| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Stratigos, A J, et al.
(författare)
-
Euromelanoma: a dermatology-led European campaign against nonmelanoma skin cancer and cutaneous melanoma. Past, present and future.
- 2012
-
Ingår i: The British journal of dermatology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1365-2133 .- 0007-0963. ; 167 Suppl 2, s. 99-104
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Euromelanoma is a dermatologist-led skin cancer prevention programme conducting an annual screening and public education campaign in over 20 European countries. Within its 10-year history, Euromelanoma has screened over 260,000 individuals across Europe, detecting a significant number of cutaneous melanomas and nonmelanoma skin cancers, identifying high-risk individuals for further surveillance and promoting awareness on the suspicious features of melanoma and the hazardous effects of ultraviolet exposure. In this review article, we summarize the history of the Euromelanoma campaign, present its organizational structure and discuss the results of the campaign in individual countries and on a European scale. Euromelanoma has had a significant impact on melanoma prevention and early diagnosis in participating countries and, despite many challenges, has positively influenced public health attitudes towards regular mole examination and the implementation of preventive measures against skin cancer.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Cazzaniga, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Development of a clinical score system for the diagnosis of photoallergic contact dermatitis using a consensus process: item selection and reliability
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. - : Wiley. - 1468-3083 .- 0926-9959. ; 29:7, s. 1376-1381
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) is an uncommon condition, and there is a lack of validated criteria for its diagnosis. Objective: To identify a set of relevant criteria to be considered when suspecting a diagnosis of PACD and to assess the reproducibility of these criteria. Methods: This was a diagnostic item selection and reliability study performed between July 2012 and October 2012. A panel of seven recognized experts was invited to consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey and to a conclusive face-to-face meeting with the aim of obtaining an agreement on criteria for the diagnosis of PACD. The panel was also provided with a series of 16 reports of suspected PACDs to be classified according to a five-point likelihood scale. Identified criteria with the weights attributed by experts were used to develop a score system for the diagnosis of PACD. Consensus was measured by calculating the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). The performance of the score system was evaluated in terms of overall classification accuracy. Results: Seven criteria were identified by experts as relevant for the diagnosis of PACD. The criteria were related to the type of skin lesions, accompanying symptoms, skin area involved, general medical history, modality of exposure to the culprit substance, history of exposure to the sun or other light sources and photopatch test results. Experts reached a moderate agreement on PACD cases classification, with ICC=0.69 (95% Confidence Interval, CI, 0.50-0.86). The score system enabled discrimination of probable and definite PACD cases from possible and unlikely or excluded ones, with a nearly perfect agreement being observed between the score system classification and judgment by experts. Conclusion: A diagnostic score was proposed. The score should receive a comprehensive validation on a larger series of cases and with multiple evaluators.
|
|
| 6. |
- Rob, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Gentamicin 240 mg plus azithromycin 2 g vs. ceftriaxone 500 mg plus azithromycin 2 g for treatment of rectal and pharyngeal gonorrhoea : a randomized controlled trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Clinical Microbiology and Infection. - : Elsevier. - 1198-743X .- 1469-0691. ; 26:2, s. 207-212
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of gentamicin 240 mg plus azithromycin 2 g for treatment of uncomplicated rectal and pharyngeal gonorrhoea compared to ceftriaxone 500 mg plus azithromycin 2 g, the recommended European first-line gonorrhoea treatment.Methods: A non-inferiority, open-label, single-centre randomized controlled trial was conducted in Prague, Czech Republic. Patients, 18-75 years of age, diagnosed with uncomplicated rectal or pharyngeal gonorrhoea by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) were randomized to treatment with gentamicin 240 mg intramuscularly plus azithromycin 2 g orally or ceftriaxone 500 g intramuscularly plus azithromycin 2 g orally. The primary outcome was negative culture and negative NAAT, i.e. 1 week and 3 weeks, respectively, after treatment.Results: Both clinical cure and microbiological clearance was achieved by 100% (95% CI 0.95-1.00) of patients in the gentamicin/azithromycin arm (n = 72; 40 rectal, 17 pharyngeal and 15 rectal+pharyngeal infections both localizations) and 100% (95% CI 0.95-1.00) in ceftriaxone/azithromycin arm (n = 71; 38 rectal, 14 pharyngeal and 19 rectal+pharyngeal infections). The absolute difference between the two arms was 0.0% (CI95% -5.1 to 5.1), thus less than the pre-specified margin of 7%. Administration of gentamicin was not more painful than ceftriaxone according to the visual analogue scale (1.8 vs. 3.4; p <0.001). Gastrointestinal adverse events were similar in the ceftriaxone arm (33/71, 46.5%) and the gentamicin arm (29/72, 40.3%), and overall in most (52/62, 83.9%) cases they were mild.Conclusions: Gentamicin 240 mg plus azithromycin 2 g is an effective alternative for treatment of extragenital gonorrhoea. (C) 2019 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.
|
|
