| 1. |
- Bill-Axelson, Anna, et al.
(author)
-
Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer
- 2005
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 352:19, s. 1977-1944
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND:In 2002, we reported the initial results of a trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in the management of early prostate cancer. After three more years of follow-up, we report estimated 10-year results.METHODS:From October 1989 through February 1999, 695 men with early prostate cancer (mean age, 64.7 years) were randomly assigned to radical prostatectomy (347 men) or watchful waiting (348 men). The follow-up was complete through 2003, with blinded evaluation of the causes of death. The primary end point was death due to prostate cancer; the secondary end points were death from any cause, metastasis, and local progression.RESULTS:During a median of 8.2 years of follow-up, 83 men in the surgery group and 106 men in the watchful-waiting group died (P=0.04). In 30 of the 347 men assigned to surgery (8.6 percent) and 50 of the 348 men assigned to watchful waiting (14.4 percent), death was due to prostate cancer. The difference in the cumulative incidence of death due to prostate cancer increased from 2.0 percentage points after 5 years to 5.3 percentage points after 10 years, for a relative risk of 0.56 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.88; P=0.01 by Gray's test). For distant metastasis, the corresponding increase was from 1.7 to 10.2 percentage points, for a relative risk in the surgery group of 0.60 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.42 to 0.86; P=0.004 by Gray's test), and for local progression, the increase was from 19.1 to 25.1 percentage points, for a relative risk of 0.33 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.44; P<0.001 by Gray's test).CONCLUSIONS:Radical prostatectomy reduces disease-specific mortality, overall mortality, and the risks of metastasis and local progression. The absolute reduction in the risk of death after 10 years is small, but the reductions in the risks of metastasis and local tumor progression are substantial.
|
|
| 2. |
- Guigliano, Robert P, et al.
(author)
-
Early versus delayed, provisional eptifibatide in acute coronary syndromes.
- 2009
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 360:21, s. 2176-2190
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors are indicated in patients with acute coronary syndromes who are undergoing an invasive procedure. The optimal timing of the initiation of such therapy is unknown. Methods We compared a strategy of early, routine administration of eptifibatide with delayed, provisional administration in 9492 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation and who were assigned to an invasive strategy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either early eptifibatide (two boluses, each containing 180 µg per kilogram of body weight, administered 10 minutes apart, and a standard infusion 12 hours before angiography) or a matching placebo infusion with provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography (delayed eptifibatide). The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, recurrent ischemia requiring urgent revascularization, or the occurrence of a thrombotic complication during percutaneous coronary intervention that required bolus therapy opposite to the initial study-group assignment ("thrombotic bailout") at 96 hours. The key secondary end point was a composite of death or myocardial infarction within the first 30 days. Key safety end points were bleeding and the need for transfusion within the first 120 hours after randomization. Results The primary end point occurred in 9.3% of patients in the early-eptifibatide group and in 10.0% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.06; P=0.23). At 30 days, the rate of death or myocardial infarction was 11.2% in the early-eptifibatide group, as compared with 12.3% in the delayed-eptifibatide group (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.01; P=0.08). Patients in the early-eptifibatide group had significantly higher rates of bleeding and red-cell transfusion. There was no significant difference between the two groups in rates of severe bleeding or nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events. Conclusions In patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, the use of eptifibatide 12 hours or more before angiography was not superior to the provisional use of eptifibatide after angiography. The early use of eptifibatide was associated with an increased risk of non–life-threatening bleeding and need for transfusion.
|
|
| 3. |
- James, Stefan K., 1964-, et al.
(author)
-
Long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in Sweden
- 2009
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 360:19, s. 1933-1945
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting coronary stents have been questioned. METHODS: We evaluated 47,967 patients in Sweden who received a coronary stent and were entered into the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry between 2003 and 2006 and for whom complete follow-up data were available for 1 to 5 years (mean, 2.7). In the primary analysis, we compared patients who received one drug-eluting coronary stent (10,294 patients) with those who received one bare-metal stent (18,659), after adjustment for differences in clinical characteristics of the patients and characteristics of the vessels and lesions. RESULTS: Analyses of outcome were based on 2380 deaths and 3198 myocardial infarctions. There was no overall difference between the group that received drug-eluting stents and the group that received bare-metal stents in the combined end point of death or myocardial infarction (relative risk with drug-eluting stents, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.03) or the individual end points of death (relative risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.05) and myocardial infarction (relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.06), and there was no significant difference in outcome among subgroups stratified according to the indication for stent implantation. Patients who received drug-eluting stents in 2003 had a significantly higher rate of late events than patients who received bare-metal stents in the same year, but we did not observe any difference in outcome among patients treated in later years. The average rate of restenosis during the first year was 3.0 events per 100 patient-years with drug-eluting stents versus 4.7 with bare-metal stents (adjusted relative risk, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52); 39 patients would need to be treated with drug-eluting stents to prevent one case of restenosis. Among high-risk patients, the adjusted risk of restenosis was 74% lower with drug-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents, and only 10 lesions would need to be treated to prevent one case of restenosis. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with bare-metal stents, drug-eluting stents are associated with a similar long-term incidence of death or myocardial infarction and provide a clinically important decrease in the rate of restenosis among high-risk patients.
|
|
| 4. |
- Lagerqvist, Bo, 1952-, et al.
