Search

Objective: To determine the inter-rater reliability of the 13-point manual muscle test (MMT) in two upper limb muscle groups of people with tetraplegiaSetting: The study was conducted at three spinal cord injury (SCI) units.Participants: Sixty people with complete or incomplete tetraplegia.Methods: The inter-rater reliability of the 13-point MMT was investigated. Strength of the elbow flexors and/or wrist extensors in people with tetraplegia was measured by two physiotherapists on the same day.Results: The weighted kappa coefficient (95% confidence interval) reflecting the agreement between the two strength assessments by two different assessors for the wrist extensors and elbow flexors were 0.96 (0.93 to 0.99) and 0.94 (0.89 to 0.99), respectively. Repeat measurements by different physiotherapists were within 1 of 13 points of each other 82% of the time for wrist extensors and 87% of the time for the elbow flexors.Conclusion: The 13-point MMT is a reliable measure of strength in the wrist extensors and elbow flexors of people with tetraplegia.

AIDS Clinical Trial Group study A5202 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00118898","term_id":"NCT00118898"}}NCT00118898) was a phase 3b, randomized, partially blinded equivalence study of open-label atazanavir/ritonavir or efavirenz, plus either placebo-controlled tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine, in treatment-naive adults living with HIV-1, evaluating efficacy, safety, and tolerability. We report an analysis of the contribution of participant characteristics to the disposition of tenofovir plasma concentrations. Tenofovir concentration data from a total of 817 individuals (88% of the total number of eligible patients randomly assigned to receive treatment in the TDF-containing arms of A5202) were available for analysis. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. One- and two-compartment models with first-order absorption and first-order elimination were evaluated. An exponential error model was used for examination of interindividual variability (IIV), and a proportional and mixed-error model was assessed for residual variability. The final structural model contained two compartments with first-order absorption and elimination. IIV was estimated for apparent clearance (CL/F) and the first-order absorption rate constant (ka), and a proportional residual variability model was selected. The final mean parameter estimates were as follows: ka = 2.87 h−1, CL/F = 37.2 liters/h, apparent volumes of the central and peripheral compartments = 127 and 646 liters, respectively, and apparent intercompartmental clearance = 107 liters/h. In addition to race/ethnicity, creatinine clearance and assignment to atazanavir/ritonavir or efavirenz were significantly associated with CL/F (P < 0.001). In conclusion, race/ethnicity is associated with tenofovir oral CL in HIV-1 positive, treatment-naive adults. This covariate relationship raises questions about the possibility of differences in efficacy and risk of adverse events in different patient populations and suggests that examining preexposure prophylaxis regimens and tenofovir exposure in different race/ethnicity groups be considered.

