Teaching and practicing cost-awareness in the intensive care unit: A TARGET to aim for

Intensive care is one of the main contributors to rising inpatient hospital costs due to frequent use of expensive diagnostics and therapies. With successful track records of team- and protocol-based care, intensive care units are ideal sites to take the lead in reducing overuse and misuse of diagnostic tests and prescribing. We offer a framework for practicing and teaching cost-awareness in the intensive care unit based on the acronym TARGET. The components of the care are as follows: Talk to patients about their preferences for care, Ask for outside tests, avoid Routine and/or Repeated tests, prescribe Generic medications, Educate about costs, and Transfuse appropriately.     

Review of deprescribing processes and development of an evidence-based,patient-centred deprescribing process

Inappropriate use of medication is widespread, especially in older people, and is associated with risks, including adverse drug reactions, hospitalization and increased mortality. Optimization of appropriate medication use to minimize these harms is an ongoing challenge in healthcare. The term ‘deprescribing’ has been used to describe the complex process that is required for safe and effective cessation of medication. Patients play an important role in their own health and, while they may complain about the number of medications they have to take, they may also be reluctant to cease a medication when given the opportunity to do so. A review of previously proposed deprescribing processes and relevant literature was used to develop the patient-centred deprescribing process, which is a five-step cycle that encompasses gaining a comprehensive medication history, identifying potentially inappropriate medications, determining whether the potentially inappropriate medication can be ceased, planning the withdrawal regimen (e.g. tapering where necessary) and provision of monitoring, support and documentation. This is the first deprescribing process developed using knowledge of the patients'' views of medication cessation; it focuses on engaging patients throughout the process, with the aim of improving long-term health outcomes. Despite a comprehensive review of the literature, there is still a lack in the evidence base on which to conduct deprescribing. The next step in broadening the evidence to support deprescribing will be to test the developed process to determine feasibility in the clinical setting.     

EAACI guidelines on allergen immunotherapy: Prevention of allergy

Allergic diseases are common and frequently coexist. Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is a disease‐modifying treatment for IgE‐mediated allergic disease with effects beyond cessation of AIT that may include important preventive effects. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) has developed a clinical practice guideline to provide evidence‐based recommendations for AIT for the prevention of (i) development of allergic comorbidities in those with established allergic diseases, (ii) development of first allergic condition, and (iii) allergic sensitization. This guideline has been developed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) framework, which involved a multidisciplinary expert working group, a systematic review of the underpinning evidence, and external peer‐review of draft recommendations. Our key recommendation is that a 3‐year course of subcutaneous or sublingual AIT can be recommended for children and adolescents with moderate‐to‐severe allergic rhinitis (AR) triggered by grass/birch pollen allergy to prevent asthma for up to 2 years post‐AIT in addition to its sustained effect on AR symptoms and medication. Some trial data even suggest a preventive effect on asthma symptoms and medication more than 2 years post‐AIT. We need more evidence concerning AIT for prevention in individuals with AR triggered by house dust mites or other allergens and for the prevention of allergic sensitization, the first allergic disease, or for the prevention of allergic comorbidities in those with other allergic conditions. Evidence for the preventive potential of AIT as disease‐modifying treatment exists but there is an urgent need for more high‐quality clinical trials.     

Difference in tissue expression of tumour markers CA 19-9 and CA 50 in hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.

The expression of tumour markers CA 19-9 and CA 50, defined by the monoclonal antibodies 1116 NS 19-9 (19-9 antibody) and C 50, was studied by the immunoperoxidase technique in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections from 11 hepatocellular carcinomas and 10 cholangiocarcinomas of the liver, and from specimens of normal liver and liver cirrhosis. The 19-9 and C 50 antibodies react with sialosylfucosyllactotetraose, corresponding to sialylated blood group antigen Lewis, and the C 50 antibody also with another sugar moiety, sialosyllactotetraose. Neither marker was cancer specific. The CA 19-9 and CA 50 antigens are normal constituents of bile ducts. Nine out of 10 cholangiocarcinomas stained for CA 50, and eight out of 10 for CA 19-9. There was no apparent difference between the staining pattern of CA 19-9 and CA 50. Hepatocellular carcinomas were consistently negative for both markers. Thus, hepatocellular carcinomas and cholangiocarcinomas showed a clear difference in the reactivity for tumour marker antigens CA 19-9 and CA 50. This difference might be of clinical importance in the differential diagnosis between hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.