(author)
-
Long-term outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in Sweden
- 2007
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 356:10, s. 1009-1019
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Recent reports have indicated that there may be an increased risk of late stent thrombosis with the use of drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents. METHODS: We evaluated 6033 patients treated with drug-eluting stents and 13,738 patients treated with bare-metal stents in 2003 and 2004, using data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. The outcome analysis covering a period of up to 3 years was based on 1424 deaths and 2463 myocardial infarctions and was adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: The two study groups did not differ significantly in the composite of death and myocardial infarction during 3 years of follow-up. At 6 months, there was a trend toward a lower unadjusted event rate in patients with drug-eluting stents than in those with bare-metal stents, with 13.4 fewer such events per 1000 patients. However, after 6 months, patients with drug-eluting stents had a significantly higher event rate, with 12.7 more events per 1000 patients per year (adjusted relative risk, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 1.37). At 3 years, mortality was significantly higher in patients with drug-eluting stents (adjusted relative risk, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.35), and from 6 months to 3 years, the adjusted relative risk for death in this group was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Drug-eluting stents were associated with an increased rate of death, as compared with bare-metal stents. This trend appeared after 6 months, when the risk of death was 0.5 percentage point higher and a composite of death or myocardial infarction was 0.5 to 1.0 percentage point higher per year. The long-term safety of drug-eluting stents needs to be ascertained in large, randomized trials.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ludvigsson, Johnny, 1943-, et al.
(author)
-
GAD treatment and insulin secretion in recent-onset type 1 diabetes
- 2008
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - Boston, Mass : Massachusetts medical society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 359:18, s. 1909-1920
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background The 65-kD isoform of glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) is a major autoantigen in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This trial assessed the ability of alum-formulated GAD (GAD-alum) to reverse recent-onset type 1 diabetes in patients 10 to 18 years of age. Methods We randomly assigned 70 patients with type 1 diabetes who had fasting C-peptide levels above 0.1 nmol per liter (0.3 ng per milliliter) and GAD autoantibodies, recruited within 18 months after receiving the diagnosis of diabetes, to receive subcutaneous injections of 20 μg of GAD-alum (35 patients) or placebo (alum alone, 35 patients) on study days 1 and 30. At day 1 and months 3, 9, 15, 21, and 30, patients underwent a mixed-meal tolerance test to stimulate residual insulin secretion (measured as the C-peptide level). The effect of GAD-alum on the immune system was also studied. Results Insulin secretion gradually decreased in both study groups. The study treatment had no significant effect on change in fasting C-peptide level after 15 months (the primary end point). Fasting C-peptide levels declined from baseline levels significantly less over 30 months in the GAD-alum group than in the placebo group (−0.21 vs. −0.27 nmol per liter [−0.62 vs. −0.81 ng per milliliter], P = 0.045), as did stimulated secretion measured as the area under the curve (−0.72 vs. −1.02 nmol per liter per 2 hours [−2.20 vs. −3.08 ng per milliliter per 2 hours], P = 0.04). No protective effect was seen in patients treated 6 months or more after receiving the diagnosis. Adverse events appeared to be mild and similar in frequency between the two groups. The GAD-alum treatment induced a GAD-specific immune response. Conclusions GAD-alum may contribute to the preservation of residual insulin secretion in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes, although it did not change the insulin requirement. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00435981.)
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Stupp, Roger, et al.
(author)
-
Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma
- 2005
-
In: The New England journal of medicine. - 1533-4406. ; 352:10, s. 987-996
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma, the most common primary brain tumor in adults, is usually rapidly fatal. The current standard of care for newly diagnosed glioblastoma is surgical resection to the extent feasible, followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. In this trial we compared radiotherapy alone with radiotherapy plus temozolomide, given concomitantly with and after radiotherapy, in terms of efficacy and safety.METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed glioblastoma were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone (fractionated focal irradiation in daily fractions of 2 Gy given 5 days per week for 6 weeks, for a total of 60 Gy) or radiotherapy plus continuous daily temozolomide (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area per day, 7 days per week from the first to the last day of radiotherapy), followed by six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide (150 to 200 mg per square meter for 5 days during each 28-day cycle). The primary end point was overall survival.RESULTS: A total of 573 patients from 85 centers underwent randomization. The median age was 56 years, and 84 percent of patients had undergone debulking surgery. At a median follow-up of 28 months, the median survival was 14.6 months with radiotherapy plus temozolomide and 12.1 months with radiotherapy alone. The unadjusted hazard ratio for death in the radiotherapy-plus-temozolomide group was 0.63 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.75; P<0.001 by the log-rank test). The two-year survival rate was 26.5 percent with radiotherapy plus temozolomide and 10.4 percent with radiotherapy alone. Concomitant treatment with radiotherapy plus temozolomide resulted in grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxic effects in 7 percent of patients.CONCLUSIONS: The addition of temozolomide to radiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma resulted in a clinically meaningful and statistically significant survival benefit with minimal additional toxicity.
|
|