Aims: The treatment of prostate cancer has evolved markedly over the last 40 years, including radiotherapy, notably with escalated dose and targeting. However, the optimal treatment for localised disease has not been established in comparative randomised trials. The aim of this article is to describe the history ofprostate radiotherapy trials, including their quality assurance processes, and to compare these with the ProtecT trial.Materials and methods: The UK ProtecT randomised trial compares external beam conformal radiotherapy, surgery and active monitoring for clinically localized prostate cancer and will report on the primary outcome (disease-specific mortality) in 2016 following recruitment between 1999 and 2009. The embedded quality assurance programme consists of on-site machine dosimetry at the nine trial centres, a retrospective review of outlining and adherence to dose constraints based on the trial protocol in 54 participants (randomly selected, around 10% of the total randomised to radiotherapy, n ¼ 545). These quality assurance processes and results were compared with prostate radiotherapy trials of a comparable era.Results: There has been an increasingly sophisticated quality assurance programme in UK prostate radiotherapy trials over the last 15 years, reflecting dose escalation and treatment complexity. In ProtecT, machine dosimetry results were comparable between trial centres and with the UK RT01 trial. The outliningreview showed that most deviations were clinically acceptable, although three (1.4%) may have been of clinical significance and were related to outlining of theprostate. Seminal vesicle outlining varied, possibly due to several prostate trials running concurrently with different protocols. Adherence to dose constraints inProtecT was considered acceptable, with 80% of randomised participants having two or less deviations and planning target volume coverage was excellent.Conclusion: The ProtecT trial quality assurance results were satisfactory and comparable with trials of its era. Future trials should aim to standardise treatment protocols and quality assurance programmes where possible to reduce complexities for centres involved in multiple trials. 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Royal College of Radiologists.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) might detect more toxic effects of radiotherapy than do clinician-reported outcomes. We did a quality of life (QoL) substudy to assess PROs up to 24 months after conventionally fractionated or hypofractionated radiotherapy in the Conventional or Hypofractionated High Dose Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy in Prostate Cancer (CHHiP) trial.METHODS: The CHHiP trial is a randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial done in 71 centres, of which 57 UK hospitals took part in the QoL substudy. Men with localised prostate cancer who were undergoing radiotherapy were eligible for trial entry if they had histologically confirmed T1b-T3aN0M0 prostate cancer, an estimated risk of seminal vesicle involvement less than 30%, prostate-specific antigen concentration less than 30 ng/mL, and a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive a standard fractionation schedule of 74 Gy in 37 fractions or one of two hypofractionated schedules: 60 Gy in 20 fractions or 57 Gy in 19 fractions. Randomisation was done with computer-generated permuted block sizes of six and nine, stratified by centre and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group. Treatment allocation was not masked. UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), including Short Form (SF)-36 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P), or Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) and SF-12 quality-of-life questionnaires were completed at baseline, pre-radiotherapy, 10 weeks post-radiotherapy, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial completed accrual on June 16, 2011, and the QoL substudy was closed to further recruitment on Nov 1, 2009. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint of the QoL substudy was overall bowel bother and comparisons between fractionation groups were done at 24 months post-radiotherapy. The CHHiP trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN97182923.FINDINGS: 2100 participants in the CHHiP trial consented to be included in the QoL substudy: 696 assigned to the 74 Gy schedule, 698 assigned to the 60 Gy schedule, and 706 assigned to the 57 Gy schedule. Of these individuals, 1659 (79%) provided data pre-radiotherapy and 1444 (69%) provided data at 24 months after radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 50·0 months (IQR 38·4-64·2) on April 9, 2014, which was the most recent follow-up measurement of all data collected before the QoL data were analysed in September, 2014. Comparison of 74 Gy in 37 fractions, 60 Gy in 20 fractions, and 57 Gy in 19 fractions groups at 2 years showed no overall bowel bother in 269 (66%), 266 (65%), and 282 (65%) men; very small bother in 92 (22%), 91 (22%), and 93 (21%) men; small bother in 26 (6%), 28 (7%), and 38 (9%) men; moderate bother in 19 (5%), 23 (6%), and 21 (5%) men, and severe bother in four (INTERPRETATION: The incidence of patient-reported bowel symptoms was low and similar between patients in the 74 Gy control group and the hypofractionated groups up to 24 months after radiotherapy. If efficacy outcomes from CHHiP show non-inferiority for hypofractionated treatments, these findings will add to the growing evidence for moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules becoming the standard treatment for localised prostate cancer.FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity that would give a therapeutic advantage to hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned analysis of the efficacy and side-effects of a randomised trial comparing conventional and hypofractionated radiotherapy after 5 years follow-up.METHODS: CHHiP is a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial that recruited men with localised prostate cancer (pT1b-T3aN0M0). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to conventional (74 Gy delivered in 37 fractions over 7·4 weeks) or one of two hypofractionated schedules (60 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks or 57 Gy in 19 fractions over 3·8 weeks) all delivered with intensity-modulated techniques. Most patients were given radiotherapy with 3-6 months of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen suppression. Randomisation was by computer-generated random permuted blocks, stratified by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk group and radiotherapy treatment centre, and treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to biochemical or clinical failure; the critical hazard ratio (HR) for non-inferiority was 1·208. Analysis was by intention to treat. Long-term follow-up continues. The CHHiP trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN97182923.FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2002, and June 17, 2011, 3216 men were enrolled from 71 centres and randomly assigned (74 Gy group, 1065 patients; 60 Gy group, 1074 patients; 57 Gy group, 1077 patients). Median follow-up was 62·4 months (IQR 53·9-77·0). The proportion of patients who were biochemical or clinical failure free at 5 years was 88·3% (95% CI 86·0-90·2) in the 74 Gy group, 90·6% (88·5-92·3) in the 60 Gy group, and 85·9% (83·4-88·0) in the 57 Gy group. 60 Gy was non-inferior to 74 Gy (HR 0·84 [90% CI 0·68-1·03], pNI=0·0018) but non-inferiority could not be claimed for 57 Gy compared with 74 Gy (HR 1·20 [0·99-1·46], pNI=0·48). Long-term side-effects were similar in the hypofractionated groups compared with the conventional group. There were no significant differences in either the proportion or cumulative incidence of side-effects 5 years after treatment using three clinician-reported as well as patient-reported outcome measures. The estimated cumulative 5 year incidence of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) grade 2 or worse bowel and bladder adverse events was 13·7% (111 events) and 9·1% (66 events) in the 74 Gy group, 11·9% (105 events) and 11·7% (88 events) in the 60 Gy group, 11·3% (95 events) and 6·6% (57 events) in the 57 Gy group, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were reported.INTERPRETATION: Hypofractionated radiotherapy using 60 Gy in 20 fractions is non-inferior to conventional fractionation using 74 Gy in 37 fractions and is recommended as a new standard of care for external-beam radiotherapy of localised prostate cancer.FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Department of Health, and the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.

