METHODS: The ADR reports recorded between 2000 and 2017 were retrospectively analysed to identify hepatic ADR reports. The trend and characteristics of hepatic ADR cases were described. Multivariate disproportionality analysis of the causative agents was performed to generate signals of hepatic ADRs.
RESULTS: A total of 2090 hepatic ADRs (1.77% of all ADRs) were reported with mortality rate of 12.7% among cases with known clinical outcomes. The incidence of hepatic ADR reporting in Malaysia increased significantly over 18 years from 0.26 to 9.45 per million population (P
METHODS: This was an observational cohort on incident end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Patients contributed person-time from the date of ESKD diagnosis until death, transplant or end of study on December 31, 2014, whichever occurred first. An extended Cox regression model with time-varying exposure to dialysis was used to account for immortal time bias.
RESULTS: Of 3990 incident ESKD patients included, 70.2% patients initiated dialysis; 78.8% with haemodialysis (HD) while the remaining 21.2% with peritoneal dialysis (PD). Dialysis reduced hazard of death in both elderly and non-elderly patients even after controlling for comorbidities (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50, 0.68 and HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69, 0.85, respectively). HD was protective in both the elderly and non-elderly (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45, 0.63 and HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64, 0.80, respectively). PD significantly reduced risk of death compared to no dialysis in the elderly but not in the non-elderly.
CONCLUSION: Dialysis improved survival in all incident ESKD patients. The findings suggested a larger protection offered by HD. Although improvement in survival from initiating dialysis was large, its true benefit should take overall quality of life into account. SUMMARY AT A GLANCE This observational study showed that initiation of dialysis improves the survival of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients of all age groups, but the quality of life is an important aspect that has not been explored.
METHODS: Using Singapore Malaysia Hospital-Based Breast Cancer Registry, clinical information was retrieved from 7064 stage I to III breast cancer patients who were diagnosed between 1990 and 2011 and underwent surgery. Predicted and observed probabilities of positive nodes and survival were compared for each subgroup. Calibration was assessed by plotting observed value against predicted value for each decile of the predicted value. Discrimination was evaluated by area under a receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95 % confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: The median predicted probability of positive lymph nodes is 40.6 % which was lower than the observed 43.6 % (95 % CI, 42.5 %-44.8 %). The calibration plot showed underestimation for most of the groups. The AUC was 0.71 (95 % CI, 0.70-0.72). Cancermath predicted and observed overall survival probabilities were 87.3 % vs 83.4 % at 5 years after diagnosis and 75.3 % vs 70.4 % at 10 years after diagnosis. The difference was smaller for patients from Singapore, patients diagnosed more recently and patients with favorable tumor characteristics. Calibration plot also illustrated overprediction of survival for patients with poor prognosis. The AUC for 5-year and 10-year overall survival was 0.77 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.79) and 0.74 (95 % CI: 0.71-0.76).
CONCLUSIONS: The discrimination and calibration of CancerMath were modest. The results suggest that clinical application of CancerMath should be limited to patients with better prognostic profile.
AIM AND METHODS: This study used microcosting methods to determine the cost and health outcomes of living and deceased donor kidney transplantation in adult and pediatric recipients. The perspective used was from the Ministry of Health Malaysia. Cost-effectiveness measures were cost per life year (LY) and cost per quality-adjusted LYs. The time horizon was the lifetime of the transplant recipient from transplant to death.
RESULTS: Records of 206 KT recipients (118 adults and 88 children) were obtained for microcosting. In adults, discounted cost per LY was US $8609(Malaysian Ringgit [RM]29 482) and US $13 209(RM45 234) for living-donor kidney transplant (LKT) and deceased donor kidney transplant (DKT), respectively, whereas in children, it was US $10 485(RM35 905) and US $14 985(RM51 317), respectively. Cost per quality-adjusted LY in adults was US $8826 (RM30 224) for LKT and US $13 592(RM46 546) for DKT. Total lifetime discounted costs of adult transplants were US $119 702 (RM409 921) for LKT, US $147 152 (RM503 922) for DKT. Total costs for pediatric transplants were US $154 841(RM530 252) and US $159 313(RM545 566) for the 2 categories respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both LKT and DKT are economically favorable for Malaysian adult and pediatric patients with ESRD and result in improvement in quality of life.
