Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R J Stephens

Publications and source records attributed to R J Stephens.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Assessment of quality of life in the supportive care setting of the big lung trial in non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: The Big Lung Trial (BLT) was a large, pragmatic trial to evaluate the addition of chemotherapy to primary treatment (ie, surgery, radical radiotherapy, or supportive care) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the supportive care group, there was a small but significant survival benefit in patients treated with chemotherapy compared with supportive care alone (no chemotherapy). A substudy was undertaken to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) implications of the treatment options. QoL was assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaires C30 (QLQ-C30) and LC17, and daily diary cards. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC17 were collected at 0, 6 to 8, 12, 18, and 24 weeks. Diary cards were completed during the first 12 weeks of the study. The primary end point was global QoL at 12 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 273 patients were randomly assigned: 138 to no chemotherapy and 135 to chemotherapy. There was no evidence of a large detrimental effect on QoL of chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in global QoL or physical/emotional functioning, fatigue and dyspnea, and pain were detected at 12 weeks. Higher rates of palliative radiotherapy in the no chemotherapy arm may have lessened differences in QoL. Global QoL, role functioning, fatigue, appetite loss, and constipation were prognostic indicators of survival at 12 weeks. CONCLUSION: There were no important adverse effects of chemotherapy on QoL.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Identification of genes regulated by leukemia-inhibitory factor in the mouse uterus at the time of implantation.

The endometrium is prepared for implantation by the actions of estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4). In mice the luminal epithelium (LE) only becomes fully receptive to the attaching blastocyst in response to the nidatory estrogen surge on d 4 of pregnancy. The cytokine leukemia-inhibitory factor (LIF) is rapidly induced by nidatory estrogen and has been shown to be the primary mediator of its action. Implantation fails in the absence of LIF, and injection of LIF on d 4 of pregnancy can substitute for the nidatory estrogen. In this study, we sought to identify genes regulated by LIF in the uterine epithelium. We used oligonucleotide microarrays to compare the transcript profiles of paired uterine horns from LIF-deficient MF1 mice after intraluminal injection of LIF or PBS on d 4 of pseudopregnancy. IGF-binding protein 3 was identified as a gene up-regulated by LIF; this was confirmed by RT-PCR. In situ hybridization showed that the primary site of IGF-binding protein 3 expression is the luminal epithelium (LE), the known site of LIF action in the uterus. We identified two other genes: amphiregulin and immune response gene-1, the expression of which were also up-regulated by LIF. Immune response gene 1 has recently been shown to be essential for implantation. Expression of all three of these genes in the LE is known to be regulated by P4. The expression of osteoblast-specific factor 2 and leukocyte 12/15 lipoxygenase, which are also expressed in LE under the control of P4, were not increased by LIF. This suggests that one of the actions of LIF on LE may be to enhance the expression of a subset of P4-regulated genes.

Amphiregulin↗
PubMed2004

Chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: the surgical setting of the Big Lung Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) meta-analysis suggested a survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy when given in addition to surgery, radical radiotherapy or 'best supportive care'. However, it included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The aim of the Big Lung Trial was therefore to run a large pragmatic trial to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis. METHODS: In the surgery setting, a total of 381 patients were randomised to chemotherapy (C, 192 patients) or no chemotherapy (NoC, 189 patients). C was three 3-weekly cycles of cisplatin/vindesine, mitomycin/ifosfamide/cisplatin, mitomycin/vinblastine/cisplatin or vinorelbine/cisplatin. RESULTS: Chemotherapy was given before surgery in 3% of patients whilst 97% received adjuvant chemotherapy. Baseline characteristics were: median age 61 years, 69% male, 48% squamous cell, 93% WHO PS 0-1, 27% stage I, 38% stage II, and 34% stage III. Complete resection was achieved in approximately 95% of patients. In the C group, 13% received no chemotherapy, 21% one or two cycles, and 64% all three cycles of their prescribed chemotherapy (60% of the latter with no delays or modification). 30% had grade 3/4 toxicity, mainly haematological, nausea/vomiting and neutropenic fever, and six patients were reported as having a treatment-related death. 198 (52%) of patients have died, but there is currently no evidence of a benefit in overall survival to the C group: HR 1.02 (95% CI 0.77-1.35), P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: This trial has failed to observe a survival benefit with adjuvant chemotherapy following complete resection of stage I-III NSCLC. However, the hazard ratio and 95% confidence intervals are consistent with the previously reported meta-analysis and two large recently reported trials, which suggest a small survival benefit with cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Chemotherapy versus supportive care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: improved survival without detriment to quality of life.

