A systematic review and meta‐analysis of clinical variables used in Huntington disease research

Treatment effect in Huntington disease (HD) clinical trials has relied on primary outcome measures such as total motor score or functional rating scales. However, these measures have limited sensitivity, particularly in pre‐ to early stages of the disease. We performed a systematic review of HD clinical studies to identify endpoints that correlate with disease severity. Using standard HD keywords and terms, we identified 749 published studies from 1993 to 2011 based on the availability of demographic, biochemical, and clinical measures. The average and variability of each measure was abstracted and stratified according to pre‐far, pre‐close, early, mild, moderate, and severe HD stages. A fixed‐effect meta‐analysis on selected variables was conducted at various disease stages. A total of 1,801 different clinical variables and treatment outcomes were identified. Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) Motor, UHDRS Independence, and Trail B showed a trend toward separation between HD stages. Other measures, such as UHDRS Apathy, Verbal Fluency, and Symbol Digit, could only distinguish between pre‐ and early stages of disease and later stages, whereas other measures showed little correlation with increasing HD stages. Using cross‐sectional data from published HD clinical trials, we have identified potential endpoints that could be used to track HD disease progression and treatment effect. Longitudinal studies, such as TRACK‐HD, are critical for assessing the value of potential markers of disease progression for use in future HD therapeutic trials. A list of variables, references used in this meta‐analysis, and database is available at http://www.cmmt.ubc.ca/research/investigators/leavitt/publications . © 2013 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society     

Transforming growth factor-beta trans-modulates the expression of colony stimulating factor receptors on murine hematopoietic progenitor cell lines

Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) is a potent and selective growth inhibitor of early hematopoietic progenitors and leukemic cells. The cellular mechanism(s) underlying this antiproliferative effect is, however, currently unknown. In the present study, we demonstrate that TGF-beta inhibits the expression of granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), interleukin 3 (IL-3), and granulocyte-CSF (G-CSF) receptors on murine factor-dependent and independent hematopoietic progenitor cell lines without a significant change in receptor affinity. A maximum reduction in GM-CSF receptor numbers of 65% to 77% was observed by 96-hour incubation with TGF-beta. The TGF- beta induced trans-down-modulation of GM-CSF receptors was prolonged, noncytotoxic but reversible, and not due to endogenous production of GM- CSF. The TGF-beta induced reduction in CSF receptor numbers preceded TGF-beta's growth inhibitory action. In addition, the ED50 (1 to 10 pmol/L) for TGF-beta's CSF receptor modulatory and antiproliferative effect was similar. The effect of TGF-beta on cell surface CSF receptor expression was specific, because the expression of other cell surface proteins (Ly 5 and Ly 17) was not affected by TGF-beta treatment, and because other growth inhibitors (tumor necrosis factor and interferon) did not affect CSF receptor expression. These data suggest that the downregulation of the growth of hematopoietic progenitor cells by TGF- beta involves reducing the cell surface expression on growth factor receptors.     

Hematopoietic growth factors for graft failure after bone marrow transplantation: a randomized trial of granulocyte-macrophage colony- stimulating factor (GM-CSF) versus sequential GM-CSF plus granulocyte- CSF

Delay in hematologic recovery after bone marrow transplantation (BMT) can extend and amplify the risks of infection and hemorrhage, compromise patients' survival, and increase the duration and cost of hospitalization. Because current studies suggest that granulocyte- macrophage (GM) colony-stimulating factor (CSF) may potentiate the sensitivity of hematopoietic progenitor cells to G-CSF, we performed a prospective, randomized trial comparing GM-CSF (250 micrograms/m2/d x 14 days) versus sequential GM-CSF x 7 days followed by G-CSF (5 micrograms/kg/d x 7 days) as treatment for primary or secondary graft failure after BMT. Eligibility criteria included failure to achieve a white blood cell (WBC) count > or = 100/microL by day +21 or > or = 300/microL by day +28, no absolute neutrophil count (ANC) > or = 200/microL by day +28, or secondary sustained neutropenia after initial engraftment. Forty-seven patients were enrolled: 23 received GM-CSF (10 unrelated, 8 related allogeneic, and 5 autologous), and 24 received GM- CSF followed by G-CSF (12 unrelated, 7 related allogeneic, and 5 autologous). For patients receiving GM-CSF alone, neutrophil recovery (ANC > or = 500/microL) occurred between 2 and 61 days (median, 8 days) after therapy, while those receiving GM-CSF+G-CSF recovered at a similar rate of 1 to 36 days (median, 6 days; P = .39). Recovery to red blood cell (RBC) transfusion independence was slow, occurring 6 to 250 days (median, 35 days) after enrollment with no significant difference between the two treatment groups (GM-CSF: median, 30 days; GM-CSF+G- CSF; median, 42 days; P = .24). Similarly, platelet transfusion independence was delayed until 4 to 249 days (median, 32 days) after enrollment, with no difference between the two treatment groups (GM- CSF: median, 28 days; GM-CSF+G-CSF: median, 42 days; P = .38). Recovery times were not different between patients with unrelated donors and those with related donors or autologous transplant recipients. Survival at 100 days after enrollment was superior after treatment with GM-CSF alone. Only 1 of 23 patients treated with GM-CSF died versus 7 of 24 treated with GM-CSF+G-CSF who died 16 to 84 days (median, 38 days) after enrollment, yielding Kaplan-Meier 100-day survival estimates of 96% +/- 8% for GM-CSF versus 71% +/- 18% for GM-CSF+G-CSF (P = .026). These data suggest that sequential growth factor therapy with GM-CSF followed by G-CSF offers no advantage over GM-CSF alone in accelerating trilineage hematopoiesis or preventing lethal complications in patients with poor graft function after BMT.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Life Support Courses: Are They Effective?

