111 research outputs found

    Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis)

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Vincristine is an integral component of treatment for children with cancer. Its main dose-limiting side effect is vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The VINCA trial was a randomized controlled trial that explored the effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection of vincristine on the development of VIPN in children with cancer. The short-term outcomes (median follow-up 9 months) showed that there was no difference in VIPN between the randomization groups. However, 1-hour infusion was less toxic in children who also received azoles. We now report the results of the final analyses (median follow-up 20 months), which includes treatment outcome as a secondary objective (follow-up 3 years). Methods: VIPN was measured 1–7 times per participant using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and the pediatric-modified total neuropathy score. Poisson mixed model and logistic generalized estimating equation analysis for repeated measures were performed.Results: Forty-five participants per randomization group were included. There was no significant effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection on VIPN. In participants receiving concurrent azoles, the total CTCAE score was significantly lower in the one-hour group (rate ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33–0.80, p = 0.003). Four patients in the one-hour group and one patient in the push group relapsed. Two patients in the one-hour group died. Conclusion:1-hour infusion of vincristine is not protective against VIPN. However, in patients receiving concurrent azoles, 1-hour infusion may be less toxic. The difference in treatment outcome is most likely the result of differences in risk profile.</p

    Differences in Trial and Real-world Populations in the Dutch Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry

    Get PDF
    __Background:__ Trials in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treatment have shown improved outcomes, including survival. However, as trial populations are selected, results may not be representative for the real-world population. The aim of this study was to assess the differences between patients treated in a clinical trial versus standard care during the course of CRPC in a real-world CRPC population. __Design, setting, and participants:__ Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Registry is a population-based, observational, retrospective registry. CRPC patients from 20 hospitals in the Netherlands have been included from 2010 to 2013. __Outcome measurements and statistical analysis:__ Baseline characteristics, systemic treatment, and overall survival were the main outcomes. Descriptive statistics, multivariate Cox regression, and multiple imputations with the Monte Carlo Markov Chain method were used. __Results and limitations:__ In total, 1524 patients were enrolled of which 203 patients had participated in trials at any time. The median follow-up period was 23 mo. Patients in the trial group were significantly younger and had less comorbidities. Docetaxel treatment was more freque

    Hyperthermophilic redox chemistry: a re-evaluation.

    No full text
    AbstractThe redox chemistry of Pyrococcus furiosus rubredoxin and ferredoxin has been studied as a function of temperature in direct voltammetry and in EPR monitored bulk titrations. The Ems of both proteins, measured with direct voltammetry, have a normal (linear) temperature dependence and show no pH dependence. EPR monitoring is not a reliable method to determine the temperature dependence of the Em: upon rapid freezing the proteins take their conformation corresponding to the freezing point of the solution
    corecore