new cell functionalization methodology based on polymer–surfactant conjugation, which allows the delivery of functional proteins to the hMSC membrane. This new approach circumvents the need for cell surface engineering using protein chimerization or genetic transfection, and we demonstrate that the surface-modified hMSCs retain their ability to proliferate and to undergo multilineage differentiation. The functionalization technology is facile, versatile and non-disruptive, and in addition to tissue oxygenation, it should have far-reaching application in a host of tissue engineering and cell-based therapies