Sahlgrenska University Hospital

BACKGROUND: In 1986, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) initiated a research program to develop an integrated, modular approach for evaluating the quality of life of patients participating in international clinical trials. PURPOSE: We report here the results of an international field study of the practicality, reliability, and validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30, the current core questionnaire. The QLQ-C30 incorporates nine multi-item scales: five functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social); three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting); and a global health and quality-of-life scale. Several single-item symptom measures are also included. METHODS: The questionnaire was administered before treatment and once during treatment to 305 patients with nonresectable lung cancer from centers in 13 countries. Clinical variables assessed included disease stage, weight loss, performance status, and treatment toxicity. RESULTS: The average time required to complete the questionnaire was approximately 11 minutes, and most patients required no assistance. The data supported the hypothesized scale structure of the questionnaire with the exception of role functioning (work and household activities), which was also the only multi-item scale that failed to meet the minimal standards for reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient > or = .70) either before or during treatment. Validity was shown by three findings. First, while all interscale correlations were statistically significant, the correlation was moderate, indicating that the scales were assessing distinct components of the quality-of-life construct. Second, most of the functional and symptom measures discriminated clearly between patients differing in clinical status as defined by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status scale, weight loss, and treatment toxicity. Third, there were statistically significant changes, in the expected direction, in physical and role functioning, global quality of life, fatigue, and nausea and vomiting, for patients whose performance status had improved or worsened during treatment. The reliability and validity of the questionnaire were highly consistent across the three language-cultural groups studied: patients from English-speaking countries, Northern Europe, and Southern Europe. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the EORTC QLQ-C30 as a reliable and valid measure of the quality of life of cancer patients in multicultural clinical research settings. Work is ongoing to examine the performance of the questionnaire among more heterogenous patient samples and in phase II and phase III clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P=0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P=0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P=0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P=0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P=0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846 .).

BACKGROUND: Full-thickness defects of articular cartilage in the knee have a poor capacity for repair. They may progress to osteoarthritis and require total knee replacement. We performed autologous chondrocyte transplantation in 23 people with deep cartilage defects in the knee. METHODS: The patients ranged in age from 14 to 48 years and had full-thickness cartilage defects that ranged in size from 1.6 to 6.5 cm2. Healthy chondrocytes obtained from an uninvolved area of the injured knee during arthroscopy were isolated and cultured in the laboratory for 14 to 21 days. The cultured chondrocytes were then injected into the area of the defect. The defect was covered with a sutured periosteal flap taken from the proximal medial tibia. Evaluation included clinical examination according to explicit criteria and arthroscopic examination with a biopsy of the transplantation site. RESULTS: Patients were followed for 16 to 66 months (mean, 39). Initially, the transplants eliminated knee locking and reduced pain and swelling in all patients. After three months, arthroscopy showed that the transplants were level with the surrounding tissue and spongy when probed, with visible borders. A second arthroscopic examination showed that in many instances the transplants had the same macroscopic appearance as they had earlier but were firmer when probed and similar in appearance to the surrounding cartilage. Two years after transplantation, 14 of the 16 patients with femoral condylar transplants had good-to-excellent results. Two patients required a second operation because of severe central wear in the transplants, with locking and pain. A mean of 36 months after transplantation, the results were excellent or good in two of the seven patients with patellar transplants, fair in three, and poor in two; two patients required a second operation because of severe chondromalacia. Biopsies showed that 11 of the 15 femoral transplants and 1 of the 7 patellar transplants had the appearance of hyaline cartilage. CONCLUSION: Cultured autologous chondrocytes can be used to repair deep cartilage defects in the femorotibial articular surface of the knee joint.

