Search

Background: Elderly patients are particularly vulnerable to adverse drug reactions, especially if they are affected by additional risk factors such as multimorbidity, polypharmacy, impaired renal function and intake of drugs with high risk potential. Apart from these clinical parameters, drug safety and efficacy can be influenced by pharmacogenetic factors. Evidence-based recommendations concerning drug-gene-combinations have been issued by international consortia and in drug labels. However, clinical benefit of providing information on individual patient factors in a comprehensive risk assessment aiming to reduce the occurrence and severity of adverse drug reactions is not evident. Purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the effect of a concise individual risk information leaflet with standard information on risk factors for side effects. Methods/Design: The trial was designed as a prospective, two-arm, randomized, controlled, multicenter, pragmatic study. 960 elderly, multimorbid outpatients in general medicine are included if they take at least one high risk and one other long-term drug (polymedication). As high risk "index drugs" oral anticoagulants and antiplatelets were chosen because of their specific, objectively assessable side effects. Following randomization, test group patients receive an individualized risk assessment leaflet evaluating their personal data concerning bleeding- and thromboembolic-risk-scores, potential drug-drug-interactions, age, renal function and pharmacogenetic factors. Control group patients obtain a standardized leaflet only containing general information on these criteria. Follow-up period is 9 months for each patient. Primary endpoint is the occurrence of a thromboembolic/bleeding event or death. Secondary endpoints are other adverse drug reactions, hospital admissions, specialist referrals and medication changes due to adverse drug reactions, the patients' adherence to medication regimen as well as health related quality of life, mortality and resulting costs. Discussion: Despite extensive evidence of risk factors for adverse drug reactions, there are few prospective trial data about an individualized risk assessment including pharmacogenetic information to increase patient safety. By conducting a health economic analysis, we will evaluate if the application of an individualized drug therapy in daily routine is cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer antigen CA125 is known as a valuable marker for the management of ovarian cancer. Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access OV Monitor Immunoassay System (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated at five different European sites and compared with a reference system, defined as CA125 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics). Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the OV Monitor ranged between 3.1% and 8.8%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 4.7% and 5.0%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 100% (SD+8.1%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on OV Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 107%, bilirubin 103%, triglycerides 103%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 27,193 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a good correlation between the Access OV Monitor and Elecsys CA125 (R=0.982, slope=0.921, intercept=+1.951). OV Monitor serum levels were low in healthy individuals (n=267, median=9.7 kU/L, 95th percentile=30.8 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n=549, medians=10.9–16.4 kU/L, 95th percentiles=44.2–355 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n=995, medians=12.4–445 kU/L; 95th percentiles=53.4–4664 kU/L). Optimal diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the OV Monitor was found for ovarian cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.898]. Results for the reference CA125 assay were comparable (AUC 0.899). Conclusions: The Access OV Monitor provides very good methodological characteristics and demonstrates an excellent analytical and clinical correlation with Elecsys CA125. The best diagnostic accuracy for the OV Monitor was found in ovarian cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the OV Monitor in other cancers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:588–99. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer antigen CA15-3 antigen is known as a valuable marker for the management of breast cancer. Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access® BR Monitor Immunoassay System (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated at five different European sites and compared with a reference system, defined as CA15-3 on the Elecsys® System (Roche Diagnostics). Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the BR Monitor ranged between 5.5% and 11.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.4% and 5.1%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 98.5% (SD±9.1%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on BR Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 112%, bilirubin 111%, triglycerides 108%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 13,540 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a general correlation between the Access BR Monitor and Elecsys CA15-3 (R=0.797), with a slope of 1.383. CA15-3 serum levels, as measured by the BR Monitor, were low in healthy individuals (n=267, median=11.9 kU/L, 95th percentile=23.5 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n=549, medians=11.3–15.6 kU/L, 95th percentiles=21.6–54.6 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n=995, medians=11.2–22.