Study objective: To determine the effectiveness of life support courses for health care providers on the basis of one of three outcomes: (1) patient mortality and morbidity, (2) retention of knowledge or skills, and (3) change in practice behavior. Methods: English-language articles from 1975 to 1992 were identified through MEDLINE and ERIC searches, bibliographies of articles, and current abstracts. Studies were considered relevant if they included a study population of life support providers, an intervention of any of the identified life support courses, and assessment of at least one of the three listed outcomes. Relevant studies were selected and validity scores were assigned to them by agreement of two independent reviewers, using a structured form to assess validity. Data on setting, methods, participants, intervention, and outcomes were then abstracted and verified. Results: Seventeen of 67 identified studies pertaining to life support courses met the inclusion criteria. (1) All three mortality and morbidity studies indicated a positive impact, with an overall odds ratio of .28 (95% confidence interval [CI], .22 to .37). (2) No net increase in scores was found in 5 of 8 studies of retention of knowledge and in 8 of 9 studies of skills retention. Two of three studies reporting refresher activities yielded positive effects on knowledge retention. Outcomes were not significantly different between groups taught with modular or didactic techniques. (3) Studies assessing behavioral outcome were methodologically weak. Conclusion: Among providers, retention of knowledge and skills acquired by participation in support courses is poor. However, refresher activities increase knowledge retention. Modular courses are as good as lectures for learning course material. There is evidence that use of the Advanced Trauma Life Support course has decreased mortality and morbidity. Further studies of patient outcome and provider behaviors are warranted. [Jabbour M, Osmond MH, Klassen TP: Life support courses: Are they effective? Ann Emerg Med December 1996;28:690-698.]     

Multimorbidity and Evidence Generation

Most people with a chronic disease actually have more than one, a condition known as multimorbidity. Despite this, the evidence base to prevent adverse disease outcomes has taken a disease-specific approach. Drawing on a conference, Improving Guidelines for Multimorbid Patients, the goal of this paper is to identify challenges to the generation of evidence to support the care of people with multimorbidity and to make recommendations for improvement. We identified three broad categories of challenges: 1) challenges to defining and measuring multimorbidity; 2) challenges related to the effects of multimorbidity on study design, implementation and analysis; and 3) challenges inherent in studying heterogeneity of treatment effects in patients with differing comorbid conditions. We propose a set of recommendations for consideration by investigators and others (reviewers, editors, funding agencies, policymaking organizations) involved in the creation of evidence for this common type of person that address each of these challenges. The recommendations reflect a general approach that emphasizes broader inclusion (recruitment and retention) of patients with multimorbidity, coupled with more rigorous efforts to measure comorbidity and comorbidity burden and the influence of multimorbidity on outcomes and the effects of therapy. More rigorous examination of heterogeneity of treatment effects requires careful attention to prioritizing the most important comorbid-related questions, and also requires studies that provide greater statistical power than conventional trials have provided. Relatively modest changes in the orientation of current research along these lines can be helpful in pointing to and partially addressing selected knowledge gaps. However, producing a robust evidence base to support patient-centered decision making in complex individuals with multimorbidity, exposed to many different combinations of potentially interacting factors that can modify the risks and benefits of therapies, is likely to require a clinical research enterprise fundamentally restructured to be more fully integrated with routine clinical practice.