BACKGROUND: Balloon-expandable coronary-artery stents were developed to prevent coronary restenosis after coronary angioplasty. These devices hold coronary vessels open at sites that have been dilated. However, it is unknown whether stenting improves long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes as compared with standard balloon angioplasty. METHODS: A total of 520 patients with stable angina and a single coronary-artery lesion were randomly assigned to either stent implantation (262 patients) or standard balloon angioplasty (258 patients). The primary clinical end points were death, the occurrence of a cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, the need for coronary-artery bypass surgery, or a second percutaneous intervention involving the previously treated lesion, either at the time of the initial procedure or during the subsequent seven months. The primary angiographic end point was the minimal luminal diameter at follow-up, as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS: After exclusions, 52 patients in the stent group (20 percent) and 76 patients in the angioplasty group (30 percent) reached a primary clinical end point (relative risk, 0.68; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.50 to 0.92; P = 0.02). The difference in clinical-event rates was explained mainly by a reduced need for a second coronary angioplasty in the stent group (relative risk, 0.58; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.40 to 0.85; P = 0.005). The mean (+/- SD) minimal luminal diameters immediately after the procedure were 2.48 +/- 0.39 mm in the stent group and 2.05 +/- 0.33 mm in the angioplasty group; at follow-up, the diameters were 1.82 +/- 0.64 mm in the stent group and 1.73 +/- 0.55 mm in the angioplasty group (P = 0.09), which correspond to rates of restenosis (diameter of stenosis, > or = 50 percent) of 22 and 32 percent, respectively (P = 0.02). Peripheral vascular complications necessitating surgery, blood transfusion, or both were more frequent after stenting than after balloon angioplasty (13.5 vs. 3.1 percent, P < 0.001). The mean hospital stay was significantly longer in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (8.5 vs. 3.1 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Over seven months of follow-up, the clinical and angiographic outcomes were better in patients who received a stent than in those who received standard coronary angioplasty. However, this benefit was achieved at the cost of a significantly higher risk of vascular complications at the access site and a longer hospital stay.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss is associated with short-term amelioration and prevention of metabolic and cardiovascular risk, but whether these benefits persist over time is unknown. METHODS: The prospective, controlled Swedish Obese Subjects Study involved obese subjects who underwent gastric surgery and contemporaneously matched, conventionally treated obese control subjects. We now report follow-up data for subjects (mean age, 48 years; mean body-mass index, 41) who had been enrolled for at least 2 years (4047 subjects) or 10 years (1703 subjects) before the analysis (January 1, 2004). The follow-up rate for laboratory examinations was 86.6 percent at 2 years and 74.5 percent at 10 years. RESULTS: After two years, the weight had increased by 0.1 percent in the control group and had decreased by 23.4 percent in the surgery group (P<0.001). After 10 years, the weight had increased by 1.6 percent and decreased by 16.1 percent, respectively (P<0.001). Energy intake was lower and the proportion of physically active subjects higher in the surgery group than in the control group throughout the observation period. Two- and 10-year rates of recovery from diabetes, hypertriglyceridemia, low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, hypertension, and hyperuricemia were more favorable in the surgery group than in the control group, whereas recovery from hypercholesterolemia did not differ between the groups. The surgery group had lower 2- and 10-year incidence rates of diabetes, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperuricemia than the control group; differences between the groups in the incidence of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension were undetectable. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with conventional therapy, bariatric surgery appears to be a viable option for the treatment of severe obesity, resulting in long-term weight loss, improved lifestyle, and, except for hypercholesterolemia, amelioration in risk factors that were elevated at baseline.

BACKGROUND: The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer was initiated in the early 1990s to evaluate the effect of screening with prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) testing on death rates from prostate cancer. METHODS: We identified 182,000 men between the ages of 50 and 74 years through registries in seven European countries for inclusion in our study. The men were randomly assigned to a group that was offered PSA screening at an average of once every 4 years or to a control group that did not receive such screening. The predefined core age group for this study included 162,243 men between the ages of 55 and 69 years. The primary outcome was the rate of death from prostate cancer. Mortality follow-up was identical for the two study groups and ended on December 31, 2006. RESULTS: In the screening group, 82% of men accepted at least one offer of screening. During a median follow-up of 9 years, the cumulative incidence of prostate cancer was 8.2% in the screening group and 4.8% in the control group. The rate ratio for death from prostate cancer in the screening group, as compared with the control group, was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.98; adjusted P=0.04). The absolute risk difference was 0.71 death per 1000 men. This means that 1410 men would need to be screened and 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The analysis of men who were actually screened during the first round (excluding subjects with noncompliance) provided a rate ratio for death from prostate cancer of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: PSA-based screening reduced the rate of death from prostate cancer by 20% but was associated with a high risk of overdiagnosis. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49127736.)

The upcoming 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours is part of an effort to hierarchically catalogue human cancers arising in various organ systems within a single relational database. This paper summarizes the new WHO classification scheme for myeloid and histiocytic/dendritic neoplasms and provides an overview of the principles and rationale underpinning changes from the prior edition. The definition and diagnosis of disease types continues to be based on multiple clinicopathologic parameters, but with refinement of diagnostic criteria and emphasis on therapeutically and/or prognostically actionable biomarkers. While a genetic basis for defining diseases is sought where possible, the classification strives to keep practical worldwide applicability in perspective. The result is an enhanced, contemporary, evidence-based classification of myeloid and histiocytic/dendritic neoplasms, rooted in molecular biology and an organizational structure that permits future scalability as new discoveries continue to inexorably inform future editions.

