Acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) remain major obstacles for successful allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) modulates immune cells, such as alloreactive T cells and dendritic cells, and improves GVHD target organ function(s) in steroid-refractory GVHD patients. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the totality of evidence regarding the efficacy of ECP for treatment of acute and chronic steroid-refractory or steroid-dependent GVHD. Nine studies, including 1 randomized controlled trial, met inclusion criteria, with a total of 323 subjects. In pooled analyses, overall response rates (ORR) were .69 (95% confidence interval [CI], .34 to .95) and .64 (95% CI, .47 to .79) for acute and chronic GVHD, respectively. In acute GVHD organ-specific responses, ECP resulted in the highest ORR for cutaneous, with .84 (95% CI, .75 to .92), followed by gastrointestinal with .65 (95% CI, .52 to .78). Similar response rates were seen in chronic GVHD involving the skin and gastrointestinal tract. Conversely, ORR for chronic GVHD involving the lungs was only .15 (95% CI, 0 to .5). In chronic GVHD, grades 3 to 4 adverse events were reported at .38 (95% CI, .06 to .78). ECP-related mortality rates were extremely low. Rates of immunosuppression discontinuation were .55 (95% CI, .40 to .70) and .23 (95% CI, .07 to .44) for acute and chronic GVHD, respectively. In summary, albeit limited by numbers of available studies, pooled analyses of prospective studies demonstrate encouraging responses after ECP treatment in acute and chronic GVHD after failing corticosteroids. Further research efforts are needed to improve organ-specific responses.

Background The proportion of proposed new treatments that are ’successful’ is of ethical, scientific, and public importance. We investigated how often new, experimental treatments evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are superior to established treatments. Objectives Our main question was: “On average how often are new treatments more effective, equally effective or less effective than established treatments?” Additionally, we wanted to explain the observed results, i.e. whether the observed distribution of outcomes is consistent with the ’uncertainty requirement’ for enrollment in RCTs. We also investigated the effect of choice of comparator (active versus no treatment/placebo) on the observed results. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register (CMR) 2010, Issue 1 in The Cochrane Library (searched 31 March 2010); MEDLINE Ovid 1950 to March Week 2 2010 (searched 24 March 2010); and EMBASE Ovid 1980 to 2010 Week 11 (searched 24 March 2010). Selection criteria Cohorts of studies were eligible for the analysis if they met all of the following criteria: (i) consecutive series of RCTs, (ii) registered at or before study onset, and (iii) compared new against established treatments in humans. Data collection and analysis RCTs from four cohorts of RCTs met all inclusion criteria and provided data from 743 RCTs involving 297,744 patients. All four cohorts consisted of publicly funded trials. Two cohorts involved evaluations of new treatments in cancer, one in neurological disorders, and one for mixed types of diseases. We employed kernel density estimation, meta-analysis and meta-regression to assess the probability of new treatments being superior to established treatments in their effect on primary outcomes and overall survival. Main results The distribution of effects seen was generally symmetrical in the size of difference between new versus established treatments. Meta-analytic pooling indicated that, on average, new treatments were slightly more favorable both in terms of their effect on reducing the primary outcomes (hazard ratio (HR)/odds ratio (OR) 0.91, 99% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.95) and improving overall survival (HR 0.95, 99% CI 0.92 to 0.98). No heterogeneity was observed in the analysis based on primary outcomes or overall survival (I2 = 0%). Kernel density analysis was consistent with the meta-analysis, but showed a fairly symmetrical distribution of new versus established treatments indicating unpredictability in the results. This was consistent with the interpretation that new treatments are only slightly superior to established treatments when tested in RCTs. Additionally, meta-regression demonstrated that results have remained stable over time and that the success rate of new treatments has not changed over the last half century of clinical trials. The results were not significantly affected by the choice of comparator (active versus placebo/no therapy). Authors’ conclusions Society can expect that slightly more than half of new experimental treatm...

Nonrandomized data were used for 7% of EMA drug approvals. Larger effect sizes were associated with greater likelihood of approval based on nonrandomized data alone. We did not find a clear treatment effect threshold for drug approval without RCT evidence.

