| 1. |
- Engert, Andreas, et al.
(författare)
-
The European Hematology Association Roadmap for European Hematology Research : a consensus document
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Haematologica. - Pavia, Italy : Ferrata Storti Foundation (Haematologica). - 0390-6078 .- 1592-8721. ; 101:2, s. 115-208
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Hematology Association (EHA) Roadmap for European Hematology Research highlights major achievements in diagnosis and treatment of blood disorders and identifies the greatest unmet clinical and scientific needs in those areas to enable better funded, more focused European hematology research. Initiated by the EHA, around 300 experts contributed to the consensus document, which will help European policy makers, research funders, research organizations, researchers, and patient groups make better informed decisions on hematology research. It also aims to raise public awareness of the burden of blood disorders on European society, which purely in economic terms is estimated at (sic)23 billion per year, a level of cost that is not matched in current European hematology research funding. In recent decades, hematology research has improved our fundamental understanding of the biology of blood disorders, and has improved diagnostics and treatments, sometimes in revolutionary ways. This progress highlights the potential of focused basic research programs such as this EHA Roadmap. The EHA Roadmap identifies nine 'sections' in hematology: normal hematopoiesis, malignant lymphoid and myeloid diseases, anemias and related diseases, platelet disorders, blood coagulation and hemostatic disorders, transfusion medicine, infections in hematology, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. These sections span 60 smaller groups of diseases or disorders. The EHA Roadmap identifies priorities and needs across the field of hematology, including those to develop targeted therapies based on genomic profiling and chemical biology, to eradicate minimal residual malignant disease, and to develop cellular immunotherapies, combination treatments, gene therapies, hematopoietic stem cell treatments, and treatments that are better tolerated by elderly patients.
|
|
| 2. |
- Malouf-Sierra, Jorge, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of Teriparatide or Risedronate in Elderly Patients With a Recent Pertrochanteric Hip Fracture: Final Results of a 78-Week Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. - : WILEY. - 0884-0431 .- 1523-4681. ; 32:5, s. 1040-1051
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We present final results of a study comparing teriparatide 20g every day (QD) with risedronate 35mg once per week (QW) started within 2 weeks after surgery for a pertrochanteric hip fracture. Patients with BMD T-score-2.0 and 25OHD 9.2ng/mL were randomized to receive 26-week double-dummy treatment plus calcium and vitamin D, followed by 52-week open-label treatment with the same assigned active drug. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine (LS) BMD at 78 weeks. Secondary and exploratory endpoints were change in BMD at the proximal femur, function, hip pain (Charnley score and 100mm Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), quality of life (Short Form-36), radiology outcomes, and safety. Data were analyzed with mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) and logistic regression. Totally, 224 patients were randomized; 171 (teriparatide: 86) contributed to the efficacy analyses (mean +/- SD age: 77 +/- 7.7 years, 77% females). Mean baseline LS, femoral neck (FN), and total hip (TH) T-scores were -2.16, -2.63, and -2.51, respectively. At 78 weeks, BMD increased significantly more with teriparatide compared to risedronate at the LS (+11.08% versus +6.45%; pamp;lt;0.001) and FN (+1.96% versus -1.19%; p=0.003), with no significant between-group difference in TH BMD. Timed up-and-go (TUG) test was significantly faster with teriparatide at 6, 12, 18, and 26 weeks (differences: -3.2 to -5.9s; p=0.045 for overall difference). Hip pain during TUG test by 100mm VAS was significantly lower with teriparatide at 18 weeks (adjusted difference: -11.3mm, p=0.033; -10.0 and -9.3mm at 12 and 26 weeks, respectively; p=0.079 for overall difference). Other secondary and exploratory outcomes were not different. Teriparatide group showed two new hip fractures versus seven with risedronate (p=0.171) and more frequent hypercalcemia and hyperuricemia. In conclusion, 78-week treatment with teriparatide showed significantly greater increases in LS and FN BMD, less pain, and a faster TUG test versus risedronate. (c) 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
|
|
