Search

Objective. We examined whether height less than the 1% for age (z score Design. National cohort study of children initiating dialysis, followed for a minimum of 1 month to a maximum of 8 years. Setting. Voluntary consortium of pediatric nephrology centers across the United States and Canada in the North American Pediatric Renal Transplant Cooperative Study. Patients. Two thousand three hundred six patients [less than or equal to] 21 years old initiated on dialysis between 1992 and 2000. Outcome Measures. School attendance, transplant wait listing, hospitalization rates, and survival. Results. Although there were no differences in transplant wait listings, school-aged children with short stature were less likely to be attending school full-time than were their counterparts with more normal height, even if medically capable. Short-stature patients have significantly more hospital days per month of dialysis follow-up than those patients with better growth (mean: 1.92 vs 1.58; median: 0.73 vs 0.44 hospital days per month of follow-up). Cox proportional hazards regression analyses show that children with height Conclusions. Poor growth during chronic renal insufficiency leading to short stature at dialysis initiation is a marker for a more complicated clinical course for children with kidney failure. Aggressive nutritional support and early referral to a nephrologist to optimize growth may improve long-term outcomes for children with chronic kidney disease. Pediatrics 2002;109:909-913; growth, kidney disease, morbidity., Growth failure is a significant problem for children with chronic kidney disease. Reports from the US Renal Data System (1) and the North American Pediatric Renal Transplant Cooperative Study (NAPRTCS) [...]

Background: A peptide vaccine was produced containing B and T cell epitopes from the V3 and C4 Envelope domains of 4 subtype B HIV-1 isolates (MN, RF, CanO, & Ev91). The peptide mixture was formulated as an emulsion in incomplete Freund's adjuvant (IFA). Methods: Low-risk, healthy adult subjects were enrolled in a randomized, placebo-controlled dose-escalation study, and selected using criteria specifying that 50% in each study group would be HLA-B7+. Immunizations were scheduled at 0, 1, and 6 months using a total peptide dose of 1 or 4 mg. Adaptive immune responses in16 vaccine recipients and two placebo recipients after the 2nd immunization were evaluated using neutralization assays of sera, as well as ELISpot and ICS assays of cryopreserved PBMCs to assess CD4 and CD8 T-cell responses. In addition, 51Cr release assays were performed on fresh PBMCs following 14-day stimulation with individual vaccine peptide antigens. Results: 24 subjects were enrolled; 18 completed 2 injections. The study was prematurely terminated because 4 vaccinees developed prolonged pain and sterile abscess formation at the injection site-2 after dose 1, and 2 after dose 2. Two other subjects experienced severe systemic reactions consisting of headache, chills, nausea, and myalgia. Both reactions occurred after the second 4 mg dose. The immunogenicity assessments showed that 6/8 vaccinees at each dose level had detectable MN-specific neutralizing (NT) activity, and 2/7 HLA-B7+ vaccinees had classical CD8 CTL activity detected. However, using both ELISpot and ICS, 8/16 vaccinees (5/7 HLA-B7+) and 0/2 controls had detectable vaccine-specific CD8 T-cell responses. Subjects with moderate or severe systemic or local reactions tended to have more frequent T cell responses and higher antibody responses than those with mild or no reactions. Conclusions: The severity of local responses related to the formulation of these four peptides in IFA is clinically unacceptable for continued development. Both HIV-specific antibody and T cell responses were induced and the magnitude of response correlated with the severity of local and systemic reactions. If potent adjuvants are necessary for subunit vaccines to induce broad and durable immune responses, careful, incremental clinical evaluation is warranted to minimize the risk of adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction For opioid-dependent patients in the US and elsewhere, detoxification and counseling-only aftercare are treatment mainstays. Long-term abstinence is rarely achieved; many patients relapse and overdose after detoxification. Methadone, buprenorphine-naloxone (BUP-NX) and extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) can prevent opioid relapse but are underutilized. This study is intended to develop an evidence-base to help patients and providers make informed choices and to foster wider adoption of relapse-prevention pharmacotherapies. Methods The National Institute on Drug Abuse's Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study CTN-0051, X:BOT, is a comparative effectiveness study of treatment for 24 weeks with XR-NTX, an opioid antagonist, versus BUP-NX, a high affinity partial opioid agonist, for opioid dependent patients initiating treatment at 8 short-term residential (detoxification) units and continuing care as outpatients. Up to 600 participants are randomized (1:1) to XR-NTX or BUP-NX. Results The primary outcome is time to opioid relapse (i.e., loss of persistent abstinence) across the 24-week treatment phase. Differences between arms in the distribution of time-to-relapse will be compared (construction of the asymptotic 95% CI for the hazard ratio of the difference between arms). Secondary outcomes include proportions retained in treatment, rates of opioid abstinence, adverse events, cigarette, alcohol, and other drug use, and HIV risk behaviors; opioid cravings, quality of life, cognitive function, genetic moderators, and cost effectiveness. Conclusions XR-NTX and BUP-NX differ considerably in their characteristics and clinical management; no studies to date have compared XR-NTX with buprenorphine maintenance. Study design choices and compromises inherent to a comparative effectiveness trial of distinct treatment regimens are reviewed. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02032433 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Effective medications to treat cocaine dependence have not been identified. Recent pharmacotherapy trials demonstrate the potential efficacy of buprenorphine (BUP) (alone or with naltrexone) for reducing cocaine use. The National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) launched the Cocaine Use Reduction with Buprenorphine (CURB) investigation to examine the safety and efficacy of sublingual BUP (as Suboxone®) in the presence of extended-release injectable naltrexone (XR-NTX, as Vivitrol®) for the treatment of cocaine dependence. This paper describes the design and rationale for this study. Methods: This multi-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled study will randomize 300 participants across 11 sites. Participants must meet the DSM-IV criteria for cocaine dependence and past or current opioid dependence or abuse. Participants are inducted onto XR-NTX after self-reporting at least 7days of abstinence from opioids and tolerating a naloxone challenge followed by oral naltrexone and are then randomly assigned to one of three medication conditions (4mg BUP, 16mg BUP, or placebo) for 8weeks. Participants receive a second injection of XR-NTX 4weeks after the initial injection, and follow-up visits are scheduled at 1 and 3months post-treatment. Participants receive weekly cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Recruitment commenced in September, 2011. Enrollment, active medication, and follow-up phases are ongoing, and recruitment is exceeding targeted enrollment rates. Conclusions: This research using 2 medications will demonstrate whether BUP, administered in the presence of XR-NTX, reduces cocaine use in adults with cocaine dependence and opioid use disorders and will demonstrate if XR-NTX prevents development of physiologic dependence on BUP. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]