Physicians capable of suppressing an immediate intuitive response to questions and those scoring higher on rational thinking made fewer inferential mistakes. We found a negative correlation between age and maximizing: Physicians who were more advanced in their careers were less willing to spend time and effort in an exhaustive search for solutions. However, they appeared to have maintained their "mindware" for effective problem solving.

No abstract

Graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) is a major complication associated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Antithymocyte globulin (ATG) is recommended for GVHD prophylaxis following allo-HCT, however, evidence on efficacy of ATG is conflicting. Accordingly, we undertook a systematic review. All phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ATG versus control for prevention of GVHD in patients undergoing allo-HCT were eligible. Medline and Cochrane databases were searched. Data on methodological quality, benefits and harms were extracted for each trial and pooled under a random effects model. Seven RCTs enrolling 733 patients met inclusion criteria. Pooled results showed no difference for overall survival with use of ATG (hazard ratio was 0.91; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.75 -1.10; P ¼ 0.32). There was a significant benefit for prevention of grade III/IV acute GVHD (risk ratio (RR) ¼ 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27 -0.94; P ¼ 0.03). There was no benefit associated with ATG use for prevention of either grade II (RR ¼ 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48 -1.30; P ¼ 0.35) or grade I acute GVHD (RR ¼ 1.42; 95% CI, 0.75 -2.69; P ¼ 0.28). Use of ATG was not associated with significant reduction in non-relapse mortality (RR ¼ 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53 -1.03; P ¼ 0.08). Future trials with adequate sample size are required to provide more definitive answers.

BackgroundDecision-making relies on both analytical and emotional thinking. Cognitive reasoning styles (e.g. maximizing and satisficing tendencies) heavily influence analytical processes, while affective processes are often dependent on regret. The relationship between regret and cognitive reasoning styles has not been well studied in physicians, and is the focus of this paper.MethodsA regret questionnaire and 6 scales measuring individual differences in cognitive styles (maximizing-satisficing tendencies; analytical vs. intuitive reasoning; need for cognition; intolerance toward ambiguity; objectivism; and cognitive reflection) were administered through a web-based survey to physicians of the University of South Florida. Bonferroni’s adjustment was applied to the overall correlation analysis. The correlation analysis was also performed without Bonferroni’s correction, given the strong theoretical rationale indicating the need for a separate hypothesis. We also conducted a multivariate regression analysis to identify the unique influence of predictors on regret.Results165 trainees and 56 attending physicians (age range 25 to 69) participated in the survey. After bivariate analysis we found that maximizing tendency positively correlated with regret with respect to both decision difficulty (r=0.673; p<0.001) and alternate search strategy (r=0.239; p=0.002). When Bonferroni’s correction was not applied, we also found a negative relationship between satisficing tendency and regret (r=-0.156; p=0.021). In trainees, but not faculty, regret negatively correlated with rational-analytical thinking (r=-0.422; p<0.001), need for cognition (r=-0.340; p<0.001), and objectivism (r=-0.309; p=0.003) and positively correlated with ambiguity intolerance (r=0.285; p=0.012). However, after conducting a multivariate regression analysis, we found that regret was positively associated with maximizing only with respect to decision difficulty (r=0.791; p<0.001), while it was negatively associated with satisficing (r=-0.257; p=0.020) and objectivism (r=-0.267; p=0.034). We found no statistically significant relationship between regret and overall accuracy on conditional inferential tasks.ConclusionRegret in physicians is strongly associated with their tendency to maximize; i.e. the tendency to consider more choices among abundant options leads to more regret. However, physicians who exhibit satisficing tendency – the inclination to accept a “good enough” solution – feel less regret. Our observation that objectivism is a negative predictor of regret indicates that the tendency to seek and use empirical data in decision-making leads to less regret. Therefore, promotion of evidence-based reasoning may lead to lower regret.

Objectives: It is unclear how guidelines panelists discuss and consider factors (criteria) that are formally and not formally included in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. To describe the use of decision criteria, we explored how panelists adhered to GRADE criteria and sought to identify any emerging non-GRADE criteria when the panelists used the Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework as part of GRADE application. Study Design and Setting: We used conventional and summative qualitative analyses to identify themes emerging from face-to-face, panel meeting discussions. Forty-eight members from 12 countries participated in the development of five guidelines for the management of venous thromboembolism by the American Society of Hematology.