Significant Difference In Treatment Failure Research Articles

Significance of c-myc Rearrangements in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Rearrangements of the c-myc oncogene can be seen in 5–10% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. However, studies examining the significance of this finding have yielded conflicting results. Therefore, we performed a retrospective analysis to determine the clinical significance of c-myc rearrangements in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The results of classical cytogenetic studies and FISH analyses were used to identify diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cases in the database of the Nebraska Lymphoma Study Group with or without c-myc rearrangements. Patients who were HIV positive and those with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease were excluded. We identified 16 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and c-myc rearrangements. All patients were initially treated with doxorubicin- or mitoxantrone-containing chemotherapy regimens. The median age of these 16 patients was 61 years (range 40 to 80), and 5 (31%) were males. The International Prognostic Index (IPI) was 0–2 at diagnosis in 9 patients (56%), and 3–5 in 7 patients (44%). Eleven patients (69%) had bulky disease (≥ 5 cm) at diagnosis. No significant differences in outcome were identified when the 16 c-myc positive patients were compared with 97 c-myc negative diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients in the same age range. The actuarial 5-year progression-free survival for the c-myc positive patients was 23% (95% CI 6% to 46%), as compared with 38% (95% CI 29% to 48%) for c-myc negative patients (p=0.17). The actuarial 5-year overall survival rates were 36% (95% CI 14% to 59%) and 47% (95% CI 36% to 56%), respectively (p=0.19). Classical cytogenetics and FISH analyses were also used to examine the 16 c-myc positive cases for bcl-2 rearrangements. Eight (50%) cases had rearrangements of bcl-2 in addition to c-myc rearrangements. These patients were similar to the c-myc positive/bcl-2 negative patients except for a higher likelihood of an elevated LDH level at diagnosis (88% vs. 25%; p=0.03). The actuarial 5-year progression-free survival for c-myc positive/bcl-2 positive patients was 0%, as compared to 33% (95% CI 6% to 66%) for patients with rearrangements of c-myc alone, and 37% (95% CI 28% to 47%) for c-myc negative patients. The actuarial 5-year overall survival rates were 12% (95% CI 1% to 42%), 47% (95% CI 12% to 76%), and 41% (95% CI 31% to 51%), respectively. A multivariate analysis, adjusting for IPI score, demonstrated that the relative risk (RR) of treatment failure was significantly worse for the c-myc positive/bcl-2 positive patients, as compared to the c-myc negative patients (RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.32–6.23; p=0.008). Similarly, mortality was also significantly worse for the c-myc positive/bcl-2 positive patients, as compared to the c-myc negative patients (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.18–6.11; p=0.02). In contrast, no significant differences in treatment failure or overall survival were demonstrated when c-myc positive/bcl-2 negative patients were compared with c-myc negative patients. Our results demonstrate that the c-myc rearrangement is not associated with poorer survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. However, patients with rearrangements of bcl-2 in addition to c-myc had significantly worse progression-free survival and overall survival.

Oral amoxicillin is as effective as injected penicillin for severe pneumonia in young children

QuestionIs oral amoxicillin as effective as injected penicillin for severe pneumonia in young children?Study designRandomised controlled equivalence trial.Main resultsAt 48 hours and at 14 days, there was no significant difference in treatment failure between oral amoxicillin and injected penicillin in children with severe pneumonia (see results table). Very young age (3–11 months), very fast breathing and hypoxemia were predictive of treatment failure at 48 hours (young age: OR 2.7, 95%CI 2.0 to 3.8; very fast breathing: 1.9, 1.4 to 2.7; hypoxemia: 1.9, 95%CI 1.3 to 2.8). However, adverse events were slightly more common with injected penicillin than oral amoxicillin (see results table).Authors’ conclusionsOral amoxicillin is as effective as injected penicillin for severe pneumonia in young children and infancy; very fast breathing and hypoxemia predict treatment failure. Oral antibiotic administration has significant advantages over injected antibiotic administration in developing countries, but may only be effective if administered in a controlled setting.

Early volume expansion for prevention of morbidity and mortality in very preterm infants.

