Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Antirheumatic agents (1)
- Child (1)
- Comparative effectiveness research (1)
- Consensus (1)
- Dermatomyositis (1)
- Diabetes (1)
- Diagnosis (1)
- Everolimus (1)
- Kidney transplantation (1)
- Nephrons (1)
Institute
- Medizin (4) (remove)
Background: Juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) is the most common inflammatory myopathy in childhood and a major cause of morbidity among children with pediatric rheumatic diseases. The management of JDM is very heterogeneous. The JDM working group of the Society for Pediatric Rheumatology (GKJR) aims to define consensus- and practice-based strategies in order to harmonize diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of JDM.
Methods: The JDM working group was established in 2015 consisting of 23 pediatric rheumatologists, pediatric neurologists and dermatologists with expertise in the management of JDM. Current practice patterns of management in JDM had previously been identified via an online survey among pediatric rheumatologists and neurologists. Using a consensus process consisting of online surveys and a face-to-face consensus conference statements were defined regarding the diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of JDM. During the conference consensus was achieved via nominal group technique. Voting took place using an electronic audience response system, and at least 80% consensus was required for individual statements.
Results: Overall 10 individual statements were developed, finally reaching a consensus of 92 to 100% regarding (1) establishing a diagnosis, (2) case definitions for the application of the strategies (moderate and severe JDM), (3) initial diagnostic testing, (4) monitoring and documentation, (5) treatment targets within the context of a treat-to-target strategy, (6) supportive therapies, (7) explicit definition of a treat-to-target strategy, (8) various glucocorticoid regimens, including intermittent intravenous methylprednisolone pulse and high-dose oral glucocorticoid therapies with tapering, (9) initial glucocorticoid-sparing therapy and (10) management of refractory disease.
Conclusion: Using a consensus process among JDM experts, statements regarding the management of JDM were defined. These statements and the strategies aid in the management of patients with moderate and severe JDM.
Background: The combination of intermediate-dose cytarabine plus mitoxantrone (IMA) can induce high complete remission rates with acceptable toxicity in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We present the final results of a randomized-controlled trial comparing IMA with the standard 7 + 3 induction regimen consisting of continuous infusion cytarabine plus daunorubicin (DA).
Patients and methods: Patients with newly diagnosed AML >60 years were randomized to receive either intermediate-dose cytarabine (1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1, 3, 5, 7) plus mitoxantrone (10 mg/m2 days 1–3) (IMA) or standard induction therapy with cytarabine (100 mg/m2 continuously days 1–7) plus daunorubicin (45 mg/m2 days 3–5) (DA). Patients in complete remission after DA received intermediate-dose cytarabine plus amsacrine as consolidation treatment, whereas patients after IMA were consolidated with standard-dose cytarabine plus mitoxantrone.
Results: Between February 2005 and October 2009, 485 patients were randomized; 241 for treatment arm DA and 244 for IMA; 76% of patients were >65 years. The complete response rate after DA was 39% [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 33–45] versus 55% (95% CI: 49–61) after IMA (odds ratio 1.89, P = 0.001). The 6-week early-death rate was 14% in both arms. Relapse-free survival curves were superimposable in the first year, but separated afterwards, resulting in 3-year relapse-free survival rates of 29% versus 14% in the DA versus IMA arms, respectively (P = 0.042). The median overall survival was 10 months in both arms (P = 0.513).
Conclusion: The dose escalation of cytarabine in induction therapy lead to improved remission rates in the elderly AML patients. This did not translate into a survival advantage, most likely due to differences in consolidation treatment. Thus, effective consolidation strategies need to be further explored. In combination with an effective consolidation strategy, the use of intermediate-dose cytarabine in induction may improve curative treatment for elderly AML patients.
Background: Conversion from calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) therapy to a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor following kidney transplantation may help to preserve graft function. Data are sparse, however, concerning the impact of conversion on posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) or the progression of pre-existing diabetes.
Methods: PTDM and other diabetes-related parameters were assessed post hoc in two large open-label multicenter trials. Kidney transplant recipients were randomized (i) at month 4.5 to switch to everolimus or remain on a standard cyclosporine (CsA)-based regimen (ZEUS, n = 300), or (ii) at month 3 to switch to everolimus, remain on standard CNI therapy or convert to everolimus with reduced-exposure CsA (HERAKLES, n = 497).
Results: There were no significant differences in the incidence of PTDM between treatment groups (log rank p = 0.97 [ZEUS], p = 0.90 [HERAKLES]). The mean change in random blood glucose from randomization to month 12 was also similar between treatment groups in both trials for patients with or without PTDM, and with or without pre-existing diabetes. The change in eGFR from randomization to month 12 showed a benefit for everolimus versus comparator groups in all subpopulations, but only reached significance in larger subgroups (no PTDM or no pre-existing diabetes).
Conclusions: Within the restrictions of this post hoc analysis, including non-standardized diagnostic criteria and limited glycemia laboratory parameters, these data do not indicate any difference in the incidence or severity of PTDM with early conversion from a CsA-based regimen to everolimus, or in the progression of pre-existing diabetes.
Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00154310 (registered September 2005) and NCT00514514 (registered August 2007); EudraCT (2006-007021-32 and 2004-004346-40).
Background: Does the dogma of nephron sparing surgery (NSS) still stand for large renal masses? Available studies dealing with that issue are considerably biased often mixing imperative with elective indications for NSS and also including less malignant variants or even benign renal tumors. Here, we analyzed the oncological long-term outcomes of patients undergoing elective NSS or radical tumor nephrectomy (RN) for non-endophytic, large (≥7cm) clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC).
Methods: Prospectively acquired, clinical databases from two academic high-volume centers were screened for patients from 1980 to 2010. The query was strictly limited to patients with elective indications. Surgical complications were retrospectively assessed and classified using the Clavien-Dindo-classification system (CDS). Overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier-method and the log-rank test.
Results: Out of in total 8664 patients in the databases, 123 patients were identified (elective NSS (n = 18) or elective RN (n = 105)) for ≥7cm ccRCC. The median follow-up over all was 102 months (range 3–367 months). Compared to the RN group, the NSS group had a significantly longer median OS (p = 0.014) and median CSS (p = 0.04).
Conclusions: In large renal masses, NSS can be performed safely with acceptable complication rates. In terms of long-term OS and CSS, NSS was at least not inferior to RN. Our findings suggest that NSS should also be performed in patients presenting with renal tumors ≥7cm whenever technically feasible. Limitations include its retrospective nature and the limited availability of data concerning long-term development of renal function in the two groups.