| 1. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of general anaesthesia on breast cancer survival: a 5-year follow up of a pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial, the CAN-study, comparing propofol and sevoflurane
- 2023
-
Ingår i: EClinicalMedicine. - : Elsevier. - 2589-5370. ; 60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Anaesthesia may impact long-term cancer survival. In the Cancer and Anaesthesia study, we hypothesised that the hypnotic drug propofol will have an advantage of at least five percentage points in five-year survival over the inhalational anaesthetic sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery. Methods From 2118 eligible breast cancer patients scheduled for primary curable, invasive breast cancer surgery, 1764 were recruited after ethical approval and individual informed consent to this open label, single-blind, randomised trial at four county- and three university hospitals in Sweden and one Chinese university hospital. Of surveyed patients, 354 were excluded, mainly due to refusal to participate. Patients were randomised by computer at the monitoring organisation to general anaesthesia maintenance with either intravenous propofol or inhaled sevoflurane in a 1:1 ratio in permuted blocks. Data related to anaesthesia, surgery, oncology, and demographics were registered. The primary endpoint was five-year overall survival. Data are presented as Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Hazard Ratios based on Cox univariable regression analyses by both intention-to-treat and perprotocol. EudraCT, 2013-002380-25 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01975064. Findings Of 1764 patients, included from December 3, 2013, to September 29, 2017, 1670 remained for analysis. The numbers who survived at least five years were 773/841 (91.9% (95% CI 90.1-93.8)) in the propofol group and 764/829 (92.2% (90.3-94.0)) in the sevoflurane group, (HR 1.03 (0.73-1.44); P = 0.875); the corresponding results in the per-protocol-analysis were: 733/798 (91.9% (90.0-93.8)) and 653/710 (92.0% (90.0-94.0)) (HR = 1.01 (0.71-1.44); P = 0.955). Survival after a median follow-up of 76.7 months did not indicate any difference between the groups (HR 0.97, 0.72-1.29; P = 0.829, log rank test). Interpretation No difference in overall survival was found between general anaesthesia with propofol or sevoflurane for breast cancer surgery. Copyright (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
| 2. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term survival after volatile or propofol general anesthesia for bladder cancer surgery : a retrospective national registry cohort study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Anesthesiology. - : American Society of Anesthesiologists. - 0003-3022 .- 1528-1175. ; 140:6, s. 1126-1133
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Prospective interventional trials and retrospective observational analyses provide conflicting evidence regarding the relationship between propofol versus inhaled volatile general anesthesia and long-term survival after cancer surgery. In specific, bladder cancer surgery lacks prospective clinical trial evidence.METHODS: Data on bladder cancer surgery performed under general anesthesia between 2014 and 2021 from The National Quality Registry for Urinary Tract and Bladder Cancer and the Swedish Perioperative Registry were record-linked. Overall survival was compared between patients receiving propofol or inhaled volatile for anesthesia maintenance. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as a five-percentage point difference in five-year survival.RESULTS: Of 7,571 subjects, 4,519 (59.7%) received an inhaled volatile anesthetic and 3,052 (40.3%) received propofol for general anesthesia maintenance. The two groups were quite similar in most respects but differed in ASA physical status and tumor stage. Propensity score matching was used to address treatment bias. Survival did not differ during follow-up (median 45 months [interquartile range, 33 to 62]) in neither the full unmatched cohort, nor following 1:1 propensity score matching (3,052 matched pairs). The Kaplan-Meier adjusted five-year survival rates in the matched cohort were 898/3,052, 67.5% (65.7-69.3) for propofol and 852/3,052, 68.5% (66.7-70.4) for inhaled volatile general anesthesia, respectively (hazard ratio 1.05 [95% CI: 0.96 to 1.15], P = 0.332). A sensitivity analysis restricted to 1,766 propensity score matched pairs of patients who received only one general anesthetic during the study period did not demonstrate a difference in survival; Kaplan-Meier adjusted five-year-survival rates were 521/1,766, 67.1% (64.7-69.7) and 482/1,766, 68.9% (66.5-71.4) for propofol and inhaled volatile general anesthesia, respectively (hazard ratio 1.09 [95% CI: 0.97 to 1.23], P = 0.139).CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery under general anesthesia, there was no statistically significant difference in long-term overall survival associated with the choice of propofol or an inhaled volatile maintenance.