Reduced perfusion of organs such as the brain, heart, kidneys and the gastrointestinal tract may lead to acute dysfunction and be associated with permanent injury. Various strategies have been used to provide cardiovascular support to preterm infants including inotropes, corticosteroids and volume expansion. In very preterm infants, does early volume expansion reduce morbidity and mortality. If volume expansion is effective, what type of volume expansion is most effective. The standard search strategy of the Neonatal Review Group was used. See Review Group details for more information. This was supplemented by additional searches of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, and updated search performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2004), MEDLINE (1996-January 2004), EMBASE (1980-January 2004), previous reviews including cross references (all articles referenced), abstracts and conferences (Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand, and Pediatric Academic Societies and American Academy of Pediatrics meetings 1998-2003). Randomised trials of early volume expansion with normal saline, fresh frozen plasma, albumin, plasma substitutes or blood compared to no treatment or another form of volume expansion in preterm infants < 32 weeks gestation or < 1500g were included. Volume expansion was defined as at least 10 mls/kg given in the first 72 hours of life. Standard methods of the Neonatal Review Group with use of relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). The fixed effects model using RevMan 4.1 was used for meta-analysis. Data from individual studies were only eligible for inclusion if a least 80% of infants were reported for that outcome. Seven studies were included. Five studies, four with data for mortality, compared volume to no treatment. Most studies enrolled very preterm infants on the basis of gestation or birthweight. Two studies comparing different types of volume expansion enrolled very preterm infants with hypotension. No study enrolled infants on the basis of low blood flow. One study examined the effect of volume expansion on blood flow but in normotensive very preterm infants. Comparing volume and no treatment, 4 studies with a total of 940 very preterm infants reported no significant difference in mortality (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.88, 1.40). The large NNNI 1996 study reported no significant difference in severe disability (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52, 1.23), cerebral palsy (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48, 1.20) and combined death or severe disability (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80, 1.24). Although one small study (Beverley 1985) reported reduced P/IVH with volume expansion, this was not supported by any other study. No significant difference was reported in grade 3-4 P/IVH and combined death or grade 3-4 P/IVH. One study (NNNI 1996) reported no significant difference in the incidence of hypotension. The finding of decreased necrotising enterocolitis and increased sepsis in infants who received fresh frozen plasma compared to a gelatin-based plasma substitute or no treatment in one study should be treated with caution. No significant differences in mortality or disability were found in this study. Comparing albumin and saline in hypotensive infants, one study (Lynch 2002) reported a significant increase in mean BP and reduced incidence of treatment failure (persistent hypotension). The other study (So 1997) and the meta-analysis of the two studies found no significant difference in treatment failure (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.53, 1.06) or in any other clinical outcome. There is no evidence from randomised trials to support the routine use of early volume expansion in very preterm infants without cardiovascular compromise. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether infants with cardiovascular compromise benefit from volume expansion. There is insufficient evidence to determine what type of volume expansion should be used in preterm infants (if at all) or for the use of early red cell transfusions. The significance of the finding of a significant increase in blood pressure in hypotensive preterm infants in one trial comparing albumin and saline is unclear, but the overall meta-analyses found no other significant clinical benefit in using albumin compared to saline.

Oral rehydration versus intravenous therapy for treating dehydration due to gastroenteritis in children: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BackgroundDespite treatment recommendations from various organizations, oral rehydration therapy (ORT) continues to be underused, particularly by physicians in high-income countries. We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare ORT and intravenous therapy (IVT) for the treatment of dehydration secondary to acute gastroenteritis in children.MethodsRCTs were identified through MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, authors and references of included trials, pharmaceutical companies, and relevant organizations. Screening and inclusion were performed independently by two reviewers in order to identify randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing ORT and IVT in children with acute diarrhea and dehydration. Two reviewers independently assessed study quality using the Jadad scale and allocation concealment. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second. The primary outcome measure was failure of rehydration. We analyzed data using standard meta-analytic techniques.ResultsThe quality of the 14 included trials ranged from 0 to 3 (Jadad score); allocation concealment was unclear in all but one study. Using a random effects model, there was no significant difference in treatment failures (risk difference [RD] 3%; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0, 6). The Mantel-Haenzsel fixed effects model gave a significant difference between treatment groups (RD 4%; 95% CI: 2, 5) favoring IVT. Based on the four studies that reported deaths, there were six in the IVT groups and two in ORT. There were no significant differences in total fluid intake at six and 24 hours, weight gain, duration of diarrhea, or hypo/hypernatremia. Length of stay was significantly shorter for the ORT group (weighted mean difference [WMD] -1.2 days; 95% CI: -2.4,-0.02). Phlebitis occurred significantly more often with IVT (number needed to treat [NNT] 33; 95% CI: 25,100); paralytic ileus occurred more often with ORT (NNT 33; 95% CI: 20,100). These results may not be generalizable to children with persistent vomiting.ConclusionThere were no clinically important differences between ORT and IVT in terms of efficacy and safety. For every 25 children (95% CI: 20, 50) treated with ORT, one would fail and require IVT. The results support existing practice guidelines recommending ORT as the first course of treatment in appropriate children with dehydration secondary to gastroenteritis.