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles=30.0–429.7 kU/L). Best diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the BR Monitor was found for locoregional and metastatic breast cancer, as well as for ovarian cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.619, 0.897 and 0.774]. Results for the reference CA15-3 assay were comparable (AUC 0.611, 0.887 and 0.818). Conclusions: The Access BR Monitor provides accurate methodological characteristics and demonstrates an analytical and clinical correlation with Elecsys CA15-3. Best diagnostic accuracy for the BR Monitor was found in breast and ovarian cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the BR Monitor in other cancers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:612–22. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastrointestinal cancer antigen CA19-9 is known as a valuable marker for the management of patients with pancreatic cancer. Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access® GI Monitor assay (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated on the UniCel® DxI 800 Immunoassay System at five different European sites and compared with a reference method, defined as CA19-9 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics). Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the GI Monitor ranged between 3.4% and 7.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.6% and 4.0%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 97.4% (SD+7.2%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on GI Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 103%, bilirubin 106%, triglycerides 106%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 115,000 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a good correlation between the Access® GI Monitor and Elecsys CA19-9 (R=0.959, slope=1.004, intercept=+0.17). GI Monitor serum levels were low in healthy individuals (n=267, median=6.0 kU/L, 95th percentile=23.1 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n=550, medians=5.8–13.4 kU/L, 95th percentiles=30.1–195.5kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n=995, medians=8.4–233.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles=53.7–13,902 kU/L). Optimal diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the GI Monitor was found for pancreatic cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.83]. Results for the reference CA19-9 assay were comparable (AUC 0.85). Conclusions: The Access® GI Monitor provides very good methodological characteristics and demonstrates an excellent analytical and clinical correlation with the Elecsys CA19-9. The GI Monitor shows the best diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the GI Monitor in other cancers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:600–11. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to investigate whether changes in progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) levels correlate with treatment response and can be used to optimize clinical management of patients with small-cell lung cancer. Patients with small-cell lung cancer (any stage) receiving chemotherapy were eligible. ProGRP was measured in serum/plasma at baseline and after each chemotherapy cycle using the Elecsys ® ProGRP assay (Roche Diagnostics). Treatment response was assessed by computed tomography scan. The primary objective was to examine whether changes in ProGRP levels correlated with computed tomography scan results after two cycles of chemotherapy. The prognostic value of ProGRP among patients receiving first-line chemotherapy was also assessed. Overall, 261 patients from six centers were eligible. Among patients with elevated baseline ProGRP (>100 pg/mL), a ProGRP decline after Cycle 2 was associated with nonprogression (area under the curve: 84%; 95% confidence interval: 72.8-95.1; n = 141). ProGRP changes from baseline to end of Cycle 1 were predictive of response, as determined by computed tomography scan 3 weeks later (area under the curve: 87%; 95% confidence interval: 74.1-99.2; n = 137). This was enhanced by repeat measurements, with a 92% area under the curve (95% confidence interval: 85.3-97.8) among patients with ProGRP data after both Cycles 1 and 2 (n = 123); if a patient experienced a ≥25% decline in ProGRP after Cycle 1, and ProGRP remained stable or decreased after Cycle 2, the probability of finding progression on the interim computed tomography scan at the end of Cycle 2 was almost zero (sensitivity: 100%, specificity: 71%). Both ProGRP levels at baseline and at the end of first-line chemotherapy were prognostic; the latter provided a moderately improved hazard ratio of 2.43 (95% confidence interval: 1.33-4.46; n = 110) versus 1.87 (95% confidence interval: 1.04-3.37; n = 216). In summary, for patients with small-cell lung cancer and elevated baseline ProGRP levels, ProGRP may be a simple, reliable, and repeatable tool for monitoring response to chemotherapy and provide valuable prognostic information.