AIMS: To appraise the clinical and genetic evidence that low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed whether the association between LDL and ASCVD fulfils the criteria for causality by evaluating the totality of evidence from genetic studies, prospective epidemiologic cohort studies, Mendelian randomization studies, and randomized trials of LDL-lowering therapies. In clinical studies, plasma LDL burden is usually estimated by determination of plasma LDL cholesterol level (LDL-C). Rare genetic mutations that cause reduced LDL receptor function lead to markedly higher LDL-C and a dose-dependent increase in the risk of ASCVD, whereas rare variants leading to lower LDL-C are associated with a correspondingly lower risk of ASCVD. Separate meta-analyses of over 200 prospective cohort studies, Mendelian randomization studies, and randomized trials including more than 2 million participants with over 20 million person-years of follow-up and over 150 000 cardiovascular events demonstrate a remarkably consistent dose-dependent log-linear association between the absolute magnitude of exposure of the vasculature to LDL-C and the risk of ASCVD; and this effect appears to increase with increasing duration of exposure to LDL-C. Both the naturally randomized genetic studies and the randomized intervention trials consistently demonstrate that any mechanism of lowering plasma LDL particle concentration should reduce the risk of ASCVD events proportional to the absolute reduction in LDL-C and the cumulative duration of exposure to lower LDL-C, provided that the achieved reduction in LDL-C is concordant with the reduction in LDL particle number and that there are no competing deleterious off-target effects. CONCLUSION: Consistent evidence from numerous and multiple different types of clinical and genetic studies unequivocally establishes that LDL causes ASCVD.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs), through their complex cargo, can reflect the state of their cell of origin and change the functions and phenotypes of other cells. These features indicate strong biomarker and therapeutic potential and have generated broad interest, as evidenced by the steady year-on-year increase in the numbers of scientific publications about EVs. Important advances have been made in EV metrology and in understanding and applying EV biology. However, hurdles remain to realising the potential of EVs in domains ranging from basic biology to clinical applications due to challenges in EV nomenclature, separation from non-vesicular extracellular particles, characterisation and functional studies. To address the challenges and opportunities in this rapidly evolving field, the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) updates its 'Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles', which was first published in 2014 and then in 2018 as MISEV2014 and MISEV2018, respectively. The goal of the current document, MISEV2023, is to provide researchers with an updated snapshot of available approaches and their advantages and limitations for production, separation and characterisation of EVs from multiple sources, including cell culture, body fluids and solid tissues. In addition to presenting the latest state of the art in basic principles of EV research, this document also covers advanced techniques and approaches that are currently expanding the boundaries of the field. MISEV2023 also includes new sections on EV release and uptake and a brief discussion of in vivo approaches to study EVs. Compiling feedback from ISEV expert task forces and more than 1000 researchers, this document conveys the current state of EV research to facilitate robust scientific discoveries and move the field forward even more rapidly.

BACKGROUND: Unconscious survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest have a high risk of death or poor neurologic function. Therapeutic hypothermia is recommended by international guidelines, but the supporting evidence is limited, and the target temperature associated with the best outcome is unknown. Our objective was to compare two target temperatures, both intended to prevent fever. METHODS: In an international trial, we randomly assigned 950 unconscious adults after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause to targeted temperature management at either 33°C or 36°C. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality through the end of the trial. Secondary outcomes included a composite of poor neurologic function or death at 180 days, as evaluated with the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale and the modified Rankin scale. RESULTS: In total, 939 patients were included in the primary analysis. At the end of the trial, 50% of the patients in the 33°C group (235 of 473 patients) had died, as compared with 48% of the patients in the 36°C group (225 of 466 patients) (hazard ratio with a temperature of 33°C, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.28; P=0.51). At the 180-day follow-up, 54% of the patients in the 33°C group had died or had poor neurologic function according to the CPC, as compared with 52% of patients in the 36°C group (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.16; P=0.78). In the analysis using the modified Rankin scale, the comparable rate was 52% in both groups (risk ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P=0.87). The results of analyses adjusted for known prognostic factors were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In unconscious survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause, hypothermia at a targeted temperature of 33°C did not confer a benefit as compared with a targeted temperature of 36°C. (Funded by the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation and others; TTM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01020916.).

AIMS: The first aim was to critically evaluate the extent to which familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is underdiagnosed and undertreated. The second aim was to provide guidance for screening and treatment of FH, in order to prevent coronary heart disease (CHD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the theoretical estimated prevalence of 1/500 for heterozygous FH, <1% are diagnosed in most countries. Recently, direct screening in a Northern European general population diagnosed approximately 1/200 with heterozygous FH. All reported studies document failure to achieve recommended LDL cholesterol targets in a large proportion of individuals with FH, and up to 13-fold increased risk of CHD. Based on prevalences between 1/500 and 1/200, between 14 and 34 million individuals worldwide have FH. We recommend that children, adults, and families should be screened for FH if a person or family member presents with FH, a plasma cholesterol level in an adult ≥8 mmol/L(≥310 mg/dL) or a child ≥6 mmol/L(≥230 mg/dL), premature CHD, tendon xanthomas, or sudden premature cardiac death. In FH, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets are <3.5 mmol/L(<135 mg/dL) for children, <2.5 mmol/L(<100 mg/dL) for adults, and <1.8 mmol/L(<70 mg/dL) for adults with known CHD or diabetes. In addition to lifestyle and dietary counselling, treatment priorities are (i) in children, statins, ezetimibe, and bile acid binding resins, and (ii) in adults, maximal potent statin dose, ezetimibe, and bile acid binding resins. Lipoprotein apheresis can be offered in homozygotes and in treatment-resistant heterozygotes with CHD. CONCLUSION: Owing to severe underdiagnosis and undertreatment of FH, there is an urgent worldwide need for diagnostic screening together with early and aggressive treatment of this extremely high-risk condition.

Because of the availability of new knowledge about the neurobiology of developmental brain injury, information that epidemiology and modern brain imaging is providing, the availability of more precise measuring instruments of patient performance, and the increase in studies evaluating the efficacy of therapy for the consequences of injury, the need for reconsideration of the definition and classification of cerebral palsy (CP) has become evident. Pertinent material was reviewed at an international symposium participated in by selected leaders in the preclinical and clinical sciences. Suggestions were made about the content of a revised definition and classification of CP that would meet the needs of clinicians, investigators, and health officials, and provide a common language for improved communication. With leadership and direction from an Executive Committee, panels utilized this information and have generated a revised Definition and Classification of Cerebral Palsy. The Executive Committee presents this revision and welcomes substantive comments about it.