BACKGROUND: In 1995 a meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating the value of adding chemotherapy to primary treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) suggested a small survival benefit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy in each of the primary treatment settings. However, the meta-analysis included many small trials and trials with differing eligibility criteria and chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: The aim of the Big Lung Trial was to confirm the survival benefits seen in the meta-analysis and to assess quality of life and cost in the supportive care setting. A total of 725 patients were randomised to receive supportive care alone (n = 361) or supportive care plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (n = 364). RESULTS: 65% of patients allocated chemotherapy (C) received all three cycles of treatment and a further 27% received one or two cycles. 74% of patients allocated no chemotherapy (NoC) received thoracic radiotherapy compared with 47% of the C group. Patients allocated C had a significantly better survival than those allocated NoC: HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.89, p = 0.0006), median survival 8.0 months for the C group v 5.7 months for the NoC group, a difference of 9 weeks. There were 19 (5%) treatment related deaths in the C group. There was no evidence that any subgroup benefited more or less from chemotherapy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the pre-defined primary and secondary quality of life end points, although large negative effects of chemotherapy were ruled out. The regimens used proved to be cost effective, the extra cost of chemotherapy being offset by longer survival. CONCLUSIONS: The survival benefit seen in this trial was entirely consistent with the NSCLC meta-analysis and subsequent similarly designed large trials. The information on quality of life and cost should enable patients and their clinicians to make more informed treatment choices.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Comparison of intermittent and continuous palliative chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Policies of UK clinicians regarding the duration of chemotherapy for patients with advanced colorectal cancer are not consistent. We aimed to compare effectiveness of continuous and intermittent chemotherapy in such patients. METHODS: Patients who responded or had stable disease after receiving 12 weeks of the regimens described by de Gramont and Lokich, or raltitrexed chemotherapy, were randomised to either intermittent (a break in chemotherapy, re-starting on the same drug on progression), or continuous chemotherapy until progression. FINDINGS: 354 patients (178 intermittent, 176 continuous) were enrolled from 42 UK centres. At randomisation, 41% of participants had part or complete response; 59% were stable. Only 66 (37%) patients allocated to intermittent treatment restarted as planned, after a median of 130 days. Median time on treatment after restarting was 84 days. Patients in the continuous group remained on treatment for a median of a further 92 days. Similar proportions of patients in both groups received second-line therapy. Patients on intermittent chemotherapy had significantly fewer toxic effects and serious adverse events than those in the continuous group. There was no clear evidence of a difference in overall survival (hazard ratio 0.87 favouring intermittent, 95% CI 0.69-1.09, p=0.23). INTERPRETATION: Our findings provided no clear evidence of a benefit in continuing therapy indefinitely until disease progression. They showed that it is safe to stop chemotherapy after 12 weeks and re-start the same treatment on progression in patients with chemosensitive advanced colorectal cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Costs and consequences of different chemotherapy regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer.