Summary Background Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity, implying a therapeutic advantage of hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned preliminary safety analysis of side-effects in stages 1 and 2 of a randomised trial comparing standard and hypofractionated radiotherapy. Methods We did a multicentre, randomised study and recruited men with localised prostate cancer between Oct 18, 2002, and Aug 12, 2006, at 11 UK centres. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive conventional or hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and all were given with 3–6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression. Computer-generated random permuted blocks were used, with risk of seminal vesicle involvement and radiotherapy-treatment centre as stratification factors. The conventional schedule was 37 fractions of 2 Gy to a total of 74 Gy. The two hypofractionated schedules involved 3 Gy treatments given in either 20 fractions to a total of 60 Gy, or 19 fractions to a total of 57 Gy. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients with grade 2 or worse toxicity at 2 years on the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale. The primary analysis included all patients who had received at least one fraction of radiotherapy and completed a 2 year assessment. Treatment allocation was not masked and clinicians were not blinded. Stage 3 of this trial completed the planned recruitment in June, 2011. This study is registered, number ISRCTN97182923. Findings 153 men recruited to stages 1 and 2 were randomly assigned to receive conventional treatment of 74 Gy, 153 to receive 60 Gy, and 151 to receive 57 Gy. With 50·5 months median follow-up (IQR 43·5–61·3), six (4·3%; 95% CI 1·6–9·2) of 138 men in the 74 Gy group had bowel toxicity of grade 2 or worse on the RTOG scale at 2 years, as did five (3·6%; 1·2–8·3) of 137 men in the 60 Gy group, and two (1·4%; 0·2–5·0) of 143 men in the 57 Gy group. For bladder toxicities, three (2·2%; 0·5–6·2) of 138 men, three (2·2%; 0·5–6·3) of 137, and none (0·0%; 97·5% CI 0·0–2·6) of 143 had scores of grade 2 or worse on the RTOG scale at 2 years. Interpretation Hypofractionated high-dose radiotherapy seems equally well tolerated as conventionally fractionated treatment at 2 years. Funding Stage 1 was funded by the Academic Radiotherapy Unit, Cancer Research UK programme grant; stage 2 was funded by the Department of Health and Cancer Research UK.