BACKGROUND: The direct oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran has a predictable anticoagulant effect and may be an alternative therapy to warfarin for patients who have acute venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving patients with acute venous thromboembolism who were initially given parenteral anticoagulation therapy for a median of 9 days (interquartile range, 8 to 11), we compared oral dabigatran, administered at a dose of 150 mg twice daily, with warfarin that was dose-adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. The primary outcome was the 6-month incidence of recurrent symptomatic, objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism and related deaths. Safety end points included bleeding events, acute coronary syndromes, other adverse events, and results of liver-function tests. RESULTS: A total of 30 of the 1274 patients randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2.4%), as compared with 27 of the 1265 patients randomly assigned to warfarin (2.1%), had recurrent venous thromboembolism; the difference in risk was 0.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.8 to 1.5; P<0.001 for the prespecified noninferiority margin). The hazard ratio with dabigatran was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.84). Major bleeding episodes occurred in 20 patients assigned to dabigatran (1.6%) and in 24 patients assigned to warfarin (1.9%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.48), and episodes of any bleeding were observed in 205 patients assigned to dabigatran (16.1%) and 277 patients assigned to warfarin (21.9%; hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85). The numbers of deaths, acute coronary syndromes, and abnormal liver-function tests were similar in the two groups. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of the study drug occurred in 9.0% of patients assigned to dabigatran and in 6.8% of patients assigned to warfarin (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism, a fixed dose of dabigatran is as effective as warfarin, has a safety profile that is similar to that of warfarin, and does not require laboratory monitoring. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00291330.)

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors such as captopril reduce mortality and cardiovascular morbidity among patients with myocardial infarction complicated by left ventricular systolic dysfunction, heart failure, or both. In a double-blind trial, we compared the effect of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan, the ACE inhibitor captopril, and the combination of the two on mortality in this population of patients. METHODS: Patients receiving conventional therapy were randomly assigned, 0.5 to 10 days after acute myocardial infarction, to additional therapy with valsartan (4909 patients), valsartan plus captopril (4885 patients), or captopril (4909 patients). The primary end point was death from any cause. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 24.7 months, 979 patients in the valsartan group died, as did 941 patients in the valsartan-and-captopril group and 958 patients in the captopril group (hazard ratio in the valsartan group as compared with the captopril group, 1.00; 97.5 percent confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.11; P=0.98; hazard ratio in the valsartan-and-captopril group as compared with the captopril group, 0.98; 97.5 percent confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.09; P=0.73). The upper limit of the one-sided 97.5 percent confidence interval for the comparison of the valsartan group with the captopril group was within the prespecified margin for noninferiority with regard to mortality (P=0.004) and with regard to the composite end point of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events (P<0.001). The valsartan-and-captopril group had the most drug-related adverse events. With monotherapy, hypotension and renal dysfunction were more common in the valsartan group, and cough, rash, and taste disturbance were more common in the captopril group. CONCLUSIONS: Valsartan is as effective as captopril in patients who are at high risk for cardiovascular events after myocardial infarction. Combining valsartan with captopril increased the rate of adverse events without improving survival.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic oesophageal changes are diagnostically helpful and identify patients exposed to the risk of disease chronicity. However, there is a serious lack of agreement about how to describe and classify the appearance of reflux oesophagitis AIMS: To examine the reliability of criteria that describe the circumferential extent of mucosal breaks and to evaluate the functional and clinical correlates of patients with reflux disease whose oesophagitis was graded according to the Los Angeles system. METHODS: Forty six endoscopists from different countries used a detailed worksheet to evaluate endoscopic video recordings from 22 patients with the full range of severity of reflux oesophagitis. In separate studies, Los Angeles system gradings were correlated with 24 hour oesophageal pH monitoring (178 patients), and with clinical trials of omeprazole treatment (277 patients). RESULTS: Evaluation of circumferential extent of oesophagitis by the criterion of whether mucosal breaks extended between the tops of mucosal folds, gave acceptable agreement (mean kappa value 0.4) among observers. This approach is used in the Los Angeles system. An alternative approach of grouping the circumferential extent of mucosal breaks as occupying 0-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, 76-99%, or 100% of the oesophageal circumference, gave unacceptably high interobserver variation (mean kappa values 0-0.15) for all but the lowest category of extent (mean kappa value 0.4). Severity of oesophageal acid exposure was significantly (p<0.001) related to the severity grade of oesophagitis. Preteatment oesophagitis grades A-C were related to heartburn severity (p<0.01), outcomes of omeprazole (10 mg daily) treatment (p<0.01), and the risk for symptom relapse off therapy over six months (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Results add further support to previous studies for the clinical utility of the Los Angeles system for endoscopic grading of oesophagitis.

ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG), Silvia G. Priori (Chairperson) (Italy), Jean-Jacques Blanc (France), Andrzej Budaj (Poland), John Camm (UK), Veronica Dean (France), Jaap Deckers (The Netherlands), Kenneth Dickstein (Norway), John Lekakis (Greece), Keith McGregor (France), Marco Metra (Italy), João Morais (Portugal), Ady Osterspey (Germany), Juan Tamargo (Spain), José Luis Zamorano (Spain) Document Reviewers, Marco Metra (CPG Review Coordinator) (Italy), Michael Böhm (Germany), Alain Cohen-Solal (France), Martin Cowie (UK), Ulf Dahlström (Sweden), Kenneth Dickstein (Norway), Gerasimos S. Filippatos (Greece), Edoardo Gronda (Italy), Richard Hobbs (UK), John K. Kjekshus (Norway), John McMurray (UK), Lars Rydén (Sweden), Gianfranco Sinagra (Italy), Juan Tamargo (Spain), Michal Tendera (Poland), Dirk van Veldhuisen (The Netherlands), Faiez Zannad (France) Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents aim to present all the relevant evidence on a particular issue in order to help physicians to weigh the benefits and risks of a particular diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. They should be helpful in everyday clinical decision-making. A great number of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and by different organizations and other related societies. This profusion can put at stake the authority and validity of guidelines, which can only be guaranteed if they have been developed by an unquestionable decision-making process. This is one of the reasons why the ESC and others have issued recommendations for formulating and issuing Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents. In spite of the fact that standards for issuing good quality Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents are well defined, recent surveys of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents published in peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 1998 have shown that methodological standards were not complied with in the vast majority of cases. It is therefore of great importance that guidelines and recommendations are presented in formats that are easily interpreted. Subsequently, their implementation programmes must also be well conducted. Attempts have been made to determine whether guidelines improve the quality of clinical practice and the utilization of health resources. The ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) supervises and coordinates the preparation of new Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents produced by Task Forces, expert groups, or consensus panels. The chosen experts in these writing panels are asked to provide disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. The Committee is also responsible for the endorsement of these Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents or statements. The Task Force has classified and ranked the usefulness or efficacy of the recommended procedure and/or treatments and the Level of Evidence as indicated in the tables on page 3. These Guidelines are based on the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Guidelines published in 1995, 1997, and renewed in 2001,1–3 which has now been combined into one manuscript. Where new information is available, an update has been performed while other parts are unchanged or adjusted only to a limited extent. The aim of this report is to provide updated practical guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of heart failure for use in clinical practice, as well as for epidemiological surveys and clinical trials. Particular attention in this update has been allocated to diastolic function and heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (PLVEF). The intention has been to merge the previous Task Force report4 with the present update. The Guidelines are intended as a support for practising physicians and other health care professionals concerned with the management of heart failure patients and to provide advice on how to manage these patients, including recommendations for referral. Documented and published evidence on diagnosis, efficacy, and safety is the main basis for these guidelines. ESC Guidelines are relevant to 49 member-states with diverse economies and therefore recommendations based on cost-effectiveness have been avoided in general. National health policy as well as clinical judgement may dictate the order of priority of implementation. It is recognized that some interventions may not be affordable in some countries for all appropriate patients. The recommendations in these guidelines should therefore always be considered in the light of national policies and local regulatory requirements for the administration of any diagnostic procedure, medicine, or device. This report was drafted by a Writing Group of the Task Force (see title page) appointed by the CPG of the ESC. Within this Task Force, statements of Conflicts of Interests were collected, which are available at the ESC Office. The draft was sent to the Committee and the document reviewers (see title page) and after their input the document was updated, reviewed and for The is based on a which statements and This document is available at the ESC The report should be in or information is based to the has been including a of the evidence for for the diagnosis, evidence is and in based on consensus of expert in the was not to use evidence in this The has been or recommendations have been by The ESC countries with a of that are at patients with heart failure in are also patients with of heart failure and a The of heart failure is if the be of patients a of heart failure and in patients with heart failure patients with heart failure have and is now the of heart failure in the and are and is of recommendations of is by the ESC. of recommendations of is by the ESC. of evidence of evidence that the of by clinical is in and the and and to the treatment of heart the to the must be or avoided The heart failure is to or of heart failure by of including forms and heart Guidelines on heart by is the of heart A of is The present document on the of and on heart if not is to the heart are with evidence of left ventricular diastolic at is a if not In diastolic and heart should not be considered as heart failure is and of heart failure in the of a ejection at diastolic is in patients in importance in the is in in and with are to and left heart failure to with of the or The not which is and and and are other in the clinical of these is information and therefore of use in treatment for heart or heart failure is as a clinical is for patients can with of or for patients are and attention and for the of only of this The of heart failure on clinical judgement based on a and appropriate Heart failure should be the only Heart failure is a in which the patients should have the of heart or at or or and evidence of at The between heart heart failure that has been by and heart failure are in A clinical to treatment at heart failure is not for diagnosis, the should some in and/or in to treatments in which a be or left ventricular is considered as of and is with It is and treatment is available, and the is therefore in these The of the of heart failure is not is responsible for in in patients with only a between and This that is not the only responsible for and or that to may not be in the of also and are the and of heart failure may be to in patients, in and in It should be and different and should be and are as they the to the that heart failure The clinical of heart failure must be by at function is also an in heart The of are including and by in this and are the of of of heart failure should be in a clinical including and the a of heart failure has been may be to the of heart failure and should be to the of as the of The Heart is in use In other the of into or is in have to have evidence of have a of heart failure and be treatment for heart failure in order to the of heart is a between and the of may be related to if after In the by has been to and It is to the between and are also in patients different of ejection should not be with are in patients of heart failure whether or not the to be has for the of heart the other if the is heart is The of may as the of A that may be present and a for A that the of should be should be of the diagnostic in heart It is to and has only in the of and and in diagnostic of patients with and and to function should be considered to clinical In is by the diagnostic potential of is function is is evidence that their can diastolic is that may left ventricular heart or or and of or their and are helpful in the of heart A in an heart failure as the of and have of their in treatment to be In the use of and as diagnostic should be that a a or in an heart failure as the of In clinical practice the of and is as to in care also in of care the and The cost-effectiveness of the that a should the for as in the as well as The to and use of is for the of heart is and is the for the of at The of ventricular function is the left ventricular ejection fraction for patients with patients with preserved of diastolic function may be to of diastolic function in patients present with and left ventricular ejection in in heart failure patients, in a of left ventricular diastolic and in and A of diastolic heart failure to be of or of of or only left ventricular function and evidence of left ventricular diastolic or diastolic is to an of diastolic is a of with a in a in the and therefore a in the In patients with may be a of with an a and a The is to left that an in the In patients with an between and the and the may be a This may be by the of by The and and diastolic by the combined of and to of diastolic a that if of diastolic function by these may improve management of heart failure patients. is not recommended and can only be in patients have an in patients, and in patients with of or is to or a in the can be recommended in the of patients with heart failure only is an in the clinical or in In patients in at has not information and in patients with or and may and is a and for the of left and ventricular and The is well for of and and of function are of in they are in of can be to the of which is a in patients with heart In clinical practice, is of limited for the of heart a in a not treatment for heart failure heart failure as a The main of in are on and treatment and on is not to the of may be in the or to should be considered in patients with or and in patients with heart failure or are not to should also be considered in patients with or any other evidence of if they are not to appropriate has not been shown to in heart failure in clinical and in the of to is not is also indicated in patients with heart failure of and in patients with evidence of or of by of a is indicated in patients are for or to treatment of patients with not to and appropriate heart should not be to of are not recommended for diagnostic or in patients. is of in the of may and the and of and ventricular which be or of heart should be to patients with and of an The is the in clinical may or the and of heart failure and therefore to be to the of heart failure in patients should be performed in patients with heart failure in order to the should be performed or in in which diagnostic or clinical a for heart the of heart of heart failure and evidence of must be present The of function by clinical is should be a for the of a with of heart failure or of left ventricular a management the of the guidelines with the treatment The of in heart failure is for limited to the and heart failure and efficacy of methodological The indicated as are in and/or of to and heart of to heart failure is or in quality of is the is to the of ventricular if and the benefits of the the be treatment should be at or left ventricular that the of and the of heart The of ventricular and heart failure may be or by treatment of to heart in particular in patients with and/or of of evidence The of heart failure should always be a to left ventricular to heart failure is on page of The therapeutic in patients with that is by left ventricular advice and other and The available of management are in and of of evidence for management with and their should are to weigh on a basis to as of a for after in