An economic sub-study was run alongside a large multi-centre randomised trial (MRC-CR06) comparing three chemotherapy regimens; de Gramont, Lokich and raltitrexed in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients in six of 45 centres in the main trial were approached to take part in the sub-study. Chemotherapy delivery costs were assessed in each sub-study centre with external validity verified by questionnaire to all other centres. Patient representativeness was assessed. Stochastic resource use data, including patient borne costs and non-hospital health service resource use were monitored prospectively. Mean total societal costs were de Gramont= 5051 pounds sterling (s.d. 1910 pounds sterling ), raltitrexed= 2616 pounds sterling (s.d. 991 pounds sterling ) and Lokich= 2576 pounds sterling (s.d. 1711 pounds sterling ). In pairwise comparisons, statistically significant mean total cost differences were shown for de Gramont vs Lokich (mean difference= 2475 pounds sterling , 95%CI 914 pounds sterling - 4037 pounds sterling , P<0.01) and for de Gramont vs raltitrexed (mean difference= 2435 pounds sterling, 95%CI 922 pounds sterling - 2948 pounds sterling , P<0.01). Sensitivity analyses showed little effect on overall costs. The main trial showed de Gramont and Lokich to be equally effective in terms of survival, quality of life and response rates but Lokich had higher toxicity and hand-foot syndrome. Raltitrexed showed similar response rates and overall survival but increased toxicity and inferior quality of life making it a clinically inferior regimen despite its ease of administration and costs. For a comparable clinical outcome, Lokich can be administered for approximately half the cost of de Gramont.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Comparison of survival, palliation, and quality of life with three chemotherapy regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomised trial compared three chemotherapy regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, in terms of their effect on overall and progression-free survival; other endpoints included toxicity, symptom palliation, and quality of life. METHODS: 905 patients were randomly assigned the de Gramont regimen (n=303; folinic acid 200 mg/m(2), fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m(2), and infusion 600 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2, repeated every 14 days), the Lokich regimen (n=301; protracted venous infusion of fluorouracil 300 mg/m(2) daily), or raltitrexed (n=301; 3 mg/m(2) intravenously every 21 days). Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Median follow-up of survivors was 67 weeks. For the de Gramont, Lokich, and raltitrexed groups, respectively, median survival was 294, 302, and 266 days. The hazard ratios for overall survival were 0.88 (95% CI 0.70-1.12, p=0.17) for de Gramont versus Lokich, and 0.99 (0.79-1.25, p=0.94) for de Gramont versus raltitrexed. An increase in treatment-related deaths was seen on raltitrexed (de Gramont one, Lokich two, raltitrexed 18) due to combined gastrointestinal and haematological toxicity. Patients' assessment of quality of life showed that raltitrexed was inferior to the fluorouracil-based regimens, especially in terms of palliation and functioning. INTERPRETATION: The deGramont and Lokich regimens were similar in terms of survival, quality of life, and response rates. The Lokich regimen was associated with more central line complications and hand-foot syndrome. Raltitrexed showed similar response rates and overall survival to the de Gramont regimen and was easier to administer, but resulted in greater toxicity and inferior quality of life.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2001

Comparative mapping of the human 9q34 region in Fugu rubripes.

Twenty-seven genes have been cloned and mapped in Fugu which have orthologues within the human chromosome 9q34 region. The genes are arranged into five cosmid and BAC contigs which physically map to two different Fugu chromosomes. Considering the gene content of these contigs, it is more probable that a translocation event took place early in the Fugu lineage to split the ancestral 9q34 region onto two chromosomes rather than the alternative hypothesis of a large-scale duplication of the region into two chromosomes with subsequent rapid and dramatic gene loss. There are considerable differences in gene order between the two species, which would appear to be the result of a series of complex chromosome inversions; thus suggesting that there have been no positional constraints on this particular gene set.

Animals↗
PubMed2000

Analysis of messy longitudinal data from a randomized clinical trial. MRC Lung Cancer Working Party.

The randomized clinical trial, LU19, conducted by the Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party, was designed to compare ACE (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and etoposide) chemotherapy plus G-CSF (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) at 2-week intervals versus ACE chemotherapy alone at standard 3-week intervals in patients with small-cell lung cancer. This trial investigated whether more intensive administration of ACE would improve overall survival and affect the quality of life of patients. The report on overall survival and other outcome measures will be published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. In this paper we focus on methods of analysing aspects of data reflecting quality of life. Twelve symptoms of lung cancer and its treatment - cough, haemoptysis, pain, nausea, vomiting, hoarse voice, sore mouth, rash, lethargy, lack of appetite, alopecia, and dysphagia - were scheduled to be assessed on seven occasions for the ACE arm and on eight occasions for the ACE+G-CSF arm by clinicians during the first 18 weeks of the treatment period. However, in practice the number of assessment forms completed per patient ranged from 1 to 9, and assessment time-points were very different from those planned. These 'messy' longitudinal data are explored by both a summary measure approach, in which experience of a symptom is summarized by a single value, and an extensive model-based statistical approach, which explicitly takes into account correlation within repeated measures. These analyses provide a clear picture of symptom comparisons between the two treatments. The application of various methods offers not only an approach to assessing the robustness of the results but also a basis for investigating reasons for inconsistency of results across methods. We conclude that except lethargy, which is worse in the ACE+G-CSF arm, all symptoms are similar across the two arms during the treatment period.

