| 1. |
- Dankiewicz, Josef, et al.
(author)
-
Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
- 2021
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - : MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 384:24, s. 2283-2294
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Hypothermia or Normothermia after Cardiac Arrest This trial randomly assigned patients with coma after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to undergo targeted hypothermia at 33 degrees C or normothermia with treatment of fever. At 6 months, there were no significant between-group differences regarding death or functional outcomes. Background Targeted temperature management is recommended for patients after cardiac arrest, but the supporting evidence is of low certainty. Methods In an open-label trial with blinded assessment of outcomes, we randomly assigned 1900 adults with coma who had had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac or unknown cause to undergo targeted hypothermia at 33 degrees C, followed by controlled rewarming, or targeted normothermia with early treatment of fever (body temperature, >= 37.8 degrees C). The primary outcome was death from any cause at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome at 6 months as assessed with the modified Rankin scale. Prespecified subgroups were defined according to sex, age, initial cardiac rhythm, time to return of spontaneous circulation, and presence or absence of shock on admission. Prespecified adverse events were pneumonia, sepsis, bleeding, arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise, and skin complications related to the temperature management device. Results A total of 1850 patients were evaluated for the primary outcome. At 6 months, 465 of 925 patients (50%) in the hypothermia group had died, as compared with 446 of 925 (48%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.14; P=0.37). Of the 1747 patients in whom the functional outcome was assessed, 488 of 881 (55%) in the hypothermia group had moderately severe disability or worse (modified Rankin scale score >= 4), as compared with 479 of 866 (55%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.09). Outcomes were consistent in the prespecified subgroups. Arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise was more common in the hypothermia group than in the normothermia group (24% vs. 17%, P<0.001). The incidence of other adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. Conclusions In patients with coma after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, targeted hypothermia did not lead to a lower incidence of death by 6 months than targeted normothermia. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; TTM2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, .)
|
|
| 2. |
- Raal, Frederick J., et al.
(author)
-
PCSK9 inhibition with evolocumab (AMG 145) in heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (RUTHERFORD-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
- 2015
-
In: The Lancet. - : Elsevier: Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 385:9965, s. 331-340
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia is characterised by low cellular uptake of LDL cholesterol, increased plasma LDL cholesterol concentrations, and premature cardiovascular disease. Despite intensive statin therapy, with or without ezetimibe, many patients are unable to achieve recommended target levels of LDL cholesterol. We investigated the effect of PCSK9 inhibition with evolocumab (AMG 145) on LDL cholesterol in patients with this disorder. Methods This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken at 39 sites (most of which were specialised lipid clinics, mainly attached to academic institutions) in Australia, Asia, Europe, New Zealand, North America, and South Africa between Feb 7 and Dec 19,2013.331 eligible patients (18-80 years of age), who met clinical criteria for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia and were on stable lipid-lowering therapy for at least 4 weeks, with a fasting LDL cholesterol concentration of 2.6 mmol/L or higher, were randomly allocated in a 2:2:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks, evolocumab 420 mg monthly, or subcutaneous placebo every 2 weeks or monthly for 12 weeks. Randomisation was computer generated by the study sponsor, implemented by a computerised voice interactive system, and stratified by LDL cholesterol concentration at screening (higher or lower than 4.1 mmol/L) and by baseline ezetimibe use (yes/no). Patients, study personnel, investigators, and Amgen study staff were masked to treatment assignments within dosing frequency groups. The coprimary endpoints were percentage change from baseline in LDL cholesterol at week 12 and at the mean of weeks 10 and 12, analysed by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01763918. Findings Of 415 screened patients, 331 were eligible and were randomly assigned to the four treatment groups: evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks (n=111), evolocumab 420 mg monthly (n=110), placebo every 2 weeks (n=55), or placebo monthly (n=55). 329 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Compared with placebo, evolocumab at both dosing schedules led to a significant reduction in mean LDL cholesterol at week 12 (every-2-weeks dose: 59.2% reduction [95% CI 53.4-65.1], monthly dose: 61.3% reduction [53.6-69.0]; both pless than0.0001) and at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 (60.2% reduction [95% CI 54.5-65.8] and 65.6% reduction [59.8-71.3]; both pless than0.0001). Evolocumab was well tolerated, with rates of adverse events similar to placebo. The most common adverse events occurring more frequently in the evolocumab-treated patients than in the placebo groups were nasopharyngitis (in 19 patients [9%] vs five [5%] in the placebo group) and muscle-related adverse events (ten patients [5%] vs 1 [1%]). Interpretation In patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, evolocumab administered either 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly was well tolerated and yielded similar and rapid 60% reductions in LDL cholesterol compared with placebo.
|
|