|
|
| 3. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Survival after primary breast cancer surgery following propofol or sevoflurane general anesthesia-A retrospective, multicenter, database analysis of 6305 Swedish patients
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 64:8, s. 1048-1054
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Retrospective studies indicate that the choice of anesthetic can affect long-term cancer survival. Propofol seems to have an advantage over sevoflurane. However, this is questioned for breast cancer. We gathered a large cohort of breast cancer surgery patients from seven Swedish hospitals and hypothesized that general anesthesia with propofol would be superior to sevoflurane anesthesia regarding long-term breast cancer survival.Methods: We identified all patients who were anaesthetized for breast cancer surgery between 2006 and 2012. The patients were matched to the Swedish Breast Cancer Quality Register, to retrieve tumor characteristics, prognostic factors, and adjuvant treatment as well as date of death. Overall survival between patients undergoing sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia was analyzed with different statistical approaches: (a) multiple Cox regression models adjusted for demographic, oncological, and multiple control variables, (b) propensity score matching on the same variables, but also including the participating centers as a cofactor in a separate analysis.Results: The database analysis identified 6305 patients. The 5-year survival rates were 91.0% and 81.8% for the propofol and sevoflurane group, respectively, in the final model (P = .126). Depending on the statistical adjustment method used, different results were obtained, from a non-significant to a "proposed" and even a "determined" difference in survival that favored propofol, with a maximum of 9.2 percentage points higher survival rate at 5 years (hazard ratio 1.46, 95% CI 1.10-1.95).Conclusions: It seems that propofol may have a survival advantage compared with sevoflurane among breast cancer patients, but the inherent weaknesses of retrospective analyses were made apparent.
|
|
| 4. |
- Enlund, Mats, et al.
(författare)
-
Volatile versus Propofol General Anesthesia and Long-term Survival after Breast Cancer Surgery : A National Registry Retrospective Cohort Study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Anesthesiology. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0003-3022 .- 1528-1175. ; 137:3, s. 315-326
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Several retrospective studies using administrative or single-center data have failed to show any difference between general anesthesia using propofol versus inhaled volatiles on long-term survival after breast cancer surgery. Although randomized controlled trials are ongoing, validated data from national clinical registries may advance the reliability of existing knowledge.Methods: Data on breast cancer surgery performed under general anesthesia between 2013 and 2019 from the Swedish PeriOperative Registry and the National Quality Registry for Breast Cancer were record-linked. Overall survival was compared between patients receiving propofol and patients receiving inhaled volatile for anesthesia maintenance.Results: Of 18,674 subjects, 13,873 patients (74.3%) received propofol and 4,801 (25.7%) received an inhaled volatile for general anesthesia maintenance. The two cohorts differed in most respects. Patients receiving inhaled volatile were older (67 yr vs. 65 yr), sicker (888 [19.0%] American Society of Anesthesiologists status 3 to 5 vs. 1,742 [12.8%]), and the breast cancer to be more advanced. Median follow-up was 33 months (interquartile range, 19 to 48). In the full, unmatched cohort, there was a statistically significantly higher overall survival among patients receiving propofol (13,489 of 13,873 [97.2%]) versus inhaled volatile ( 4,039 of 4,801 [84.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.90; P < 0.001). After 1:1 propensity score matching (4,658 matched pairs), there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (propofol 4,284 of 4,658 [92.0%]) versus inhaled volatile (4,288 of 4,658 [92.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.13; P = 0.756).Conclusions: Among patients undergoing breast cancer surgery under general anesthesia, no association was observed between the choice of propofol or an inhaled volatile maintenance and overall survival.
|
|
| 5. |
- Enlund, Mats
(författare)
-
Is It Definitely Clear That Long-Term Survival after Breast Cancer Surgery Is Not Affected by Anaesthetics?