Amsacrine↗
PubMed2000

Gemcitabine plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer--a randomized trial with quality of life as the primary outcome. UK NSCLC Gemcitabine Group. Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Three hundred patients with symptomatic, locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC not requiring immediate radiotherapy were enrolled into this randomized multicentre trial comparing gemcitabine + BSC vs BSC alone. Patients allocated gemcitabine received 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, for a maximum of six cycles. The main aim of this trial was to compare patient assessment of a predefined subset of commonly reported symptoms (SS14) from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC13 scales. The primary end-points were defined as (1) the percentage change in mean SS14 score between baseline and 2 months and (2) the proportion of patients with a marked (> or = 25%) improvement in SS14 score between baseline and 2 months sustained for > or =4 weeks. The secondary objectives were to compare treatments with respect to overall survival, and multidimensional QL parameters. The treatment groups were balanced with regard to age, gender, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) and disease stage (40% had metastatic disease). The percentage change in mean SS14 score from baseline to 2 months was a 10% decrease (i.e. improvement) for gemcitabine plus BSC and a 1% increase (i.e. deterioration) for BSC alone (P = 0.113, two-sample t-test). A sustained (> or = 4 weeks) improvement (> or =25%) on SS14 was recorded in a significantly higher proportion of gemcitabine + BSC patients (22%) than in BSC alone patients (9%) (P = 0.0014, Pearson's chi-squared test). The QLQ-C30 and L13 subscales showed greater improvement in the gemcitabine plus BSC arm (in 11 domains) than in the BSC arm (one symptom item). There was greater deterioration in the BSC alone arm (six domains/items) than in the gemcitabine + BSC arm (three QL domains). Tumour response occurred in 19% (95% CI 13-27) of gemcitabine patients. There was no difference in overall survival: median 5.7 months (95% CI 4.6-7.6) for gemcitabine + BSC patients and 5.9 months (95% CI 5.0-7.9) (log-rank, P = 0.84) for BSC patients, and 1 -year survival was 25% for gemcitabine + BSC and 22% for BSC. Overall, 74 (49%) gemcitabine + BSC patients and 119 (79%) BSC patients received palliative radiotherapy. The median time to radiotherapy was 29 weeks for gemcitabine + BSC patients and 3.8 weeks for BSC. Patients treated with gemcitabine + BSC reported better QL and reduced disease-related symptoms compared with those receiving BSC alone. These improvements in patient-assessed QL were significant in magnitude and were sustained.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Improving survival without reducing quality of life in small-cell lung cancer patients by increasing the dose-intensity of chemotherapy with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support: results of a British Medical Research Council Multicenter Randomized Trial. Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party.

PURPOSE: The treatment of small-cell lung cancer patients with good performance status aims to improve survival. Dose-intensification could be a way to achieve improved survival but can be limited by neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Preliminary, nonrandomized feasibility studies showed that doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide (ACE) could be given every 2 (instead of the usual 3) weeks with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) (lenograstim; Chugai-Rh¿one-Poulenc, Tokyo, Japan) support. The present multicenter randomized trial was designed to examine whether such dose-intensification improves survival while maintaining acceptable toxicity levels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients were randomized to receive six cycles of ACE either every 3 weeks (control [C] group) or every 2 weeks with G-CSF (G group). The standard dose-intensity of ACE was increased by 50% in group G. RESULTS: Four hundred and three patients (G group: n = 201; C group: n = 202) were randomized. The received dose-intensity was 34% higher in the G group than in the C group. Complete response rates were 40% for the G group and 28% for the C group (P =.02), and overall rates were 78% for the G group and 79% for the C group. Survival was longer in the G group (hazard ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.99; P =.04), survival rates for the G and C groups being 47% and 39% at 12 months and 13% and 8% at 24 months, respectively. Metastasis-free survival, nonhematologic toxicity, and quality of life were similar in the two groups. In the G group, there was less neutropenia but more thrombocytopenia and more frequent blood and platelet transfusions. CONCLUSION: Increasing the dose-intensity of ACE with G-CSF support improved survival while maintaining acceptable toxicity.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Depression in patients with lung cancer: prevalence and risk factors derived from quality-of-life data.

