METHODS: A retrospective audit of heart transplant recipients (n = 87) treated with tacrolimus was performed. Relevant data were collected from the time of transplant to discharge. The concordance of tacrolimus dosing and monitoring according to hospital guidelines was assessed. The observed and software-predicted tacrolimus concentrations (n = 931) were compared for the first 3 weeks of oral immediate-release tacrolimus (Prograf) therapy, and the predictive performance (bias and imprecision) of the software was evaluated.
RESULTS: The majority (96%) of initial oral tacrolimus doses were guideline concordant. Most initial intravenous doses (93%) were lower than the guideline recommendations. Overall, 36% of initial tacrolimus doses were administered to transplant recipients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <60 mL/min/1.73 m despite recommendations to delay the commencement of therapy. Of the tacrolimus concentrations collected during oral therapy (n = 1498), 25% were trough concentrations obtained at steady-state. The software displayed acceptable predictions of tacrolimus concentration from day 12 (bias: -6%; 95%confidence interval, -11.8 to 2.5; imprecision: 16%; 95% confidence interval, 8.7-24.3) of therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Tacrolimus dosing and monitoring were discordant with the guidelines. The Bayesian forecasting software was suitable for guiding tacrolimus dosing after 11 days of therapy in heart transplant recipients. Understanding the factors contributing to the variability in tacrolimus pharmacokinetics immediately after transplant may help improve software predictions.
Methods: A prospective observational study including 223 patients receiving the branded medicine Exjade® and 101 patients receiving the copy Osveral® was carried out. Data were assessed for a 1-year period and included clinical symptoms, serum ferritin (SF), serum creatinine (SC), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT). Data were analyzed with SPSS version 22 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).
Results: The median age of the sample was 8 years. There was no significant difference in gender distribution between the two groups (p = 0.625). Nausea was the most frequently reported adverse effect followed by diarrhea and abdominal pain in both groups. Patients receiving Exjade® had a higher relative reduction of SF at the end of the study compared with the Osveral® group (19.9% versus 9.93%, p = 0.028). SC was found to be significantly higher in the Osveral® group than in the Exjade® group throughout the study period. The mean platelet count was higher in the Exjade® group. ALT was significantly higher among patients receiving Osveral® over the last three months of the study.
Conclusions: Exjade® showed a better ability to reduce SF, with less liver toxicity, and better hemostasis profile. No congenital anomalies associated with short-term use of both drugs during pregnancy were observed or reported.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional comparative study comparing primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) patients (Group A) with primary angle closure and primary angle closure suspect (Group B). Group A was treated with topical pressure-lowering drugs; Group B was not. Data on ocular diagnosis and details of treatment were obtained from medical records. Ocular surface disease incidence was assessed using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire and from clinical signs using Schirmer's test, tear break-up time and corneal fluorescein stain. Predictive Analytic Software 20 and STATA analysis software were used for statistical analyses.
RESULTS: Group A demonstrated a higher rate of OSD (OSDI 52.3%, Schirmer's test 70.5%, tear break-up time (TBUT) 75%, corneal staining 77.3%) compared to Group B (OSDI 39.0%, Schirmer's test 73.2%, TBUT 58.5% and cornea staining 14.6%) except for Schirmer's test. There was a significant difference in mean score of OSDI (p=0.004), TBUT (p=0.008) and cornea staining (p<0.001) between two groups. Primary angle closure glaucoma treated with more than two medications and for more than three years had worse ocular surface disease parameters but without statistical significant difference.
CONCLUSION: Ocular surface disease is common in PACG patients treated with topical pressure-lowering drugs. Topical pressure-lowering drugs caused significant OSD symptoms and signs except for tear production in PACG patients. Thorough evaluation of ocular surface disease is important to ensure appropriate treatment and intervention in PACG patients.
METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3, multicentre randomised trial, patients aged 21-80 years with cT3 or cT4 gastric cancer undergoing curative resection were enrolled at 22 centres from South Korea, China, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery and EIPL (EIPL group) or surgery alone (standard surgery group) via a web-based programme in random permuted blocks in varying block sizes of four and six, assuming equal allocation between treatment groups. Randomisation was stratified according to study site and the sequence was generated using a computer program and concealed until the interventions were assigned. After surgery in the EIPL group, peritoneal lavage was done with 1 L of warm (42°C) normal 0·9% saline followed by complete aspiration; this procedure was repeated ten times. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done assuming intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02140034.
FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2012, and Aug 3, 2018, 800 patients were randomly assigned to the EIPL group (n=398) or the standard surgery group (n=402). Two patients in the EIPL group and one in the standard surgery group withdrew from the trial immediately after randomisation and were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. At the third interim analysis on Aug 28, 2019, the predictive probability of overall survival being significantly higher in the EIPL group was less than 0·5%; therefore, the trial was terminated on the basis of futility. With a median follow-up of 2·4 years (IQR 1·5-3·0), the two groups were similar in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio 1·09 [95% CI 0·78-1·52; p=0·62). 3-year overall survival was 77·0% (95% CI 71·4-81·6) for the EIPL group and 76·7% (71·0-81·5) for the standard surgery group. 60 adverse events were reported in the EIPL group and 41 were reported in the standard surgery group. The most common adverse events included anastomotic leak (ten [3%] of 346 patients in the EIPL group vs six [2%] of 362 patients in the standard surgery group), bleeding (six [2%] vs six [2%]), intra-abdominal abscess (four [1%] vs five [1%]), superficial wound infection (seven [2%] vs one [<1%]), and abnormal liver function (six [2%] vs one [<1%]). Ten of the reported adverse events (eight in the EIPL group and two in the standard surgery group) resulted in death.
INTERPRETATION: EIPL and surgery did not have a survival benefit compared with surgery alone and is not recommended for patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
FUNDING: National Medical Research Council, Singapore.
Materials and methods: A total of 40 patients were recruited, (mean age = 23 years) and were assigned to low and moderate caries risk groups (n = 20). Eighty occlusal surfaces of posterior teeth were examined for early caries lesion visually and using SoproLife® at baseline and at a recall visit six months later. At baseline visit, patients were given oral hygiene education, fluoridated toothpaste for homecare and topical fluoride application. SoproLife® images acquired were analysed using Image J software version 1.50. Difference in the mean value of intensity of the red wavelength spectrum between baseline and recall visits, (ΔI), were analysed for both risk groups. ΔI for upper and lower first molar teeth were also analysed.
Results: Results show no statistical difference for ΔI between low and moderate risk groups (p = 0.13). There is no statistical difference in ΔI within the low caries risk group (p = 0.42) but there is significant difference in the moderate risk group (p = 0.02). No statistically significant difference in ΔI value between upper first molars (UFM) (p = 0.80) and lower first molars (LFM) (p = 0.07) were detected. There was also no statistically significant difference in ΔI value within the upper and lower first molars (UFM: p = 0.31, LFM: p = 0.27).
Conclusion: SoproLife® generated images did not show significant differences in remineralisation of early caries between low and moderate caries risk patients and between the upper first and lower first permanent molars in these patients.
Methods: The posterior parts of the archwires were sectioned into 20 mm segments (N = 102) and divided among six groups. Four groups were treated with different pH levels and two served as controls. The specimens were immersed in individual test tubes containing 10 ml of artificial saliva adjusted to a pH of 6.75 or 3.5. The tubes were sealed and stored in a 37 °C water bath for 28 days. After 28 days, the specimens were ligated to brackets embedded in an acrylic block and subjected to mechanical stress using an electronic toothbrush for 210 s. The specimens were photographed, and images were measured for coating loss using AutoCAD® software. Surface morphology was observed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Results: Significant coating loss (p