Background: We performed a multicenter evaluation of the Elecsys® progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) immunoassay in Europe and China., Methods: The assay was evaluated at three European and two Chinese sites by imprecision, stability, method comparison and differentiation potential in lung cancer., Results: Intermediate imprecision across five analyte concentrations ranged from 2.2% to 6.0% coefficient of variation. Good stability for plasma and serum samples was shown for various storage conditions. There was excellent correlation between the Elecsys® and ARCHITECT assays in plasma (slope 1.02, intercept -2.72pg/mL). The Elecsys® assay also showed good correlation between serum and plasma samples (slope 0.93, intercept 2.35pg/mL; correlation coefficient 0.97). ProGRP differentiated small-cell and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; area under the curve 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.93; 78.3% sensitivity, 95% specificity; at 84pg/mL), with no relevant effects of ethnicity, age, gender or smoking. Median ProGRP concentrations were low in benign diseases (38pg/mL), other malignancies (40pg/mL) or NSCLC (39pg/mL), except chronic kidney disease above stage 3 (>100pg/mL)., Conclusions: Increased stability of the Elecsys® ProGRP assay in serum and plasma offers clear benefits over existing assays. This first evaluation of a ProGRP assay in China demonstrated comparable differentiation potential among different ethnicities., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Gastrointestinal cancer antigen CA19-9 is known as a valuable marker for the management of patients with pancreatic cancer., Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access GI Monitor assay (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated on the UniCel Dxl 800 Immunoassay System at five different European sites and compared with a reference method, defined as CA19-9 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics)., Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the GI Monitor ranged between 3.4% and 7.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.6% and 4.0%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 97.4% (SD + 7.2%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on GI Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 103%, bilirubin 106%, triglycerides 106%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 115,000 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a good correlation between the Access GI Monitor and Elecsys CA19-9 (R = 0.959, slope = 1.004, intercept = +0.17). GI Monitor serum levels were low in healthy individuals (n = 267, median = 6.0 kU/L, 95th percentile=23.1 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n = 550, medians = 5.8-13.4 kU/L, 95th percentiles = 30.1-195.5 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n = 995, medians = 8.4-233.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles = 53.7-13,902 kU/L). Optimal diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the GI Monitor was found for pancreatic cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.83]. Results for the reference CA19-9 assay were comparable (AUC 0.85)., Conclusions: The Access GI Monitor provides very good methodological characteristics and demonstrates an excellent analytical and clinical correlation with the Elecsys CA19-9. The GI Monitor shows the best diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the GI Monitor in other cancers.

Background: Cancer antigen CA125 is known as a valuable marker for the management of ovarian cancer., Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access OV Monitor Immunoassay System (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated at five different European sites and compared with a reference system, defined as CA125 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics)., Results: Total imprecision (% CV) of the OV Monitor ranged between 3.1% and 8.8%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 4.7% and 5.0%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 100% (SD + 8.1%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on OV Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 107%, bilirubin 103%, triglycerides 103%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 27,193 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a good correlation between the Access OV Monitor and Elecsys CA125 (R = 0.982, slope = 0.921, intercept = +1.951). OV Monitor serum levels were low in healthy individuals (n = 267, median = 9.7 kU/L, 95th percentile = 30.8 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n = 549, medians = 10.9-16.4 kU/L, 95th percentiles = 44.2-355 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n = 995, medians = 12.4-445 kU/L; 95th percentiles = 53.4-4664 kU/L). Optimal diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the OV Monitor was found for ovarian cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.898]. Results for the reference CA125 assay were comparable (AUC 0.899)., Conclusions: The Access OV Monitor provides very good methodological characteristics and demonstrates an excellent analytical and clinical correlation with Elecsys CA125. The best diagnostic accuracy for the OV Monitor was found in ovarian cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the OV Monitor in other cancers.

Background: Cancer antigen CA15-3 antigen is known as a valuable marker for the management of breast cancer., Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access BR Monitor Immunoassay System (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated at five different European sites and compared with a reference system, defined as CA15-3 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics)., Results: Total imprecision (% CV) of the BR Monitor ranged between 5.5% and 11.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.4% and 5.1%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 98.5% (SD + 9.1%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on BR Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 112%, bilirubin 111%, triglycerides 108%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 13,540 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from individuals showed a general correlation between the Access BR Monitor and Elecsys CA15-3 (R = 0.797), with a slope of 1.383. CA15-3 serum levels, as measured by the BR Monitor, were low in healthy individuals (n = 267, median = 11.9 kU/L, 95th percentile = 23.5 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n = 549, medians = 11.3-15.6 kU/L, 95th percentiles = 21.6-54.6 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n = 995, medians = 11.2-22.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles = 30.0-429.7 kU/L). Best diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the BR Monitor was found for locoregional and metastatic breast cancer, as well as for ovarian cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.619, 0.897 and 0.774]. Results for the reference CA15-3 assay were comparable (AUC 0.611, 0.887 and 0.818)., Conclusions: The Access BR Monitor provides accurate methodological characteristics and demonstrates an analytical and clinical correlation with Elecsys CA15-3. Best diagnostic accuracy for the BR Monitor was found in breast and ovarian cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the BR Monitor in other cancers.