PURPOSE: To evaluate self-reported depression rates in patients with inoperable lung cancer and to explore demographic, clinical, and quality-of-life (QOL) factors associated with depression and thus identify patients at risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Nine hundred eighty-seven patients from three palliative treatment trials conducted by the Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party formed the study sample. 526 patients (53%) had poor prognosis small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and 461 patients (47%) had good prognosis non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale data and QOL items from the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist were analyzed, together with relevant demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Depression was self-rated in 322 patients (33%) before treatment and persisted in more than 50% of patients. SCLC patients had a three-fold greater prevalence of case depression than those with NSCLC (25% v 9%; P <.0001). An increased rate for women was found for good performance status (PS) patients (PS of 0 or 1) but the sex difference reduced for poor PS patients (PS of 3 or 4) because of increased depression rates for men (chi(2) for trend, P <.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that functional impairment was the most important risk factor; depression increased by 41% for each increment on the impairment scale. Pretreatment physical symptom burden, fatigue, and clinician-rated PS were also independent predictors, but cell type was not. CONCLUSION: Depression is common and persistent in lung cancer patients, especially those with more severe symptoms or functional limitations. Psychologic screening and appropriate intervention is an essential part of palliative care.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed2000

Treatment and outcomes for elderly patients with small cell lung cancer.

It is estimated that approximately half of the 500 000 people diagnosed with lung cancer worldwide every year are aged >70 years. Thus, this disease represents a major problem in the elderly and one that will indeed increase as the median age of the population increases. For small cell lung cancer (SCLC), which accounts for approximately 20% of cases of lung cancer, the primary treatment is chemotherapy and in the majority of cases the primary aim is to control the disease which generally would have spread beyond the lungs at the time of presentation. A small number of 'standard' chemotherapy regimens (combined with radiotherapy for patients with limited disease) have been shown to improve survival and quality of life and are widely used. Much of the work investigating the relationship between age and treatment outcomes has been based on clinical trial data and may itself be inherently biased due to trial eligibility criteria excluding elderly patients. However, there is no good evidence that elderly patients fare worse with treatment than their younger counterparts in terms of response rates and survival. Nevertheless with increasing age comes increasing concomitant illnesses which may account for the widely observed increases in drug toxicity, and this may be the primary consideration in selecting the treatment option. Thus for many elderly patients, carboplatin/ etoposide may be the treatment of choice because it is perhaps the least toxic of the standard regimens. Whatever regimen is chosen, the key to treatment effectiveness seems to be to deliver the first 3 or 4 cycles without delay or dosage reduction. Although palliation of symptoms remains a major goal in the treatment of all patients with SCLC there is a dearth of data on whether elderly patients are equally well palliated as their younger counterparts. There is no good evidence that age per se should be a factor in deciding whether patients should receive standard treatment rather than a more gentle approach, and more elderly patients should be included in clinical trials. The key areas where more information is required regarding the treatment and outcomes of elderly patients with SCLC are the assessment of palliation, and comprehensive reviews of all patients diagnosed with the disease, not just those included in trials.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Overview Collaborative Group.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic cranial irradiation reduces the incidence of brain metastasis in patients with small-cell lung cancer. Whether this treatment, when given to patients in complete remission, improves survival is not known. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival. METHODS: We analyzed individual data on 987 patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission who took part in seven trials that compared prophylactic cranial irradiation with no prophylactic cranial irradiation. The main end point was survival. RESULTS: The relative risk of death in the treatment group as compared with the control group was 0.84 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.73 to 0.97; P= 0.01), which corresponds to a 5.4 percent increase in the rate of survival at three years (15.3 percent in the control group vs. 20.7 percent in the treatment group). Prophylactic cranial irradiation also increased the rate of disease-free survival (relative risk of recurrence or death, 0.75; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.86; P<0.001) and decreased the cumulative incidence of brain metastasis (relative risk, 0.46; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.57; P<0.001). Larger doses of radiation led to greater decreases in the risk of brain metastasis, according to an analysis of four total doses (8 Gy, 24 to 25 Gy, 30 Gy, and 36 to 40 Gy) (P for trend=0.02), but the effect on survival did not differ significantly according to the dose. We also identified a trend (P=0.01) toward a decrease in the risk of brain metastasis with earlier administration of cranial irradiation after the initiation of induction chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic cranial irradiation improves both overall survival and disease-free survival among patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Defining and analysing symptom palliation in cancer clinical trials: a deceptively difficult exercise.

