Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Peto

Publications and source records attributed to R Peto.

261 records · Page 15Linked to original sources

The mechanism of carcinogenesis by the neutral fraction of cigarette smoke condensate.

Sixteen groups, each of 50 Swiss female SPF mice, were treated thrice weekly with various combinations of 3,4-benzopyrene (BP) and/or the neutral fraction of cigarette smoke (NF) in acetone applied to the skin. Some groups received one carcinogen, some the other and some a mixture of the two. Skin tumour incidence rates were found to increase both with the dose of NF and with the dose of BP. With BP alone a threshold dose was found beyond which a very heavy incidence rate of malignant skin tumours occurred. After correction of the results for intercurrent deaths it was found that when NF and BP are applied together as a mixture they do not act independently in the production of malignant skin tumours but interact positively. This suggests that some of the components of NF act as cocarcinogens rather than as complete carcinogens. Treatment with NF appeared to increase the incidence of malignant lymphomas. The data were not suitable for deciding whether the various treatments influenced the rates of incidence of internal tumours of other types, for example, lung tumours.

Acetone↗

Avoidance of large biases and large random errors in the assessment of moderate treatment effects: the need for systematic overviews.

In order to avoid selective biases and to minimize random errors, inference about the effects of treatment on serious endpoints needs to be based not on one, or a few, of the available trial results, but on a systematic overview of the totality of the evidence from all the relevant unconfounded randomized trials. But, only where coverage of all, or nearly all, randomized patients in all relevant trials (or a reasonably unbiased sample of such trials) can be assured, is a systematic overview of trials reasonably trustworthy, for then any selective biases are likely to be small in comparison with any moderate effects of treatment. Checks for the existence of such biases can best be conducted if reasonably detailed data are available from each trial. Future trials should take into account the results of any relevant overviews in their design, and should plan to obtain sufficient numbers of events to contribute substantially to such overviews. In many cases, this implies the need for randomized trials that are much larger than is currently standard.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials.

Long-term beta blockade for perhaps a year or so following discharge after an MI is now of proven value, and for many such patients mortality reductions of about 25% can be achieved. No important differences are clearly apparent among the benefits of different beta blockers, although some are more convenient than others (or have slightly fewer side effects), and it appears that those with appreciable intrinsic sympathomimetic activity may confer less benefit. If monitored, the side effects of long-term therapy are not a major problem, as when they occur they are easily reversible by changing the beta blocker or by discontinuation of treatment. By contrast, although very early IV short-term beta blockade can definitely limit infarct size, more reliable information about the effects of such treatment on mortality will not be available until a large trial (ISIS) reports later this year, with data on some thousands of patients entered within less than 4 hours of the onset of pain. Our aim has been not only to review the 65-odd randomized beta blocker trials but also to demonstrate that when many randomized trials have all applied one general approach to treatment, it is often not appropriate to base inference on individual trial results. Although there will usually be important differences from one trial to another (in eligibility, treatment, end-point assessment, and so on), physicians who wish to decide whether to adopt a particular treatment policy should try to make their decision in the light of an overview of all these related randomized trials and not just a few particular trial results. Although most trials are too small to be individually reliable, this defect of size may be rectified by an overview of many trials, as long as appropriate statistical methods are used. Fortunately, robust statistical methods exist--based on direct, unweighted summation of one O-E value from each trial--that are simple for physicians to use and understand yet provide full statistical sensitivity. These methods allow combination of information from different trials while avoiding the unjustified direct comparison of patients in one trial with patients in another. (Moreover, they can be extended of such data that there is no real need for the introduction of any more complex statistical methods that might be more difficult for physicians to trust.) Their robustness, sensitivity, and avoidance of unnecessary complexity make these particular methods an important tool in trial overviews.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗

Random diets.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cellulose↗