of a of in to a health care or their to the if a in is the of in the is a that in in heart on should be to patients with heart with or The of In practice, a of is in heart of is other in of is of should in patients. or is present in of patients with The of and that is is an of should always be The use of should be and may or or should be In are to by other of It is not to dictate guidelines are to the not to the is and the for is the of treatments for heart failure on is evidence of the of in patients with heart for is of the of the based on in and should be Within and patients are to their The should be with with any of heart failure treatment or and and In heart failure or of or is function and therefore should be and on how to and that not are in patients in recommendations for in heart failure patients by the European Society of Cardiology have been are recommended as in patients with a left ventricular function as a ejection with or (see page of of evidence should be to the shown to be in the in heart failure of of evidence and not based on of of evidence patients with a left ventricular should be with an to or the of heart also the of and in this of of evidence of shown to be in are in and of which have been for the treatment of heart failure in are presented in patients with heart failure that is by left ventricular should an of of evidence and in patients with and heart failure and left ventricular should be as the in the of In patients with should be with of of evidence should be in patients with or of heart if after the of if the are to improve and to and for heart failure of of evidence patients with a left ventricular of of evidence with are and may be as an in patients or on an of of evidence in and diastolic and in are in patients. treatment is in the of and previous of of evidence The of should always be at the and to the The recommended for an are in of function is after and at the of an is or other which may are or in patients with or present or should be or any recommendations and are in and are for treatment is present and as or The use of in of and of of evidence are that have the on or of these should always be in with and if of of evidence should only be if or in heart failure the and of of evidence In patients are to of to and or may be of of evidence are in this of of evidence The use of all should be by of and A practical is to and after of treatment the are can be made should be considered for the treatment of all patients with and heart failure or and on including and is a of of evidence and heart the and to of heart This has been in of different and or of of evidence In patients with left ventricular with or heart an is recommended in to to of of evidence in clinical may be present between different in patients with heart only and can be recommended of of evidence The should be and and to the in the clinical trials. should be to may heart and of heart the recommended procedure for the use of in clinical practice and the of the in the relevant and for are in are recommended in to and in heart failure with to improve and of of evidence are recommended in to and in heart failure after with left ventricular and of heart failure or to and of of evidence patients with left ventricular patients with and is evidence for the of an or an to heart failure or can be as an to in patients to to improve and of of evidence and to have efficacy in on and of of evidence In with of heart failure or left ventricular and have or on of of evidence can be considered in with in patients to of of evidence and for heart failure of of evidence by a potential between and have not been by recent in or of of evidence and of which are in are to for and the recommended are shown in are indicated in and any of heart whether or not left ventricular is the the ventricular which ventricular function and of of evidence A of and to in patients with of of evidence has on may heart failure in the patients with heart failure by left ventricular and with and in heart of of evidence to the use of and and The of is if is in the the is for in the treatment of of of evidence they may be as for or of of evidence In of for and the can be to and and quality of of of evidence may be for the treatment of or of of of evidence Evidence that improve of heart failure or an is is evidence to support the use of in heart failure of of evidence safety with and a on they may a for the treatment of or not by and are not recommended for the treatment of heart failure by and in are not recommended in heart failure of they are in to of of evidence of and to treatment for heart failure not improve and not on of of evidence a or has been shown to be in as well as to patients with heart with is may and some patients are or treatment with and is not recommended in of of evidence administration of is in patients with heart failure with of and may and their on is on of evidence and of that some may have on and function and are with are at of to are with of in and is evidence to support the treatment with an and in heart In with a previous or a left ventricular is indicated of of evidence is evidence to that the of or in patients with heart a or are recommended as of of evidence should be avoided in patients with with heart failure of of evidence of the potential for should be the in In the of in heart failure are to the of any potential of in these patients. other are not indicated in patients with In patients with or ventricular treatment with may be should be avoided as they may ventricular have an and in heart failure of of evidence in heart failure of of evidence (see also page may also be indicated or in with or in the management of or ventricular of of evidence administration of in patients with heart failure is not of of evidence is and ventricular of of evidence It may and in patients with heart failure and in the of left or improve the of and is the treatment in this is the only relevant is for the treatment of in has in of of evidence clinical of heart failure are must always be considered of of evidence are to support the use of for the of heart failure on heart failure of that might to of of evidence the of are or is not recommended as management of patients with heart failure and of of evidence in patients with left ventricular and to ventricular may to in heart failure patients of of evidence This is also for to left ventricular is indicated in patients with left ventricular heart failure of of evidence be recommended for the treatment of heart failure of of evidence be considered a to heart of of evidence left be recommended for the treatment of heart failure of of evidence the should not be considered an to heart of of evidence ventricular be recommended for the treatment of heart an in and with some of of evidence and A on the of or has been as well as a on have been in patients with heart failure to only of the in patients with ventricular and may of of evidence can be considered in patients with ejection fraction and ventricular and to improve of of evidence of of evidence and of of evidence In patients with ventricular or ventricular the is in of these by or and the for The the limited and with and the cost-effectiveness to the into a with The patients with left ventricular and heart failure and that of an in with in patients with heart failure and was not to in of and therefore the treatment with and may be for the majority of patients. should be for patients considered at of treatment and The cost-effectiveness of this treatment to be In the patients with and were to or a of was a in by was between and on of an in with can be considered in patients with heart failure with and to improve or of of evidence is recommended to improve in patients have or have ventricular which is or with left ventricular function of of evidence is in patients with not of a on including and an to of of evidence recent the of on in patients with ejection the with is of treatment is to the of the and must also be into of patients in is not well with in the of is evidence that patients with as the of this is the benefits may be should be considered for heart are with of heart failure with of treatment and with a The of new treatments has the of the to heart (see page The must be and to and be as to the to and after The for heart are shown in Heart is an of treatment for heart have been is considered to to and quality of with are of of evidence of the main of heart is of the which is responsible for a of in the The is limited by the of and by for left ventricular and heart to and in some patients support of of evidence ventricular are as a to treatment is these are not recommended for use of of evidence may be to or to in patients with heart the is The of in the of heart failure that is by is in the to be and should be to the presented in In the the ejection the the of heart failure or with an is recommended in patients with if indicated by a in (see on in the page should be to the in patients with left ventricular if an page page to the in a page and to in in with an by a the and should be the of the should be by a The of can be adjusted based on any should be the an an may be if a and to in in and have to heart failure should page In patients and in patients the of an should be considered page of heart failure are shown in in that have the or are should page are can be in and of with a are should be considered if is evidence of left ventricular Heart or may a limited should be for heart if In to the treatments in support and/or can be in heart always should be considered as an to treatment that the patients on the for support with or ventricular or may be These should be only in the of a for the management of the treatment in patients should always be considered and may the use of for the of recent epidemiological that in the the of patients with heart and may be as as is the of diastolic in patients with heart failure and a function in the is evidence clinical or on how to heart failure with Heart failure with and heart failure to diastolic are not The the evidence of preserved and not that left ventricular diastolic has been The of diastolic heart failure evidence of diastolic which may be to should be and in particular should be and is is to patients heart The recommendations are of the limited available in patients with or diastolic of of evidence is evidence that patients with diastolic heart failure any may improve and and may have their and of and may be with are should be as not to and and be to heart and the diastolic may be for the with have shown a in patients with A of an may Heart failure patients with a of years in is with are and patients also which the of and may In these patients in have been trials. of of may be the of treatment for patients. and are and in patients in general. In the are of In patients, is with a of and or and are well in the if patients with as and are should not be of patients may be to of are recommended in patients with as and the and the of these should be of the of It is to and for improve function and with and of of evidence In patients with ventricular the use of is only in patients with ventricular and should be the of of evidence is indicated in patients with heart failure and with ventricular ventricular or ventricular and in patients at of of of evidence be may on the of and left of of evidence In patients with and heart failure and/or left ventricular the use of to should be to of of evidence if available, to of of evidence In patients or the may be considered for of ventricular of of evidence In patients with are the of of evidence In can be considered of of evidence in with should always be considered of of evidence of is not on previous heart failure or is on and recommendations in to treatment for heart failure of left ventricular is present if not or is present the of and or if not present if not also of heart failure care and of of evidence and of of evidence of patients with heart It is that the on local and and whether the is for of patients of heart and left ventricular or the heart failure of of evidence between heart and heart failure for the of heart failure or left ventricular The and and diastolic of that is left ventricular The should be as an of how on can be made on the of heart failure A in

