Diagnosis of biliary tract and ampullary carcinomas

Diagnostic methods for biliary tract carcinoma and the efficacy of these methods are discussed. Neither definite methods for early diagnosis nor specific markers are available in this disease. When this disease is suspected on the basis of clinical symptoms and risk factors, hemato-biochemical examination and abdominal ultrasonography are performed and, where appropriate, enhanced computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is carried out. Diagnoses of extrahepatic bile duct cancer and ampullary carcinoma are often made based on the presence of obstructive jaundice. Although rare, abdominal pain and pyrexia, as well as abnormal findings of the hepatobiliary system detected by hemato-biochemical examination, serve as a clue to making a diagnosis of these diseases. On the other hand, the early diagnosis of gallbladder cancer is scarcely possible on the basis of clinical symptoms, so when this cancer is found with the onset of abdominal pain and jaundice, it is already advanced at the time of detection, thus making a cure difficult. When gallbladder cancer is suspected, enhanced CT is carried out. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), in particular — one of the methods of enhanced CT — is useful for decision of surgical criteria, because MDCT shows findings such as localization and extension of the tumor, and the presence or absence of remote metastasis. Procedures such as magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasonography, bile duct biopsy, and cholangioscopy should be carried out taking into account indications for these procedures in individual patients. However, direct biliary tract imaging is necessary for making a precise diagnosis of the horizontal extension of bile duct cancer

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome