Search

This study examined the latent structure of the broad range of complex neuropsychiatric morbidities occurring 1 year after COVID-19 infection. As part of the CU-COVID19 study, 248 (response rate=39.3%) of 631 adults hospitalized for COVID-19 infection in Hong Kong completed an online survey between March-2021 and January-2022. Disorder prevalence was compared against a random non-infected household sample (n=1834). 248 surveys were received on average 321 days post-infection (Mean age: 48.9, 54% female, moderate/severe/critical infection: 58.2%). 32.4% were screened to have at least one mental disorder, 78.7% of whom had concurrent fatigue/subjective cognitive impairment (SCI). Only PTSD (19.1%) was significantly more common than control (14%, p=0.047). Latent profile analysis classified individuals into P1 (12·4%)-no current neuropsychiatric morbidities, P2 (23.1%)-SCI/fatigue, P3 (45.2%)-anxiety/PTSD, P4 (19.3%)-depression. SCI and fatigue pervaded in all profiles (P2-4) with neuropsychiatric morbidities one-year post-infection. PTSD, anxiety and depressive symptoms were most important in differentiating P2-4. Past mental health and P4 independently predicted functional impairment. Neuropsychiatric morbidity was associated with past mental health, reduced resilience, financial problems, but not COVID-19 severity. Their confluence with depressive and anxiety symptoms predicted impairment and are associated with psychological and environmental factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data to examine lipid control among adults in the US with coronary artery disease from January 2015 to March 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Depression and anxiety are commonly associated with synucleinopathies. Mood disturbances have also been reported in patients with idiopathic REM sleep behaviour disorder (iRBD) and are difficult to treat due to exacerbation of sleep symptoms with standard antidepressants. Despite this, detailed prevalence studies of mood symptomatology and contributors to mood disturbances in iRBD are limited. Mood, sleep, autonomic, cognitive and motor symptoms were assessed in 49 well‐characterized patients with iRBD using a variety of clinical scales. Spearman correlations, factor analysis and multiple linear regression were used to uncover associations between mood and non‐motor and motor symptoms. The prevalence of significant depression was 17.0% and that of anxiety was 14.6% in the iRBD cohort. Age and disease duration were not correlated with these affective symptoms in iRBD patients. We found depression was significantly predicted by the presence and severity of motor, sleep and cognitive symptoms. Anxiety was predicted by the severity of nocturnal and daytime sleep‐related symptoms, cognitive symptoms and autonomic symptoms, with a differential effect depending on the questionnaire used. Depression and anxiety are common in iRBD patients and can be significantly explained by specific sets of non‐motor and motor symptoms. These associations provide insight into the underlying pathophysiology and emphasize the importance of a holistic approach to mood disturbance in this population, which may circumvent the reliance on pharmacotherapy that can exacerbate dream enactment behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Several studies have used objective radiologic data to assess the effect of palliative radiotherapy on tumor burden. The purpose of this literature review was to survey the various metrics that have been used to quantify bone tumor response to palliative radiotherapy by radiographical means and to determine whether any of these metrics were associated with clinical palliative outcomes. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, a literature search Ovid Medline and OldMedline from 1946 to February 6, 2019, Embase Classic/Embase from 1947 to 2019 week 5, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials February 2019 to extract articles related to quantified radiologic evaluation of bone metastases following palliative radiotherapy. Imaging modality, quantification metric, and association between imaging modality and clinical response were recorded. Results: Fourteen articles selected for full-text review utilized computed tomography (10 studies), fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (3 studies), magnetic resonance imaging (1 study), diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (3 studies), and X-ray (1 study) imaging modalities. Variables assessed included tumor volume regression, bone density, metabolic activity, and signal intensity. Studies differed both in the type of imaging modality used and metric derived to quantify the radiologic findings. Fifty percent of the included studies aimed to identify a relationship between a quantified radiologic metric and clinical palliative response. Of these studies, 86% reported a correlation. Conclusion: Quantified radiologic metrics can provide an objective measure of response to palliative radiotherapy and may be useful in predicting clinical palliative response. More studies are needed to validate these metrics and develop a standardized protocol for radiologic evaluation that can be implemented into a clinical workflow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which analyzed data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey about spending on insulin by U.S. payers and patients from 2008 to 2017. Topics include increase in per-beneficiary spending on insulin by commercial payers over the study period, increase in per-beneficiary spending on insulin for Medicare and commercial payers, and difference between discounts available to Medicaid and non-Medicaid payers.

Purpose: To investigate the natural history of taxane-associated acute pain syndrome (TAPS) in a docetaxel patient cohort and to examine the long-term manifestation of TAPS.Patients and Methods: For three consecutive treatment cycles, taxane-naive breast cancer patients completed diaries on days 1-7, 14, and 21 and telephone questionnaires 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months following treatment. Questionnaires to assess pain and interference were adapted from the Brief Pain Inventory. To examine the experience of arthralgia and myalgia as one syndrome, information on patient experiences with arthralgia or myalgia was elicited separately in order to determine how closely experiences of each toxicity correlated with each other. A ≥2 point increase from baseline was defined as an arthralgia or myalgia "pain flare," and only those with "flare" were included in calculations of incidence.Results: A total of 278 patients were accrued. Thirty-eight patients were omitted due to missing information, and 24 patients were omitted due to metastatic disease, for a total of 216 patients overall and 188 in the docetaxel cohort. A total of 74.5% of docetaxel patients experienced joint pain flare, and 78.2% experienced muscle pain flare at some point in the overall course of three treatment cycles. Joint and muscle pain peaked on days 4-5 for each cycle, and median pain severity for both joint and muscle pain was 4/10 during the 21-day period. Median onset of joint pain flare was 3 days for cycle 1 and 4 days for cycles 2 and 3, with an average median duration of 4 days. Median onset of muscle pain flare was 4 days for all three cycles, with a median duration of 4 days for cycles 1 and 2, and 5 days for cycle 3. Both joint and muscle pain persisted 1 year after treatment in approximately half of responding patients.Conclusion: This study documents the significant incidence of TAPS in patients treated with docetaxel chemotherapy and shows a long-term persistence of the syndrome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Arthralgia and myalgia following taxane chemotherapy has been documented in the literature. However, these two toxicities associated with taxane treatment have not been closely examined in the literature, and data remain inconsistent in terms of the reported incidences of these toxicities. The purpose of this literature review was to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the incidence of taxane-induced arthralgia and myalgia, as well as to document the risk factors and preventative and therapeutic treatments that have been investigated. Methods A literature search was conducted in Ovid Medline, OldMedline, Embase, Embase Classic, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using relevant subject headings and keywords such as: “arthralgia,” “myalgia,” “muscle pain,” “joint pain,” “taxane,” “chemotherapy,” “docetaxel,” “paclitaxel.” Results The reported incidences of arthralgia and myalgia were variable. Taxane chemotherapy was found to be associated with greater incidences of arthralgia and myalgia than non-taxane forms of chemotherapy. Moreover, docetaxel and nab-paclitaxel seem to be associated with lower incidences of arthralgia and myalgia than paclitaxel. Finally, the literature on prevention and therapeutic treatment of taxane-induced arthralgia and myalgia is scarce. Conclusion More studies should be done in order to more conclusively identify optimal therapeutic and preventative treatments as well as different risk factors. We recommend that a prospective study be done in order to better understand the true incidence of arthralgia and myalgia in patients being treated with the paclitaxel, docetaxel, and nab-paclitaxel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess which pain intensity dimension scale (worst, least, average, or current pain) from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) correlates most highly with functional interference scores in patients experiencing taxane-induced arthralgia and myalgia.Methods: Breast cancer patients scheduled to receive docetaxel, paclitaxel, or albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) were enrolled in the study. Patients completed an initial baseline questionnaire and subsequently filled out a diary based on the BPI on days 1-7, 14, and 21 for three consecutive treatment cycles. Pain scores for worst, least, average, and current pain intensity dimensions as well as pain interference scores were recorded in the diaries and questionnaires using the BPI. Worst, least, average, and current pain scores were correlated with functional pain interference scores using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. A general linear mixed model of each functional interference measure was performed over time for cycles 1-3 with each pain intensity dimension scale.Results: Among worst, average, least, and current joint pain dimensions, average joint pain scores correlated best with all BPI interference responses while average muscle pain scores correlated best with all BPI interference responses except for sleeping probability and normal work.Conclusion: We recommend the BPI scale measuring average pain for future studies evaluating pain scores in patients experiencing taxane-induced arthralgia and myalgia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Quality of life (QoL) assessment questionnaires can be burdensome to advanced cancer patients, thus necessitating the need for shorter assessment instruments than traditionally available. We compare three shortened QoL questionnaires in regards to their characteristics, validity, and reliability. Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify studies that employed or discussed three abridged QoL questionnaires: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 15-Palliative Care (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General-7 (FACT-G7), and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care-14 (FACIT-PAL-14). Articles that discussed questionnaire length, intended use, scoring procedure, and validation were included. Results: The 7-item FACT-G7 is the shortest instrument, whereas the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and the FACIT-PAL-14 contain 14 and 15 items, respectively. All three questionnaires have similar recall period, item organization, and subscale components. Designed as core questionnaires, all three maintain content and concurrent validity of their unabridged original questionnaires. Both the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and the FACT-G7 demonstrate good internal consistency and reliability, with Cronbach's α ≥0.7 deemed acceptable. The developmental study for the FACIT-PAL-14 was published in 2013 and subsequent validation studies are not yet available. Conclusion: The EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and the FACT-G7 were found to be reliable and appropriate for assessing health-related QoL issues-the former for palliative cancer patients and the latter for advanced cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Conceptually, the FACIT-PAL-14 holds promise to cover social and emotional support issues that are not completely addressed by the other two questionnaires; however, further validation is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Limited data exist on predictors of intensive care unit (ICU) admission in patients with hematologic malignancy. The objective of this study was to identify predictors of ICU admission in hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancies. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 820 consecutive admissions of patients with a malignant hematology diagnosis at our institution between March 2009 and December 2015. Backward stepwise selection procedure was conducted for multivariable logistic regression analyses. 820 patients were included, of whom 179 (22%) were admitted to the ICU. Types of hematologic cancers included 71% (N = 578) lymphoid cancer, 18% (N = 151) myeloid cancer, and 10% (N = 80) plasma cell neoplasms. 14% (N = 111) of patients had acute leukemia. Six predictors of admission to ICU were found in multivariable analysis, including disease-related (acute leukemia, curative intent chemotherapy), laboratory-related (platelet count < 50 × 109/L, albumin below normal, LDH above normal at time of admission), and physician-related factors (having advanced directives discussion) (p < 0.0001). A significant proportion of patients with hematologic malignancies admitted to hospital are admitted to ICU. Utilizing the identified predictors of ICU admission may help guide timely informed goals of care discussions with patients before clinical deterioration occurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Statins may reduce a cytokine storm, which has been hypothesized as a possible mechanism of severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to report on adverse outcomes among COVID-19 patients by statin usage. Methods: Literatures were searched from January 2019 to December 2020 to identify studies that reported the association between statin usage and adverse outcomes, including mortality, ICU admissions, and mechanical ventilation. Studies were meta-analyzed for mortality by the subgroups of ICU status and statin usage before and after COVID-19 hospitalization. Studies reporting an odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed separately. Results: Thirteen cohorts, reporting on 110,078 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Individuals who used statins before their COVID-19 hospitalization showed a similar risk of mortality, compared to those who did not use statins (HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50, 1.28; OR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.38, 1.03). Patients who were administered statins after their COVID-19 diagnosis were at a lower risk of mortality (HR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.61; OR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.75). The use of statins did not reduce the mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU (OR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.26, 1.64). Among non-ICU patients, statin users were at a lower risk of mortality relative to non-statin users (HR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.62; OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.88). Conclusion: Patients administered statins after COVID-19 diagnosis or non-ICU admitted patients were at lower risk of mortality relative to non-statin users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: SPRINT and ACCORD are the two largest randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) targets of 120 mmHg. Both studies enrolled non-CKD patients at high cardiovascular (CV) risk. Current evidence has poorly characterized the renal effects of intensive SBP targets, which are critical to a complete understanding of BP treatment effects. Our study pools data of all non-CKD patients from ACCORD and SPRINT. We assessed whether an intensive SBP target of 120 mmHg would influence rates of incident CKD events. We additionally investigated if this population experienced CV benefits with this BP target. With 10,984 patients, this is the largest study to date examining BP targets using RCT data of patients without baseline CKD. Methods: IPD for all patients in the SPRINT and ACCORD trials were obtained; 10,984 patients without baseline CKD (defined as eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were identified. These patients were assigned to their original randomized intervention group—5,479 to the intensive group (120 mmHg SBP) and 5,505 to the standard group (140 mmHg SBP). We assessed whether intensive vs. standard BP control influenced incident CKD outcomes, defined as a reduction in eGFR of ≥30% to a level <60mL/min/1.73 m2, using Pearson's Chi-square test. We also evaluated the SPRINT Primary Outcome, all-cause mortality, CVD mortality, stroke, HF, and non-fatal MI in an intention to treat analysis using cox proportional hazards models stratified by clinical site. Results: In non-CKD patients, the incident CKD event rate was not independent of treatment group, at 13.9% (760/5479) and 7.0% (387/5505) in the intensive and standard groups, respectively (chi-square=137.42, p<0.001). The SPRINT Primary Outcome (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.93; p=0.002), stroke (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51, 0.95; p=0.02), and HF (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.0.57, 0.99; p=0.04) rates were significantly lower in the intensive group. Conclusion: Intensive BP targets influence the likelihood of incident CKD events in patients without baseline CKD. However, these targets have CV benefits in reducing rates of stroke, HF, and composite CV outcomes. Clinicians should consider CV benefits of intensive targets along with potential renal effects in clinical decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Racial/ethnic minority populations in the United States have increased rates of diabetes compared with White populations. The 2021 guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommend diabetes screening for adults aged 35 to 70 years with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 kg/m2 or greater.Objective: To determine the BMI threshold for diabetes screening in major racial/ethnic minority populations with benefits and harms equivalent to those of the current diabetes screening threshold in White adults.Design: Cross-sectional study.Setting: NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), 2011 to 2018.Participants: Nonpregnant U.S. adults aged 18 to 70 years (n = 19 335).Measurements: A logistic regression model was used to estimate diabetes prevalence at various BMIs for White, Asian, Black, and Hispanic Americans. For each racial/ethnic minority group, the equivalent BMI threshold was defined as the BMI at which the prevalence of diabetes in 35-year-old persons in that group is equal to that in 35-year-old White adults at a BMI of 25 kg/m2. Ranges were estimated to account for the uncertainty in prevalence estimates for White and racial/ethnic minority populations.Results: Among adults aged 35 years with a BMI of 25 kg/m2, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian Americans (3.8% [95% CI, 2.8% to 5.1%]), Black Americans (3.5% [CI, 2.7% to 4.7%]), and Hispanic Americans (3.0% [CI, 2.1% to 4.2%]) was significantly higher than that in White Americans (1.4% [CI, 1.0% to 2.0%]). Compared with a BMI threshold of 25 kg/m2 in White Americans, the equivalent BMI thresholds for diabetes prevalence were 20 kg/m2 (range, <18.5 to 23 kg/m2) for Asian Americans, less than 18.5 kg/m2 (range, <18.5 to 23 kg/m2) for Black Americans, and 18.5 kg/m2 (range, <18.5 to 24 kg/m2) for Hispanic Americans.Limitation: Sample size limitations precluded assessment of heterogeneity within racial/ethnic groups.Conclusion: Among U.S. adults aged 35 years or older, offering diabetes screening to Black Americans and Hispanic Americans with a BMI of 18.5 kg/m2 or greater and Asian Americans with a BMI of 20 kg/m2 or greater would be equivalent to screening White adults with a BMI of 25 kg/m2 or greater. Using screening thresholds specific to race/ethnicity has the potential to reduce disparities in diabetes diagnosis.Primary Funding Source: Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Colchicine may inhibit inflammasome signaling and reduce proinflammatory cytokines, a purported mechanism of COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to report on the state of the current literature on the use of colchicine in COVID-19 and to investigate the reported clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients by colchicine usage. Methods: The literature was searched from January 2019 through January 28, 2021. References were screened to identify studies that reported the effect of colchicine usage on COVID-19 outcomes including mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, or mechanical ventilation. Studies were meta-analyzed for mortality by the subgroup of trial design (RCT vs observational) and ICU status. Studies reporting an risk ratio (RR), odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed separately. Results: Eight studies, reporting on 16,248 patients, were included in this review. The Recovery trial reported equivalent mortality between colchicine and non-colchicine users. Across the other studies, patients who received colchicine had a lower risk of mortality—HR of 0.25 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.66) and OR of 0.22 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.57). There was no statistical difference in risk of ICU admissions between patients with COVID-19 who received colchicine and those who did not–OR of 0.26 (95% CI: 0.06, 1.09). Conclusion: Colchicine may reduce the risk of mortality in individuals with COVID-19. Further prospective investigation may further determine the efficacy of colchicine as treatment in COVID-19 patients in various care settings of the disease, including post-hospitalization and long-term care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Famotidine is a competitive histamine H2-receptor antagonist most commonly used for gastric acid suppression but thought to have potential efficacy in treating patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis are to summarize the current literature and report clinical outcomes on the use of famotidine for treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: Five databases were searched through February 12, 2021 to identify observational studies that reported on associations of famotidine use with outcomes in COVID-19. Meta-analysis was conducted for composite primary clinical outcome (e.g. rate of death, intubation, or intensive care unit admissions) and death separately, where either aggregate odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was calculated. Results: Four studies, reporting on 46,435 total patients and 3,110 patients treated with famotidine, were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant association between famotidine use and composite outcomes in patients with COVID-19: HR 0.63 (95% CI: 0.35, 1.16). Across the three studies that reported mortality separated from other endpoints, there was no association between famotidine use during hospitalization and risk of death—HR 0.67 (95% CI: 0.26, 1.73) and OR 0.79 (95% CI: 0.19, 3.34). Heterogeneity ranged from 83.69% to 88.07%. Conclusion: Based on the existing observational studies, famotidine use is not associated with a reduced risk of mortality or combined outcome of mortality, intubation, and/or intensive care services in hospitalized individuals with COVID-19, though heterogeneity was high, and point estimates suggested a possible protective effect for the composite outcome that may not have been observed due to lack of power. Further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may help determine the efficacy and safety of famotidine as a treatment for COVID-19 patients in various care settings of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The appendices were incorrectly numbered in the original article. Please see below correcct appendices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Weight loss in cancer patients is a worrisome constitutional change predicting disease progression and shortened survival time. A logical approach to counter some of the weight loss is to provide nutritional support, administered through enteral nutrition (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN). The aim of this paper was to update the original systematic review and meta-analysis previously published by Chow et al., while also assessing publication quality and effect of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the meta-conclusion over time.Methods: A literature search was carried out; screening was conducted for RCTs published in January 2015 up until December 2018. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving no infection and no nutrition support complications. Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients achieving no major complications and no mortality. Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) by Cochrane IMS and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 3) by Biostat were used for meta-analyses of endpoints and assessment of publication quality.Results: An additional seven studies were identified since our prior publication, leading to 43 papers included in our review. The results echo those previously published; EN and PN are equivalent in all endpoints except for infection. Subgroup analyses of studies only containing adults indicate identical risks across all endpoints. Cumulative meta-analysis suggests that meta-conclusions have remained the same since the beginning of publication time for all endpoints except for the endpoint of infection, which changed from not favoring to favoring EN after studies published in 1997. There was low risk of bias, as determined by assessment tool and visual inspection of funnel plots.Conclusions: The results support the current European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines recommending enteral over parenteral nutrition, when oral nutrition is inadequate, in adult patients. Further studies comparing EN and PN for these critical endpoints appear unnecessary, given the lack of change in meta-conclusion and low publication bias over the past decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• All but one endpoint maintained the same meta-conclusion over publication time. • New studies did not change the scientific conclusion of existing literature. • SFRT is equally as efficacious as MFRT. • The majority of included studies have low risk of bias. • Future resources should not be used to repeat these studies, and can be better allocated to test other hypotheses. There has been a long-standing debate regarding the efficacy of single fraction radiotherapy (SFRT) compared to multiple fraction radiotherapy (MFRT); many systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been conducted to resolve the debate and suggested SFRT is equally as effective as MFRT. Given the adequate amalgamated sample size that exists, it is difficult to appreciate the need for further RCTs. The aim of this paper was to conduct a cumulative meta-analysis to determine whether further trials will be of value to the meta-conclusion. This paper also assessed publication quality. A total of 29 studies were used in our meta-analysis. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 3) by Biostat was used to conduct a cumulative meta-analysis. The Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool was employed to assess study quality of the included RCTs. Funnel plots were generated using Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) by Cochrane IMS, to visually assess for publication bias. All but one endpoint, overall response rates in assessable patients, maintained the same meta-conclusion over publication time; published studies did not change the amalgamated scientific conclusion of existing literature. Additional studies have simply confirmed pre-existing conclusions and refined the point estimate of the efficacy estimate. The majority of included studies have low risk of bias. In conclusion, the meta-conclusion has remained consistent over time – SFRT is equally as efficacious as MFRT. Recent studies have had little impact on the overall conclusion, and given the vast amount of resources to execute a randomized trial, future resources should not be used to repeat these studies, and can be better allocated to test other hypotheses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim is to conduct an updated systematic review comparing palonosetron to other 5-HT 3 RAs for the prophylaxis of CINV, assess for publication biases, and determine whether further RCTs are required, that could potentially lead to a different meta-conclusion. Random-effects analysis model was used to generate odds ratio (OR), risk differences (RD) and accompanying 95% confidence intervals (CI). Funnel plots to assess for biases and cumulative meta-analyses to assess effect size over time were generated. 4145 patients were randomized to palonosetron and 4911 received other 5-HT 3 RAs. In the majority of efficacy endpoints, the meta-conclusion has not changed over time - recent clinical trials simply narrow CIs the meta-conclusion. Safety profile boasts a stable conclusion over time. No publication biases exist. Considering the vast amount of resources needed to conduct RCTs, resources should be dedicated to other prophylactic treatments/settings which have not been as well explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Patients with multiple brain metastases may be treated with whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). For these patients, symptom palliation and improvement of quality of life (QOL) and performance status is of the upmost importance. The objective of the present study was to determine the symptom experience and overall QOL in patients with brain metastases before and after WBRT.Methods: A total of 14 symptom scores and overall QOL were collected prospectively in 217 patients for up to 3 months. Wilcoxon signed rank test was applied to determine significant symptoms and QOL changes. Spearman's correlations were applied to determine the relationship between symptom scores and QOL.Results: Appetite loss, weakness, and nausea significantly increased from baseline, while balance, headache, and anxiety significantly decreased from baseline. At baseline, all symptoms other than coordination were significantly correlated with QOL. At 1-month follow-up (FU), changes in concentration, weakness, coordination, and balance were significantly associated with QOL changes. At 2-month FU, changes in pain, insomnia, concentration, balance, and depression were significantly associated with QOL changes. At 3-month FU, only change in nausea was significantly associated with QOL changes.Conclusions: Following WBRT, certain symptoms may influence overall QOL to a greater extent than others, which may fluctuate with time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Olanzapine is a potent antipsychotic medication that inhibits a wide variety of receptors. It has been used in trials for the prophylaxis and rescue of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This study systematically investigates the efficacy of olanzapine in relation to other antiemetics in the prophylaxis and rescue of CINV.Methods: A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing olanzapine to other standard antiemetics for either prevention or rescue. The primary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving no emesis or no nausea, in the acute, delayed, and overall phases.Results: Ten RCTs in the preventative setting and three RCTs in the breakthrough setting were identified. Subgroup analysis demonstrated a similar degree of benefit from a 5- and 10-mg dose of olanzapine for the no emesis endpoint in the overall phase. In the prophylaxis setting, olanzapine was statistically superior in five of six endpoints and clinically superior in four of six endpoints. In the breakthrough setting, olanzapine was statistically and clinically superior in the only endpoint analyzed: no emesis.Conclusion: Olanzapine is more efficacious than other standard antiemetics for the rescue of CINV and its inclusion improves control in the prevention setting. Given the possible reduction in side effects, the use of a 5-mg dose of olanzapine