This study aimed to evaluate whether the use of preoperative ultrasound (US)-guided wire localization of metastatic axillary lymph nodes (LN) assessed previously by core needle biopsy (CNB) and clip placement in breast cancer patients improves successful surgical removal.A retrospective review examined breast cancer patients who underwent US-guided CNB of an axillary LN and biopsy clip placement as well as axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) or sentinel node lymph node biopsy (SLNB) from 1 January 2010 to 30 September 2013. Preoperative needle localization status, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and type of axillary LN surgery were reviewed. Confirmation that the metastatic LN had been surgically removed was determined on the specimen image, by pathologic report confirmation, or by pre-radiation therapy computed tomography (CT) scan.Preoperative US-guided needle localization was performed for 68.2 % (73/107) of the patients, with 97.3 % (n = 71) demonstrating confirmation of biopsy clip and LN removal versus 79.4 % (n = 27) of the 34 patients showing no performance of needle localization (p = 0.0043). Subgroup analysis showed a significant difference in removal of metastatic LN between the patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy [97 % of LNs removed with wire localization (n = 65/67) vs. 83.3 % of LNs removed without wire localization (n = 20/24; p = 0.04)] and the patients who had ALND, [96.3 % of LNs removed with wire localization (n = 52/54) vs. 77.8 % of LNs removed without wire localization (n = 21/27; p = 0.015)].US-guided wire localization of metastatic axillary LNs that have had biopsy with clip placement significantly improves the success rate of surgical removal, allowing more accurate staging and decreasing the false-negative rates of SLNB after neoadjuvant therapy.

In this study we have screened a series of 29 primary leiomyosarcomas for abnormalities of both the p53 gene and the MDM2 gene, which encodes a p53-associated protein. SSCP (single-strand conformation polymorphism) analysis and direct sequencing of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-amplified DNA were used to establish that 6/29 tumours possessed point mutations of the p53 gene. Using a monoclonal antibody that recognises the p53 protein in immunohistochemical staining experiments, we observed overexpression of the p53 protein in five of the six tumours containing point mutations in the p53 gene. Southern analysis of tumour DNA revealed that 2/29 tumours demonstrated amplification of the MDM2 gene. When considered together, these results indicate that alterations in both the p53 gene and MDM2 gene are important in the development of a significant minority of leiomyosarcomas. In addition, we have demonstrated a significant association between the presence of abnormalities of the p53 gene or MDM2 genes in leiomyosarcomas and a more advanced clinicopathological stage (P = 0.03). We have also examined the role of the DCC tumour-suppressor gene in the development of human soft-tissue tumours in a variety of histological types. Except for evidence of a rearrangement in a single leiomyosarcoma cell line, SK-UT-1, we have found no direct evidence to support a role for mutation of the gene in the development of human soft-tissue tumours. Images Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 6

BackgroundAntiretroviral regimens with simplified dosing and better safety are needed to maximize the efficiency of antiretroviral delivery in resource-limited settings. We investigated the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral regimens with once-daily compared to twice-daily dosing in diverse areas of the world.Methods and findings1,571 HIV-1-infected persons (47% women) from nine countries in four continents were assigned with equal probability to open-label antiretroviral therapy with efavirenz plus lamivudine-zidovudine (EFV+3TC-ZDV), atazanavir plus didanosine-EC plus emtricitabine (ATV+DDI+FTC), or efavirenz plus emtricitabine-tenofovir-disoproxil fumarate (DF) (EFV+FTC-TDF). ATV+DDI+FTC and EFV+FTC-TDF were hypothesized to be non-inferior to EFV+3TC-ZDV if the upper one-sided 95% confidence bound for the hazard ratio (HR) was ≤1.35 when 30% of participants had treatment failure. An independent monitoring board recommended stopping study follow-up prior to accumulation of 472 treatment failures. Comparing EFV+FTC-TDF to EFV+3TC-ZDV, during a median 184 wk of follow-up there were 95 treatment failures (18%) among 526 participants versus 98 failures among 519 participants (19%; HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.27; p = 0.74). Safety endpoints occurred in 243 (46%) participants assigned to EFV+FTC-TDF versus 313 (60%) assigned to EFV+3TC-ZDV (HR 0.64, CI 0.54-0.76; pConclusionEFV+FTC-TDF had similar high efficacy compared to EFV+3TC-ZDV in this trial population, recruited in diverse multinational settings. Superior safety, especially in HIV-1-infected women, and once-daily dosing of EFV+FTC-TDF are advantageous for use of this regimen for initial treatment of HIV-1 infection in resource-limited countries. ATV+DDI+FTC had inferior efficacy and is not recommended as an initial antiretroviral regimen.Trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00084136. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.