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia. However, the etiopathogenesis of this devastating disease is not fully understood. Recent studies in rodents suggest that alterations in the gut microbiome may contribute to amyloid deposition, yet the microbial communities associated with AD have not been characterized in humans. Towards this end, we characterized the bacterial taxonomic composition of fecal samples from participants with and without a diagnosis of dementia due to AD. Our analyses revealed that the gut microbiome of AD participants has decreased microbial diversity and is compositionally distinct from control age- and sex-matched individuals. We identified phylum- through genus-wide differences in bacterial abundance including decreased Firmicutes, increased Bacteroidetes, and decreased Bifidobacterium in the microbiome of AD participants. Furthermore, we observed correlations between levels of differentially abundant genera and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of AD. These findings add AD to the growing list of diseases associated with gut microbial alterations, as well as suggest that gut bacterial communities may be a target for therapeutic intervention.

BACKGROUND: The optimal combination drug therapy for hypertension is not established, although current U.S. guidelines recommend inclusion of a diuretic. We hypothesized that treatment with the combination of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker would be more effective in reducing the rate of cardiovascular events than treatment with an ACE inhibitor plus a thiazide diuretic. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned 11,506 patients with hypertension who were at high risk for cardiovascular events to receive treatment with either benazepril plus amlodipine or benazepril plus hydrochlorothiazide. The primary end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for angina, resuscitation after sudden cardiac arrest, and coronary revascularization. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. The trial was terminated early after a mean follow-up of 36 months, when the boundary of the prespecified stopping rule was exceeded. Mean blood pressures after dose adjustment were 131.6/73.3 mm Hg in the benazepril-amlodipine group and 132.5/74.4 mm Hg in the benazepril-hydrochlorothiazide group. There were 552 primary-outcome events in the benazepril-amlodipine group (9.6%) and 679 in the benazepril-hydrochlorothiazide group (11.8%), representing an absolute risk reduction with benazepril-amlodipine therapy of 2.2% and a relative risk reduction of 19.6% (hazard ratio, 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.90; P<0.001). For the secondary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke, the hazard ratio was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.92; P=0.002). Rates of adverse events were consistent with those observed from clinical experience with the study drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The benazepril-amlodipine combination was superior to the benazepril-hydrochlorothiazide combination in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension who were at high risk for such events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00170950.)

