Prevention of azoxymethane-induced colon cancer by combination of low doses of atorvastatin, aspirin, and celecoxib in F 344 rats

Preclinical and clinical studies have provided evidence that aspirin, celecoxib, (cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor), and statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl CoA reductase inhibitors) inhibit colon carcinogenesis. Chronic use of high doses of these agents may induce side effects in ostensibly normal individuals. Combining low doses of agents may be an effective way to increase their efficacy and minimize toxicity. We assessed the efficacy of atorvastatin (lipitor), celecoxib, and aspirin, given individually at high dose levels and in combination at lower doses against azoxymethane-induced colon carcinogenesis, in male F 344 rats. One day after the last azoxymethane treatment (15 mg/kg body weight, s.c., once weekly for 2 weeks), groups of male F 344 rats were fed the AIN-76A diet or AIN-76A diet containing 150 ppm atorvastatin, 600 ppm celecoxib, and 400 ppm aspirin, 100 ppm atorvastatin + 300 ppm celecoxib, and 100 ppm atorvastatin + 200 ppm aspirin. Rats were killed 42 weeks later, and colon tumors were processed histopathologically and analyzed for cell proliferation and apoptosis immunohistochemically. Administration of these agents individually and in combination significantly suppressed the incidence and multiplicity of colon adenocarcinomas. Low doses of these agents in combination inhibited colon carcinogenesis more effectively than when they were given individually at higher doses. Inhibition of colon carcinogenesis by these agents is associated with the inhibition of cell proliferation and increase in apoptosis in colon tumors. These observations are of clinical significance because this can pave the way for the use of combinations of these agents in small doses against colon cancer.     

Ascites in the puerperium: a missed diagnosis of acute postpartum pancreatitis

Introduction Acute pancreatitis in pregnancy is often associated with severe morbidity. It is usually an antepartum problem occurring in late pregnancy. It rarely occurs in the postpartum period and when it does diagnosis can be difficult.Case report We report a case of unexplained ascites following ventouse delivery, diagnosed 6 weeks later as acute pancreatitis.Conclusion Although it is rare, acute pancreatitis must be considered when evaluating patients presenting with abdominal pain and/or ascites in the postpartum period. Serum amylase may not always be elevated and early recourse to CT scan will facilitate diagnosis and allow for appropriate management.     

Effectiveness of a novel and scalable clinical decision support intervention to improve venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: a quasi-experimental study

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) causes morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients, and regulators and payors are encouraging the use of systems to prevent them. Here, we examine the effect of a computerized clinical decision support (CDS) intervention implemented across a multi-hospital academic health system on VTE prophylaxis and events. METHODS: The study included 223,062 inpatients admitted between April 2007 and May 2010, and used administrative and clinical data. The intervention was integrated into a commercial electronic health record (EHR) in an admission orderset used for all admissions. Three time periods were examined: baseline (period 1), and the time after implementation of the first CDS intervention (period 2) and a second iteration (period 3). Providers were prompted to accept or decline prophylaxis based on patient risk. Time series analyses examined the impact of the intervention on VTE prophylaxis during time periods two and three compared to baseline, and a simple pre-post design examined impact on VTE events and bleeds secondary to anticoagulation. VTE prophylaxis and events were also examined in a prespecified surgical subset of our population meeting the public reporting criteria defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Patient Safety Indicator (PSI). RESULTS: Unadjusted analyses suggested that "recommended", "any", and "pharmacologic" prophylaxis increased from baseline to the last study period (27.1% to 51.9%, 56.7% to 78.1%, and 42.0% to 54.4% respectively; p < 0.01 for all comparisons). Results were significant across all hospitals and the health system overall. Interrupted time series analyses suggested that our intervention increased the use of "recommended" and "any" prophylaxis by 7.9% and 9.6% respectively from baseline to time period 2 (p < 0.01 for both comparisons); and 6.6% and 9.6% respectively from baseline to the combined time periods 2 and 3 (p < 0.01 for both comparisons). There were no significant changes in "pharmacologic" prophylaxis in the adjusted model. The overall percent of patients with VTE increased from baseline to the last study period (2.0% to 2.2%; p = 0.03), but an analysis excluding patients with VTE "present on admission" (POA) demonstrated no difference in events (1.3% to 1.3%; p = 0.80). Overall bleeds did not significantly change. An analysis examining VTE prophylaxis and events in a surgical subset of patients defined by the AHRQ PSI demonstrated increased "recommended", "any", and "pharmacologic" prophylaxis from baseline to the last study period (32.3% to 60.0%, 62.8% to 85.7%, and 47.9% to 63.3% respectively; p < 0.01 for all comparisons) as well as reduced VTE events (2.2% to 1.7%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The CDS intervention was associated with an increase in "recommended" and "any" VTE prophylaxis across the multi-hospital academic health system. The intervention was also associated with increased VTE rates in the overall study population, but a subanalysis using only admissions with appropriate POA documentation suggested no change in VTE rates, and a prespecified analysis of a surgical subset of our sample as defined by the AHRQ PSI for public reporting purposes suggested reduced VTE. This intervention was created in a commonly used commercial EHR and is scalable across institutions with similar systems.     

A Culturally Tailored Navigator Program for Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Community Health Center: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Background  Minority racial/ethnic groups have low colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. Objective  To evaluate a culturally tailored intervention to increase CRC screening, primarily using colonoscopy, among low income and non-English speaking patients. Design  Randomized controlled trial conducted from January to October of 2007. Setting  Single, urban community health center serving a low-income, ethnically diverse population. Patients  A total of 1,223 patients 52-79 years of age overdue for CRC screening, randomized to intervention (n = 409) vs. usual care control (n = 814) groups. Intervention  Intervention patients received an introductory letter with educational material followed by phone or in-person contact by a language-concordant “navigator.” Navigators (n = 5) were community health workers trained to identify and address patient-reported barriers to CRC screening. Individually tailored interventions included patient education, procedure scheduling, translation and explanation of bowel preparation, and help with transportation and insurance coverage. Rates of colorectal cancer screening were assessed for intervention and usual care control patients. Results  Over a 9-month period, intervention patients were more likely to undergo CRC screening than control patients (27% vs. 12% for any CRC screening, p < 0.001; 21% vs. 10% for colonoscopy completion, p < 0.001). The higher screening rate resulted in the identification of 10.5 polyps per 100 patients in the intervention group vs. 6.8 in the control group (p = 0.04). Limitations  Patients were from one health center. Some patients may have obtained CRC screening outside our system. Conclusions  A culturally tailored, language-concordant navigator program designed to identify and overcome barriers to colorectal cancer screening can significantly improve colonoscopy rates for low income, ethnically and linguistically diverse patients. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00476970