Repeated ST2 measurements appeared to be a strong predictor of outcome in patients with acute HF, independent of repeatedly measured NT-proBNP. Hence ST2 may be helpful in clinical practice for prognostication and treatment monitoring. (TRanslational Initiative on Unique and novel strategies for Management of Patients with Heart failure [TRIUMPH]; NTR1893).
Patients with AHF and preserved renal function are decongested better, as shown by an increase in hemoglobin. A rapid increase in hemoglobin during the first week is independently associated with a favorable outcome, despite a slight decrease in renal function.
The designed method enables quantitative BR analysis of alternative treatments using all available evidence from a network of clinical trials. The preference-free analysis can be useful in presenting the results of an MTC considering multiple outcomes.
Aims/hypothesis Vasopressin plays a role in osmoregulation, glucose homeostasis and inflammation. Therefore, plasma copeptin, the stable C-terminal portion of the precursor of vasopressin, has strong potential as a biomarker for the cardiometabolic syndrome and diabetes. Previous results were contradictory, which may be explained by differences between men and women in responsiveness of the vasopressin system. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of copeptin for prediction of future type 2 diabetes in men and women separately. Methods From the Prevention of Renal and Vascular Endstage Disease (PREVEND) study, 4,063 women and 3,909 men without diabetes at baseline were included. A total of 208 women and 288 men developed diabetes during a median follow-up of 7.7 years. Results In multivariable-adjusted models, we observed a stronger association of copeptin with risk of future diabetes in women (OR 1.49 [95% CI 1.24, 1.79]) than in men (OR 1.01 [95% CI 0.85, 1.19]) (p interaction <0.01). The addition of copeptin to the Data from the Epidemiological Study on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome (DESIR) clinical model improved the discriminative value (C-statistic,+0.007, p00.02) and reclassification (integrated discrimination improvement [IDI] 0 0.004, p<0.01) in women. However, we observed no improvement in men. The additive value of copeptin in women was maintained when other independent predictors, such as glucose, high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and 24 h urinary albumin excretion (UAE), were included in the model. Conclusions/interpretation The association of plasma copeptin with the risk of developing diabetes was stronger in women than in men. Plasma copeptin alone, and along with existing biomarkers (glucose, hs-CRP and UAE), significantly improved the risk prediction for diabetes in women.
The LFTs comprised serial assessment of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and albumin at baseline and during follow-up (daily until discharge, on days 7 and 14). The prevalence of abnormal LFTs (above upper limit of normal for AST and ALT or below lower limit of normal for albumin) was: at baseline AST 20%, ALT 12%, albumin 40%; and at day 14: AST 15%, ALT 9%, albumin 26%. Abnormal LFTs at baseline were associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death with odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 3.5 (1.7-7.3) for AST, 3.9 (1.8-8.4) for ALT, and 2.8 (1.3-5.9) for albumin (all P < 0.01). Abnormal baseline and discharge LFTs had an unfavourable impact on 180-day mortality with hazard ratios (95% CI) for baseline AST, ALT, and albumin of 1.3 (1.0
Decision makers in different health care settings need to weigh the benefits and harms of alternative treatment strategies. Such health care decisions include marketing authorization by regulatory agencies, practice guideline formulation by clinical groups, and treatment selection by prescribers and patients in clinical practice. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a family of formal methods that help make explicit the tradeoffs that decision makers accept between the benefit and risk outcomes of different treatment options. Despite the recent interest in MCDA, certain methodological aspects are poorly understood. This paper presents 7 guidelines for applying MCDA in benefit-risk assessment and illustrates their use in the selection of a statin drug for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. We provide guidance on the key methodological issues of how to define the decision problem, how to select a set of nonoverlapping evaluation criteria, how to synthesize and summarize the evidence, how to translate relative measures to absolute ones that permit comparisons between the criteria, how to define suitable scale ranges, how to elicit partial preference information from the decision makers, and how to incorporate uncertainty in the analysis. Our example on statins indicates that fluvastatin is likely to be the most preferred drug by our decision maker and that this result is insensitive to the amount of preference information incorporated in the analysis.
Currently, patient preference studies are not required to be included in marketing authorization applications to regulatory authorities, and the role and methodology for such studies have not been agreed upon. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) conducted a pilot study to gain experience on how the collection of individual preferences can inform the regulatory review. Using a short online questionnaire, ordinal statements regarding the desirability of different outcomes in the treatment of advanced cancer were elicited from 139 participants (98 regulators, 29 patient or carers, and 12 healthcare professionals). This was followed by face-to-face meetings to gather feedback and validate the individual responses. In this article we summarize the EMA pilot study and discuss the role of patient preference studies within the regulatory review. Based on the results, we conclude that our preference elicitation instrument was easy to implement and sufficiently precise to learn about the distribution of the participants' individual preferences.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.