METHOD: A multicentre, parallel, randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial was conducted. Adult patients receiving CAPD were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to SSL or STS. The primary outcome was the rate of peritonitis after 1 year of follow-up.
RESULTS: A total of 472 subjects were randomised (SSL, n = 233; STS, n = 239). One subject in each group was excluded from the analysis as they withdrew consent before the first dialysis dose. Four hundred and seventy subjects (SSL, n = 232; STS, n = 238) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Non-inferiority between two groups was established as no significant difference was found in peritonitis rate (incident rate ratio: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.65-1.28). No significant difference was detected in weekly Kt/V (p = 0.58) and creatinine clearance (p = 0.55). However, the average ultrafiltration volume was significantly lower in SSL, with a mean difference of 93 ml (p < 0.01). SSL also demonstrated a 2.57-times higher risk of device defect than STS (95% CI: 1.77-3.75).
CONCLUSION: SSL was non-inferior in peritonitis rate compared to plastic-free STS over 1 year in patients requiring CAPD. There was no difference in the delivered dialysis dose, but there was a higher rate of device defects with SSL.
METHODS: In this 24-month, open-label study, de novo kidney transplant recipients (KTxRs) were randomized (1:1) to receive EVR+rCNI or MPA+sCNI, along with induction therapy and corticosteroids.
RESULTS: Of the 2037 patients randomized in the TRANSFORM study, 293 were Asian (EVR+rCNI, N = 136; MPA+sCNI, N = 157). At month 24, EVR+rCNI was noninferior to MPA+sCNI for the binary endpoint of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)
METHODS: On two different occasions, a panel of 14 retinal specialists from Malaysia, together with an external expert, responded to a questionnaire on management of DME. A consensus was sought by voting after compiling, analyzing and discussion on first-phase replies on the round table discussion. A recommendation was deemed to have attained consensus when 12 out of the 14 panellists (85%) agreed with it.
RESULTS: The terms target response, adequate response, nonresponse, and inadequate response were developed when the DME patients' treatment responses were first characterized. The panelists reached agreement on a number of DME treatment-related issues, including the need to classify patients prior to treatment, first-line treatment options, the right time to switch between treatment modalities, and side effects associated with steroids. From this agreement, recommendations were derived and a treatment algorithm was created.
CONCLUSION: A detail and comprehensive treatment algorithm by Malaysia Retina Group for the Malaysian population provides guidance for treatment allocation of patients with DME.
DESIGN: This multicenter, parallel group, randomized controlled trial involved 363 prevalent CAPD patients from 8 centers. The primary endpoint was peritonitis rate; secondary endpoints were technique failure and technical problems encountered. The duration of the evaluation was 1 year.
RESULTS: The risk of peritonitis on Carex varied between the centers. We found a significant treatment-center interaction effect (likelihood ratio test: p = 0.03). The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of peritonitis on Carex as compared with Ultra ranged from 0.4 to 7.2. In two centers, Carex was inferior to Ultra with regard to peritonitis; but, in five centers, the results were inconclusive. Equivalence was not demonstrated in any center. The overall rate of peritonitis in the Carex group was twice that in the Ultra group [IRR: 2.18; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.51 to 3.14]. Technique failure and technical problems were more common with the Carex system. Technique failure rate at 1 year was 44% in the Carex group and 22% in the Ultra group.
CONCLUSIONS: Equivalence between the Carex disconnect system and the Ultra disconnect system could not be demonstrated. The risk of peritonitis on Carex varied significantly between centers.