BACKGROUND: Many variations in oocyte and embryo grading make inter-laboratory comparisons extremely difficult. This paper reports the proceedings of an international consensus meeting on oocyte and embryo morphology assessment. METHODS: Background presentations about current practice were given. RESULTS: The expert panel developed a set of consensus points to define the minimum criteria for oocyte and embryo morphology assessment. CONCLUSIONS: It is expected that the definition of common terminology and standardization of laboratory practice related to embryo morphology assessment will result in more effective comparisons of treatment outcomes. This document is intended to be referenced as a global consensus to allow standardized reporting of the minimum data set required for the accurate description of embryo development.

BACKGROUND: Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, is in clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials involving patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease--one involving 1121 carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele and the other involving 1331 noncarriers. Bapineuzumab or placebo, with doses varying by study, was administered by intravenous infusion every 13 weeks for 78 weeks. The primary outcome measures were scores on the 11-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog11, with scores ranging from 0 to 70 and higher scores indicating greater impairment) and the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicating less impairment). A total of 1090 carriers and 1114 noncarriers were included in the efficacy analysis. Secondary outcome measures included findings on positron-emission tomographic amyloid imaging with the use of Pittsburgh compound B (PIB-PET) and cerebrospinal fluid phosphorylated tau (phospho-tau) concentrations. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcomes. At week 78, the between-group differences in the change from baseline in the ADAS-cog11 and DAD scores (bapineuzumab group minus placebo group) were -0.2 (P=0.80) and -1.2 (P=0.34), respectively, in the carrier study; the corresponding differences in the noncarrier study were -0.3 (P=0.64) and 2.8 (P=0.07) with the 0.5-mg-per-kilogram dose of bapineuzumab and 0.4 (P=0.62) and 0.9 (P=0.55) with the 1.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. The major safety finding was amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema among patients receiving bapineuzumab, which increased with bapineuzumab dose and APOE ε4 allele number and which led to discontinuation of the 2.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. Between-group differences were observed with respect to PIB-PET and cerebrospinal fluid phospho-tau concentrations in APOE ε4 allele carriers but not in noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE ε4 carriers. (Funded by Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy and Pfizer; Bapineuzumab 301 and 302 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00575055 and NCT00574132, and EudraCT number, 2009-012748-17.).