| 1. |
- Arne, Gabriella, et al.
(författare)
-
Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) express somatostatin receptors and bind radiolabeled somatostatin analogs.
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden). - 1651-226X .- 0284-186X. ; 52:4, s. 783-792
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) can be effectively treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, some patients with GIST develop drug resistance, and alternative treatment strategies are therefore needed. The aim of this study was to analyze the expression of somatostatin receptors (SSTR) in GIST as a target for peptide receptor-mediated radiotherapy (PRRT). Material and methods. Expression profiling of SSTR1-5 was performed on biopsies from 34 GISTs (16 gastric tumors, 15 small intestinal tumors, and three rectal tumors). SSTR scintigraphy ((111)In-octreotide) and measurement of (111)In activity in tumor specimens was performed in seven patients. Uptake and internalization of (177)Lu- octreotate was studied in primary cell cultures from two patients. Results. Quantitative PCR analysis showed expression of SSTR1 and SSTR2 in the majority of tumors, while SSTR3-5 were expressed at low levels. Immunohistochemical analysis confirmed the presence of SSTR1 and SSTR2 proteins in all GISTs, and SSTR3-5 in a subset of tumors. Diagnostic imaging by SSTR scintigraphy, using (111)In-octreotide, demonstrated tumor uptake of (111)In in three of six GIST patients. Measurement of (111)In activity in excised tumor specimens from five patients gave tumor-to-blood (T/B) activity ratios of between eight and 96. Tumor cells in primary culture (gastric and small intestinal GIST) specifically bound and internalized (177)Lu when incubated with the therapeutic compound (177)Lu-octreotate for 4-48 hours (p < 0.05). Conclusion. Peptide receptor-mediated radiotherapy via SSTR may provide a novel treatment strategy in carefully selected GIST patients with TKI-resistant tumors.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Arvidsson, Andreas, et al.
(författare)
-
”Risk för undernäring”
- 2013
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 4. |
- Arvidsson, Bo, 1962-, et al.
(författare)
-
Reference data for bone mineral density in Swedish women using digital X-ray radiometry
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Journal of clinical densitometry. - New York, USA : Elsevier. - 1094-6950 .- 1559-0747. ; 16:2, s. 183-188
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- During the last decade, digital X-ray radiometry (DXR) has been used to measure bone mineral density (BMD) in the metacarpal bones. The aim of this study was to establish Swedish reference material for bone mass in women, measured in the metacarpal bones with DXR, and compare these data with the data from the manufacturer. A sample of 1440 women aged 20-79yr living in Örebro County was randomly assigned from the population register. Microdose mammography was used (Sectra MDM L30; Sectra Imtec AB, Linköping, Sweden) to measure BMD. Cole's LMS method was used to calculate DXR. Six hundred sixty-nine (48.3%) women participated. Peak bone mass occurred at the age of 43.4yr with a BMD of 0.597g/cm(2) (standard deviation: 0.050). Our Swedish data correlated well with the manufacturer's material. Only among women aged 50-59yr did BMD differ, where the Swedish sample had lower values. The LMS method can be used to describe the DXR data and provide a more detailed picture of bone density distribution. DXR-BMD in Swedish women aged 20-79yr is equivalent to findings from other studies, showing the same distribution of BMD in most age groups except for ages 50-59yr.
|
|
| 5. |
- Arvidsson, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Day-to-day Rationing of Limited Resources in Swedish routine Primary Care : an interview study
- 2013
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Rationing is a reality in all health care, but little is known about day-to-day rationing in routine primary health care (PHC). This study aims to explore strategies to handle limited of resources in Swedish routine primary care.Methods: Data were compiled from 62 interviews with healthcare professionals (general practitioners, nurses, physiotherapists, and managers at primary care centres). A qualitative research method was applied in the analysis.Results: The interviewed staff described perceptions of a general public with high expectations on PHC in combination with a lack of resources. Strategies to cope with scarce resources were avoiding rationing, ad hoc rationing, or planned rationing. Rationing was largely implicit and not based on ethical principles or other defined criteria. Trying to avoid rationing resulted in unintended rationing. Ad hoc rationing had undesired consequences, e.g. inadequate continuity of care and displacing certain patient groups, especially the chronically ill and the elderly. The staff expressed a need for support and for applicable guidelines, and called for policy statements based on priority decisions to help manage the situation.Conclusions: The interviews suggested a need to improve the transparency of priority setting procedures in PHC, although the nature of the PHC setting presents special challenges. Improving transparency could, in turn, improve equity and the efficient use of resources in PHC.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Arvidsson, Eva
(författare)
-
Priority Setting and Rationing in Primary Health Care
- 2013
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Studies on priority setting in primary health care are rare. Priority setting and rationing in primary health care is important because outcomes from primary health care have significant implications for health care costs and outcomes in the health system as a whole.Aims: The general aim of this thesis has been to study and analyse the prerequisites for priority setting in primary health care in Sweden. This was done by exploring strategies to handle scarce resources in Swedish routine primary health care (Paper I); analysing patients’ attitudes towards priority setting and rationing and patients’ satisfaction with the outcome of their contact with primary health care (Paper II); describing and analysing how general practitioners, nurses, and patients prioritised individual patients in routine primary health care, studying the association between three key priority setting criteria (severity of the health condition, patient benefit, and cost-effectiveness of the medical intervention) and the overall priority assigned by the general practitioners and nurses to individual patients (Paper III); and analysing how the staff, in their clinical practise, perceived the application of the three key priority setting criteria (Paper IV).Methods: Both qualitative (Paper I and IV) and quantitative (Paper II and III) methods were used. Paper I was an interview study with medical staff at 17 primary health care centres. The data for Paper II and Paper III were collected through questionnaires to patients and staff at four purposely selected health care centres during a 2-week period. Paper IV was a focus group study conducted with staff members who practiced priority setting in day-to-day care.Results: The process of coping with scarce resources was categorised as efforts aimed to avoid rationing, ad hoc rationing, or planned rationing. Patients had little understanding of the need for priority setting. Most of them did not experience any kind of rationing and most of those who did were satisfied with the outcome of their contact with primary health care. Patients, compared to medical staff, gave relatively higher priority to acute/minor conditions than to preventive check-ups for chronic conditions when prioritising individual patients in day-today primary health care. When applying the three priority setting criteria in day-to-day primary health care, the criteria largely influenced the overall prioritisation of each patient. General practitioners were most influenced by the expected cost-effectiveness of the intervention and nurses were most influenced by the severity of the condition. Staff perceived the criteria as relevant, but not sufficient. Three additional aspects to consider in priority setting in primary health care were identified, namely viewpoint (medical or patient’s), timeframe (now or later) and evidence level (group or individual).Conclusion: There appears to be a need for, and the potential to, introduce more consistent priority setting in primary health care. The characteristics of primary health care, such as the vast array of health problems, the large number of patients with vague symptoms, early stages of diseases, and combinations of diseases, induce both special possibilities and challenges.