should be considered. Future RCTs should compare the 5-mg versus the 10-mg dosages further and report on the efficacy and percentage of patients developing side effects. Further analyses should be done without the influence of corticosteroids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug that inhibits serotonergic, dopaminergic, alpha-1 adrenergic, histaminic, and muscarinic receptors. Several phase I and II trials have been published documenting the use of olanzapine in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This review aims to summarize all phase I and II trials that reported on olanzapine for the prophylaxis of CINV.Methods: A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE from 1946 to July week 1 2015, Embase Classic and Embase from 1947 to 2015 week 28, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up until June 2015. Phase I and II trials reporting on olanzapine for the prophylaxis for CINV were included if they reported on at least one of four primary endpoints: complete response (CR), complete control (CC), no nausea, and no emesis. Other endpoints of interest included the safety of olanzapine as measured by the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory.Results: Across the seven included studies, there were a total of 201 patients. The CR across four studies was 97.2, 83.1, and 82.8 % for the acute, delayed, and overall phases, respectively. The CC for acute, delayed, and overall phases was 92.5, 87.5, and 82.5 %, respectively. The overall no nausea rate was 92.7, 71.8, and 70.6 % for the acute, delayed, and overall phases, respectively. The overall no emesis rates for the acute, delayed, and overall phases were 100, 94.5, and 90.4 %, respectively. Fatigue, drowsiness, and disturbed sleep were common side effects.Conclusion: Olanzapine is efficacious and safe when used as a prophylaxis for CINV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to compare the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) quality of life (QOL) scores of patient groups with varying clinical and sociodemographic features in the early stage cancer population. Methods: A literature search was conducted on both the Embase and OvidSP platforms. Weighted analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for binary predictors and weighted linear regression analysis was conducted for continuous predictors. Results: Six binary features predicted at least one domain of QOL: primary cancer site (homogeneous versus heterogeneous), total per capita healthcare expenditures, mean age, previous chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and previous hormonal therapy. Two continuous factors had predictive value with respect to QOL: completion of postsecondary education and marital status. Conclusion: Although there are limitations of the current study, similar correlations to our own have been previously described between QOL and healthcare expenditures, mean age and education. Currently, the literature conflicts in its analysis of previous radiotherapy and chemotherapy as predictors of QOL. No published evidence exists describing the presently found relationships in primary cancer site, marital status and hormonal therapy. Future work may focus on determining cause and effect relationships between these predictors and QOL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Evidence suggests that intensive blood pressure targets may be beneficial for cardiovascular outcomes. Limited evidence exists for whether these benefits are consistent across different races. SPRINT and ACCORD are the largest randomized control trials that investigate intensive blood pressure targets. Hypothesis: We assessed if the effect of intensive antihypertensive therapy varies by race. Methods: We pooled individual patient level data from SPRINT and ACCORD, which enrolled patients with hypertension at high risk for cardiovascular disease (N = 14,094; 39.7% Female; 58.0% White, 27.9% Black, 9.3% Hispanic, 4.8% Other; Age (years) = 66.2 ± 8.9; Baseline BP (mmHg) = 139.5/77.4 ± 15.7/11.5). We assessed the effects of intensive (<120 mmHg) vs. standard (<140 mmHg) target antihypertensive therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of first incidence of myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality. All-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality were assessed as secondary outcomes. Hazard ratios were calculated for each race category for each outcome using Cox proportional hazard models. Interactions between treatment effect and race were assessed using likelihood ratio tests. Results: Intensive vs. standard hazard ratios [HRs] (95% CI; p-value) for the primary outcome were 0.800 (0.697-0.918; 0.001), 0.816 (0.645-1.032; 0.089), 0.974 (0.643-1.475; 0.899), and 0.903 (0.555-1.469; 0.681) in White, Hispanic, Black, and Other race respectively. Cardiovascular mortality HRs were 0.807 (0.578-1.128; 0.209), 0.792 (0.467-1.345; 0.388), 0.462 (0.16-1.329; 0.152), and 2.080 (0.519-8.331; 0.301). All-cause mortality HRs were 0.791 (0.651-0.960; 0.018), 0.999 (0.743-1.344; 0.996), 1.086 (0.624-1.892; 0.770), 1.284 (0.531-3.104; 0.579). Interactions between treatment effect and race were not found for primary outcome (p = 0.797), all-cause mortality (p = 0.378), or cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.377). Conclusion: In conclusion, cardiovascular and mortality benefits from treating to an intensive SBP target of <120 mmHg vs. standard target of <140 mmHg were consistent across all races. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]