| 1. |
- Villa, Luisa L., et al.
(författare)
-
Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions
- 2007
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 356:19, s. 1915-1927
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus types 16 (HPV-16) and 18 (HPV-18) cause approximately 70% of cervical cancers worldwide. A phase 3 trial was conducted to evaluate a quadrivalent vaccine against HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 (HPV-6/11/16/18) for the prevention of high-grade cervical lesions associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned 12,167 women between the ages of 15 and 26 years to receive three doses of either HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine or placebo, administered at day 1, month 2, and month 6. The primary analysis was performed for a per-protocol susceptible population that included 5305 women in the vaccine group and 5260 in the placebo group who had no virologic evidence of infection with HPV-16 or HPV-18 through 1 month after the third dose (month 7). The primary composite end point was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer related to HPV-16 or HPV-18. RESULTS: Subjects were followed for an average of 3 years after receiving the first dose of vaccine or placebo. Vaccine efficacy for the prevention of the primary composite end point was 98% (95.89% confidence interval [CI], 86 to 100) in the per-protocol susceptible population and 44% (95% CI, 26 to 58) in an intention-to-treat population of all women who had undergone randomization (those with or without previous infection). The estimated vaccine efficacy against all high-grade cervical lesions, regardless of causal HPV type, in this intention-to-treat population was 17% (95% CI, 1 to 31). CONCLUSIONS: In young women who had not been previously infected with HPV-16 or HPV-18, those in the vaccine group had a significantly lower occurrence of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia related to HPV-16 or HPV-18 than did those in the placebo group.
|
|
| 2. |
- Saad-Magalhaes, C., et al.
(författare)
-
Does removal of aids/devices and help make a difference in the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index?
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 69:1, s. 82-87
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the removal of aids/devices and/or help from another person in the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ) leads to a significant change in the disability index (DI) score and responsiveness in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).METHODS: Changes in the C-HAQ DI score in a cross-sectional sample of 2663 children with JIA and in 530 active patients with JIA in a trial of methotrexate (MTX) were compared.RESULTS: Patients in the MTX trial had higher disease activity and disability than the cross-sectional sample. The frequency of aids/devices (range 1.2-10.2%) was similar between the two samples, while help (range 5.3-38.1%) was more frequently used in the MTX group. Correlation between disease severity variables and the two different C-HAQ DI scoring methods did not change substantially. There was a decrease in the C-HAQ DI score for both the cross-sectional (mean score from 0.64 with the original method to 0.54 without aids/devices and help, p<0.0001) and the MTX sample (mean score from 1.23 to 1.07, p<0.0001). A linear regression analysis of the original C-HAQ DI score versus the score without aids/devices and help demonstrated the substantial overlap of the different scoring methods. Responsiveness in the responders to MTX treatment did not change with the different C-HAQ DI scoring methods (range 0.86-0.82).CONCLUSION: The removal of aids/devices and help from the C-HAQ does not alter the interpretation of disability at a group level. The simplified C-HAQ is a more feasible and valid alternative for the evaluation of disability in patients with JIA.
|
|