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cancers. - : MDPI. - 2072-6694. ; 13:14
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Retrospective studies indicate that cancer survival may be affected by the anaesthetic technique. Propofol seems to be a better choice than volatile anaesthetics, such as sevoflurane. The first two retrospective studies suggested better long-term survival with propofol, but not for breast cancer. Subsequent retrospective studies from Asia indicated the same. When data from seven Swedish hospitals were analysed, including 6305 breast cancer patients, different analyses gave different results, from a non-significant difference in survival to a remarkably large difference in favour of propofol, an illustration of the innate weakness in the retrospective design. The largest randomised clinical trial, registered on clinicaltrial.gov, with survival as an outcome is the Cancer and Anesthesia study. Patients are here randomised to propofol or sevoflurane. The inclusion of patients with breast cancer was completed in autumn 2017. Delayed by the pandemic, one-year survival data for the cohort were presented in November 2020. Due to the extremely good short-term survival for breast cancer, one-year survival is of less interest for this disease. As the inclusions took almost five years, there was also a trend to observe. Unsurprisingly, no difference was found in one-year survival between the two groups, and the trend indicated no difference either.Simple summaryThe choice of anaesthetic may affect long-term survival, as suggested in animal studies and in retrospective patient studies. Breast cancer seems to be an exception, according to results from retrospective patient studies. So far this has not been proven in randomised clinical trials. The current state of research is summarised in this overview. The conclusion is that today it seems that the choice of anaesthetic does not play a role in long-term survival after breast cancer surgery.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Enlund, Mats
(författare)
-
More reviews than RCTs
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 65:5, s. 711-712
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 8. |
- Holmberg, Lars, et al.
(författare)
-
Number of transurethral procedures after non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer and survival in causes other than bladder cancer
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Plos One. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 17:9 September
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Previous research has associated repeated transurethral procedures after a diagnosis of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with increased risk of death of causes other than bladder cancer. Aim We investigated the overall and disease-specific risk of death in patients with NMIBC compared to a background population sample. Methods We utilized the database BladderBaSe 2.0 containing tumor-specific, health-related and socio-demographic information for 38,547 patients with NMIBC not primarily treated with radical cystectomy and 192,733 individuals in a comparison cohort, matched on age, gender, and county of residence. The cohorts were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Hazard ratios (HR) from a Cox regression models. In the NMIBC cohort, we analyzed the association between number of transurethral procedures and death conditioned on surviving two or five years. Results Overall survival and survival from causes other than bladder cancer estimated with Kaplan- Meier curves was 9.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) (8.6%-10.0%)) and 1.4% (95% CI 0.7%-2.1%) lower respectively for the NMIBC cohort compared to the comparison cohort at ten years. In a Cox model adjusted for prognostic group, educational level and comorbidity, the HR was 1.03 (95% CI 1.01-1.05) for death from causes other than bladder cancer comparing the NMIBC cohort to the comparison cohort. Among the NMIBC patients, there was no discernible association between number of transurethral procedures and deaths of causes other than bladder cancer after adjustment. The number of procedures were, however, associated with risk of dying from bladder cancer HR 3.56 (95% CI 3.43-3.68) for four or more resections versus one within two years of follow-up. Conclusion The results indicate that repeated diagnostic or therapeutic transurethral procedures under follow-up do not increase of risk dying from causes other than bladder cancer. The modestly raised risk for NMIBC patients dying from causes other than bladder cancer is likely explained by residual confounding. © 2022 Holmberg et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
|
|
| 9. |
- Wang, Dong, et al.
(författare)
-
Toward Delicate Anomaly Detection of Energy Consumption for Buildings : Enhance the Performance From Two Levels
- 2022
-
Ingår i: IEEE Access. - : IEEE. - 2169-3536. ; 10, s. 31649-31659
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Buildings are highly energy-consuming and therefore are largely accountable for environmental degradation. Detecting anomalous energy consumption is one of the effective ways to reduce energy consumption. Besides, it can contribute to the safety and robustness of building systems since anomalies in the energy data are usually the reflection of malfunctions in building systems. As the most flexible and applicable type of anomaly detection approach, unsupervised anomaly detection has been implemented in several studies for building energy data. However, no studies have investigated the joint influence of data structures and algorithms’ mechanisms on the performance of unsupervised anomaly detection for building energy data. Thus, we put forward a novel workflow based on two levels, data structure level and algorithm mechanism level, to effectively detect the imperceptible anomalies in the energy consumption profiles of buildings. The proposed workflow was implemented in a case study for identifying the anomalies in three real-world energy consumption datasets from two types of commercial buildings. Two aims were achieved through the case study. First, it precisely detected the contextual anomalies concealed beneath the time variation of the energy consumption profiles of the three buildings. The performance in terms of areas under the precision-recall curves (AUC_PR) for the three given datasets were 0.989, 0.941, and 0.957, respectively. Second, more broadly, the joint effect of the two levels was examined. On the data level, all four detectors on the contextualized data were superior to their counterparts on the original data. On the algorithm level, there was a consistent ranking of detectors regarding their detecting performances on the contextualized data. The consistent ranking suggests that local approaches outperform global approaches in the scenarios where the goal is to detect the instances deviating from their contextual neighbors rather than the rest of the entire data.
|
|
