Search

Cardiovascular disease is a prevalent and prognostically important comorbidity among patients with kidney disease, and individuals with kidney disease make up a sizeable proportion (30%-60%) of patients with cardiovascular disease. However, several systematic reviews of cardiovascular trials have observed that patients with kidney disease, particularly those with advanced kidney disease, are often excluded from trial participation. Thus, currently available trial data for cardiovascular interventions in patients with kidney disease may be insufficient to make recommendations on the optimal approach for many therapies. The Kidney Health Initiative, a public-private partnership between the American Society of Nephrology and the US Food and Drug Administration, convened a multidisciplinary, international work group and hosted a stakeholder workshop intended to understand and develop strategies for overcoming the challenges with involving patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular clinical trials, with a particular focus on those with advanced disease. These efforts considered perspectives from stakeholders, including academia, industry, contract research organizations, regulatory agencies, patients, and care partners. This article outlines the key challenges and potential solutions discussed during the workshop centered on the following areas for improvement: building the business case, re-examining study design and implementation, and changing the clinical trial culture in nephrology. Regulatory and financial incentives could serve to mitigate financial concerns with involving patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular trials. Concerns that their inclusion could affect efficacy or safety results could be addressed through thoughtful approaches to study design and risk mitigation strategies. Finally, there is a need for closer collaboration between nephrologists and cardiologists and systemic change within the nephrology community such that participation of patients with kidney disease in clinical trials is prioritized. Ultimately, greater participation of patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular trials will help build the evidence base to guide optimal management of cardiovascular disease for this population., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

The role of percutaneous coronary interventions in addition to medical therapy for patients with stable coronary artery disease continues to be debated in routine clinical practice, despite more than 2 decades of randomized controlled trials. The residual uncertainty arises from particular challenges facing revascularization trials. Which endpoint do doctors care about, and which do patients care about? Which participants should be enrolled? What background medical therapy should we use? When is placebo control relevant? In this paper, we discuss how these questions can be approached and examine the merits and disadvantages of possible options. Engaging multiple stakeholders, including patients, researchers, regulators, and funders, to ensure the design elements are methodologically valid and clinically meaningful should be an aspirational goal in the development of future trials., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Studies have documented that the majority of consent documents for medical diagnosis and treatment are written at a reading level above that of the majority of the U.S. population. This study hypothesized that use of an easy-to-read consent statement, when compared with a standard consent statement, will result in higher patient comprehension of the clinical treatment protocol, lower patient anxiety, higher patient satisfaction, and higher patient accrual., Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 44 institutions that were members or affiliates of three cooperative oncology groups. Institutions were randomly assigned to administer either an easy-to-read consent statement or the standard consent statement to patients being recruited to participate in selected cancer treatment trials. Telephone interviews were conducted with a total of 207 patients to assess study outcomes., Results: Patients in the intervention arm demonstrated significantly lower consent anxiety and higher satisfaction compared with patients in the control arm. Patient comprehension and state anxiety were not affected by the intervention. Accrual rates into the parent studies also did not differ significantly between the two study groups., Conclusion: Clinical trial informed consent statements can be modified to be easier to read without omitting critical information. Patient anxiety and satisfaction can be affected by the consent document. The generalizability of these study results is limited by the characteristics of the patient sample. Ninety percent of the sample were white women, and the mean Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine score was approximately 64, indicating a literacy level at or above the ninth grade.

To evaluate the efficacy of a long-acting preparation of medroxyprogesterone acetate for hot flash management, 3 men receiving androgen ablation therapy for prostate cancer and 15 women with a history of breast cancer were treated as part of clinical practice with three biweekly intramuscular injections of 500 mg depomedroxyprogesterone. A review of hot flash diaries and patient charts were completed to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of these injections for managing hot flashes. Treatment was associated with an approximate 90% decrease in hot flashes (95% CI 82-97%). Daily hot flash frequency decreased from a mean of 10.9 on the first day of treatment (95% CI 8.0-13.8 hot flashes per day) to a mean of 1.1 hot flashes 6 weeks later (95% CI 0.5-1.8 hot flashes) and to a mean of 0.7 hot flashes 12 weeks following therapy initiation (95% CI 0.1-1.2). Improvement in the hot flashes remained for months after discontinuing the injections in many patients. Reported side effects were minimal. This experience suggests that treatment with depomedroxyprogesterone may be an effective and well-tolerated option for the treatment of hot flashes.

Purpose/objectives: To identify content items for an inclusive education curriculum for adult patients with cancer, as well as describe their learning and support preferences, determine the level of information provided to them, and assess the patients' interest in potential new services., Design: Exploratory, descriptive survey research., Setting: A National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center., Sample: All consenting adult patients with cancer who had appointments in the outpatient care setting during a two-week period (N = 1,310)., Methods: A 3-phase study identified core components of an inclusive educational curriculum, conducted structured interviews of patients with cancer, and validated findings in a selected sample., Findings: The surveys were completed and returned by 48% (n = 625) of the patients. The most favored method for learning about all cancer topics was discussions with physicians (66%). Other preferred methods included brochures or booklets provided by physicians or nurses (33%), discussions with nurses (34%), self-selecting print media from information displays (20%), and talking with other patients with cancer (14%). Statistically significant differences in learning preferences were found among subgroups defined by age, gender, and education., Conclusions: Patients preferred interactive, interpersonal communication with physicians or nurses. In addition, the prevailing method of education delivery for patients with cancer was providing print materials that support and enhance knowledge shared in the patient-healthcare team communication., Implications for Nursing: This study confirms the importance of the learning and support preferences of patients with cancer. To implement a successful education program for their patients, nurses must be aware of patients' preferences for learning new information. Time must be set aside for one-on-one communication with patients, and print materials must be easily accessible to healthcare providers to support the patient-education process.

Purpose: Hot flashes can be a prominent problem in women with a history of breast cancer. Given concerns regarding the use of hormonal therapies in such patients, other nonhormonal means for treating hot flashes are required. Based on anecdotal information regarding the efficacy of fluoxetine and other newer antidepressants for treating hot flashes, the present trial was developed., Patients and Methods: This trial used a double-blinded, randomized, two-period (4 weeks per period), cross-over methodology to study the efficacy of fluoxetine (20 mg/d) for treating hot flashes in women with a history of breast cancer or a concern regarding the use of estrogen (because of breast cancer risk). Eligible patients had to have reported that they averaged at least 14 hot flashes per week; they could have received tamoxifen or raloxifene as long as they were on a stable dose. The major outcome measure was a bivariate construct representing hot flash frequency and hot flash score, analyzed by a classic sums and differences cross-over analysis., Results: Eighty-one randomized women began protocol therapy. By the end of the first treatment period, hot flash scores (frequency x average severity) decreased 50% in the fluoxetine arm versus 36% in the placebo arm. Cross-over analysis demonstrated a significantly greater marked hot flash score improvement with fluoxetine than placebo (P =.02). The results were not adjusted for potential confounding influences, including age and tamoxifen use. The fluoxetine was well tolerated., Conclusion: This dose of fluoxetine resulted in a modest improvement in hot flashes.