The assessment of symptom palliation is an essential component of many treatment comparisons in clinical trials, yet an extensive literature search revealed no consensus as to its precise definition, which could embrace relief of symptoms, time to their onset, duration, degree, as well as symptom control and prevention. In an attempt to assess the importance of these aspects and to compare different methods of analysis, we used one symptom (cough) from a patient self-assessment questionnaire (the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist) in a large (>300 patient) multicentre randomized clinical trial (conducted by the Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party) of palliative chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer. The regimens compared were a two-drug regimen (2D) and a four-drug regimen (4D). No differences were seen between the regimens in time of onset of palliation or its duration. The degree of palliation was strongly related to the initial severity: 90% of the patients with moderate or severe cough at baseline reported improvement, compared with only 53% of those with mild cough. Analyses using different landmark time points gave conflicting results: the 4D regimen was superior at 1 month and at 3 months, whereas at 2 months the 2D regimen appeared superior. When improvement at any time up to 3 months was considered, the 4D regimen showed a significant benefit (4D 79%, 2D 60%, P = 0.02). These findings emphasize the need for caution in interpreting results, and the importance of working towards a standard definition of symptom palliation. The current lack of specified criteria makes analysis and interpretation of trial results difficult, and comparison across trials impossible. A standard definition of palliation for use in the analysis of clinical trials data is proposed, which takes into account aspects of onset, duration and degree of palliation, and symptom improvement, control and prevention.

Carcinoma, Small Cell↗
PubMed1999

Treatment of endotracheal or endobronchial obstruction by non-small cell lung cancer: lack of patients in an MRC randomized trial leaves key questions unanswered. Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party.

Symptoms of endotracheal or endobronchial obstruction caused by non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be relieved with external beam radiotherapy (XRT) or endobronchial treatment. The comparative roles of these two methods need to be established. Patients with predominantly intraluminal obstruction of the trachea, a main bronchus or a lobar bronchus by unresectable NSCLC were randomized to XRT versus the clinician's choice of endobronchial treatment with brachytherapy, laser resection or cryotherapy, according to local availability and practice. Clinicians' assessments included symptoms of obstruction, WHO performance status, lung function tests and adverse effects of treatment. Patients completed a Rotterdam Symptom Checklist at all assessments and a daily diary card to record the severity of major symptoms during the first 4 weeks. To show a difference of 15% in the relief of breathlessness rates at 4 months (from 65% to 80%), 400 patients were required. In spite of our many previously successful lung cancer trials, and initial interest from clinicians in 24 UK centres, who estimated they could randomize 200 patients per year into the present trial, only 75 patients were randomized from seven centres over 3.5 years. Intake to the trial was therefore abandoned in November 1996 although an independent Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee had concluded in April 1996 that the scientific case for the trial was still strong; there were no competing trials; there were no design problems; and much had been done to promote the trial. The main reasons given by centres for the slow intake were: lack of referrals of untreated patients; patients being referred specifically for endobronchial treatment; patients having already received XRT; emergency endobronchial relief of obstruction being necessary; and XRT and endobronchial treatment being considered complementary and not as alternatives. The relative advantages and disadvantages of XRT versus endobronchial treatment remain to be determined. The lack of recruitment to this trial raises the issue of innovative techniques not being given the chance of proving their worth compared with traditional treatments.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Aggressive behaviour in children with Tourette syndrome and comorbid attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive behaviour, defined as sudden, explosive outbursts of rage, has been reported as a clinical problem in approximately 23% to 40% of Tourette syndrome (TS) patients (1-5). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are also reported in 50% to 70% of TS patients (6). OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether aggressive behaviour was associated with TS directly or found primarily in TS with comorbid ADHD or OCD. METHOD: Aggressive behaviour in 33 nonmedicated patients with TS (ages 6 to 14 years) and 6 healthy control subjects (ages 7 to 12 years) was examined by semistructured interview and multiinformant questionnaires. RESULTS: Aggression subscales on Achenbach's Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) completed by parents and Teacher's Report Form (TRF) completed by teachers distinguished the TS-only and control groups from the group with TS + Comorbidity (P < 0.046, and P < 0.016) after adjusting for tic severity and age. The conduct disorder subscale on the Conners Parent Rating Scale (CPRS) was also significantly higher (P < 0.005) in the TS + comorbidity group than in the TS-only or control groups, with more problems reported in the older children. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide additional evidence that aggressive behaviour observed in children with TS may be associated with comorbid ADHD or OCD (6), independent of tic severity or age. This is consistent with the clinical observation that most TS patients have only minimal symptoms, which do not interfere with their daily functioning.

Adolescent↗