|
|
| 8. |
- Arvidsson, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Priority setting in primary health care - dilemmas and opportunities: a focus group study
- 2010
-
Ingår i: BMC Family Practice. - : BioMed Central. - 1471-2296. ; 11:71
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Swedish health care authorities use three key criteria to produce national guidelines for local priority setting: severity of the health condition, expected patient benefit, and cost-effectiveness of medical intervention. Priority setting in primary health care (PHC) has significant implications for health costs and outcomes in the health care system. Nevertheless, these guidelines have been implemented to a very limited degree in PHC. The objective of the study was to qualitatively assess how general practitioners (GPs) and nurses perceive the application of the three key priority-setting criteria. Methods: Focus groups were held with GPs and nurses at primary health care centres, where the staff had a short period of experience in using the criteria for prioritising in their daily work. Results: The staff found the three key priority-setting criteria (severity, patient benefit, and cost-effectiveness) to be valuable for priority setting in PHC. However, when the criteria were applied in PHC, three additional dimensions were identified: 1) viewpoint (medical or patients), 2) timeframe (now or later), and 3) evidence level (group or individual). Conclusions: The three key priority-setting criteria were useful. Considering the three additional dimensions might enhance implementation of national guidelines in PHC and is probably a prerequisite for the criteria to be useful in priority setting for individual patients.
|
|
| 9. |
- Arvidsson, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Setting priorities in primary health care - on whose conditions? A questionnaire study
- 2012
-
Ingår i: BMC Family Practice. - : BioMed Central. - 1471-2296. ; 13:114
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In Sweden three key criteria are used for priority setting: severity of the health condition; patient benefit; and cost-effectiveness. They are derived from the ethical principles established by the Swedish parliament 1997 but have been used only to a limited extent in primary care. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse: 1) GPs, nurses, and patients prioritising in routine primary care 2) The association between the three key priority setting criteria and the overall priority assigned by the GPs and nurses to individual patients. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanMethods: Paired questionnaires were distributed to all patients and the GPs or nurses they had contact with during a 2-week period at four health centres in Sweden. The staff registered the health conditions or health problem, and the planned intervention. Then they estimated the severity of the health condition, the expected patient benefit, and the cost-effectiveness of the planned intervention. Both the staff and the patients reported their overall prioritisation of the patient. In total, 1851 paired questionnaires were collected. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanResults: Compared to the medical staff, the patients assigned relatively higher priority to acute/minor conditions than to preventive check-ups for chronic conditions. Severity of the health condition was the priority setting criterion that had the strongest association with the overall priority for the staff as a whole, but for the GPs it was cost-effectiveness. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanConclusions: The challenge for primary care providers is to balance the patients demands with medical needs and cost-effectiveness. Transparent priority setting in primary care might contribute to a greater consensus between GPs and nurses on how to use the key priority setting criteria.
|
|
| 10. |
- Arvidsson, Eva, 1959-, et al.
(författare)
-
Vägen framåt
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Att välja rättvist. - Lund : Studentlitteratur AB. ; , s. 207-214
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Som vi visat har utvecklingen av metoder och strukturer för öppna prioriteringar i Sverige kommit långt. Många frågor återstår likväl. Under vårt arbete med denna bok har vi identifierat ett antal förbättringsområden och utmaningar som vi avslutningsvis vill lyfta fram. Det rör sig om vilka som ska delta i prioriteringarna, tydliggörande av värdegrunden, behov av bättre kunskap, baserad på både vetenskaplig metod och erfarenhet, och fortsatt utveckling av prioriteringsprocesser på olika nivåer och i olika sammanhang. Även om vi i Sverige skulle nå en god enighet kring principer och kriterier för prioriteringar så kommer vi alltid finna många olika sätt att praktiskt lösa specifika prioriteringsproblem.
|
|