Randomized trial of inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate versus theophylline for moderate asthma during pregnancy

Objective This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate to oral theophylline for the prevention of asthma exacerbation(s) requiring medical intervention. Study design A prospective, double-blind, double placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of pregnant women with moderate asthma was performed. Results There was no significant difference ( P = .554) in the proportion of asthma exacerbations among the 194 women in the beclomethasone cohort (18.0%) versus the 191 in the theophylline cohort (20.4%; risk ratio [RR] = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.6-1.3). The beclomethasone cohort had significantly lower incidences of discontinuing study medications caused by side effects (RR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.1-0.9; P = .016), and proportion of study visits with forced expiratory volume expired in 1 second (FEV1) less than 80% predicted (0.284±0.331 vs 0.284±0.221, P = .039). There were no significant differences in treatment failure, compliance, or proportion of peak expiratory flow rate less than 80% predicted. There were no significant differences in maternal or perinatal outcomes. Conclusion The treatment of moderate asthma with inhaled beclomethasone versus oral theophylline resulted in similar rates of asthma exacerbations and similar obstetric and perinatal outcomes. These results favor the use of inhaled corticosteroids for moderate asthma during pregnancy because of the improved FEV1 and because theophylline had more side effects and requires serum monitoring.

Opiate treatment for opiate withdrawal in newborn infants.

Neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) due to opiate withdrawal may result in disruption of the mother-infant relationship, sleep-wake abnormalities, feeding difficulties, weight loss and seizures. Treatments used to ameliorate symptoms and reduce morbidity include opiates, sedatives and non-pharmacological treatments. To assess the effectiveness and safety of using an opiate, compared to a sedative or non-pharmacological treatment, for treatment of NAS due to withdrawal from opiates. The evidence for use of different opiates was assessed in subgroup analyses. The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group including searches (up to March 2002) of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002), MEDLINE (1966-March 2002), previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, journal handsearching mainly in the English language. Trials enrolling infants with NAS born to mothers with an opiate dependence, with > 80% follow up and using random or quasi-random allocation to opiate or control. Control could include an opiate, sedative or non-pharmacological treatment. Each author assessed study quality and extracted data independently. Primary outcomes included control of symptoms, seizure occurrence, mortality and neurodevelopment. Treatment effect was expressed using relative risk (RR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and weighted mean difference (WMD). Meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effect model. Six studies enrolling a total of 511 infants met inclusion criteria (Carin 1983, Finnegan 1984, Kaltenbach 1986, Kandall 1983, Khoo 1995, Madden 1977); however, two (Finnegan 1984, Kaltenbach 1986) may be sequential reports that include some identical patients. The studies enrolled infants of mothers who had used opiates with or without other drugs during pregnancy. Methodological concerns included the use of quasi-random rather than random patient allocation methods in three studies, and sizeable, largely unexplained differences in reported numbers allocated to each group in four studies. Opiate (morphine) vs supportive care only: One study (Khoo 1995) found no significant effect on treatment failure (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.41, 4.07), a significant increase in hospital stay (MD 15.0 days, 95% CI 8.9, 21.1) and significant reductions in time to regain birthweight (MD -2.8 days, 95% -5.3, -0.3) and duration of supportive care (MD -197.2 minutes/day, 95% CI -274.2, -120.3). Opiate vs phenobarbital: Meta-analysis of three studies found no significant difference in treatment failure (typical RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46, 1.32). One of these studies (Finnegan 1984) reported that opiate treatment resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure among infants of mothers who had used only opiates; however, as this was a post-hoc analysis, this result should be interpreted with caution. One study (Kandall 1983) reported a reduction in seizures, of borderline statistical significance, with the use of opiate. Opiate vs diazepam: Meta-analysis of two studies found a significant reduction in treatment failure (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23, 0.80) with the use of opiate. No study reported neurodevelopment by allocated treatment group. Opiates, as compared to supportive care only, appear to reduce the time to regain birth weight and reduce the duration of supportive care, but increase the duration of hospital stay; there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. When compared to phenobarbital, opiates may reduce the incidence of seizures but, overall, there is no evidence of effect on treatment failure. When compared to diazepam, opiates reduce the incidence of treatment failure. A post-hoc analysis generates the hypothesis that treatment effects may vary according to whether the population includes infants born to all opiate users (i.e. with or without other drug exposure) or is restricted to infants of mothers who used opiates only. In view of the methodologic limitations of the included studies the conclusions of this review should be treated with caution. Further research is needed.

Presentation and outcome of 1107 cases of schistosomiasisfrom Africa diagnosed in a non-endemic country

Schistosomiasis is found in a significant proportion of returning travellers and immigrants to Britain. This study is a retrospective review of 1107 consecutive cases of schistosomiasis from Africa diagnosed by microscopy or serology presenting to the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, London, UK. 50·4% of cases were asymptomatic. The most common symptom which resolved on treatment was tiredness. Serology was positive in 951 (86%), and ova seen in 45%. Urine dipstick testing was positive for blood in 21% and protein in 15%, with eosinophilia in 44%. In this population urine dipstick, full blood count and serology were all insufficient screening tools used alone. Among patients with full follow-up data 3 months or more after treatment with praziquantel, definite treatment failure occured in 4 of 271 (1·5%), restricting the analysis to those with ova seen at diagnosis. There was no significant difference in treatment failure between 1 and 3 days of treatment. Antibody level was the same or higher than at treatment in 55% of cases seen after about 3 months and 38% after 1 year, confirming it is probably of limited clinical use in detecting treatment failure.