CHRONOS-4: phase 3 study of copanlisib plus rituximab-based immunochemotherapy in relapsed indolent B-cell lymphoma.

ABSTRACT: Copanlisib, a pan-class I phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor with predominant activity against the α and δ isoforms, previously demonstrated durable responses as monotherapy and improved progression-free survival (PFS) in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). CHRONOS-4 was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to investigate the efficacy and safety of copanlisib in combination with standard immunochemotherapy in patients with relapsed iNHL. Patients (n = 524) were randomized (1:1) to copanlisib (60 mg IV) plus immunochemotherapy (rituximab and bendamustine [R-B] or placebo plus R-B). Copanlisib/placebo were administered with R-B (days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle) for ≤6 cycles and as monotherapy from cycle 7 up to 12 months. The primary study end point was PFS. Median exposure was 8.5 months (0.2-12.9) for copanlisib plus R-B and 11.4 months (0.1-12.6) for placebo plus R-B. Median PFS was 32.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.4-38.6) for copanlisib plus R-B and 33.3 months (95% CI, 27.8-42.8) for placebo plus R-B (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88-1.44; P = .83). No differences between treatment arms were observed in overall survival (data not yet mature), objective response rate, and duration of response for the overall population or individual histology types. Overall, copanlisib plus R-B was associated with higher rates of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), grade 4 and 5 TEAEs, and treatment discontinuation. A number of serious TEAEs were infections. Overall, copanlisib plus R-B did not provide clinical benefit vs placebo plus R-B and was associated with worse tolerability in patients with relapsed iNHL. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02626455.

Health Technology Assessment With Diminishing Returns to Health: The Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness (GRACE) Approach.

OBJECTIVES: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) embeds an assumption at odds with most economic analysis-that of constant returns to health in the creation of happiness (utility). We aim to reconcile it with the bulk of economic theory. METHODS: We generalize the traditional CEA approach, allow diminishing returns to health, and align CEA with the rest of the health economics literature. RESULTS: This simple change has far-reaching implications for the practice of CEA. First, optimal cost-effectiveness thresholds should systematically rise for more severe diseases and fall for milder ones. We provide formulae for estimating how these thresholds vary with health-related quality of life (QoL) in the sick state. Practitioners can also use our approach to account for treatment outcome uncertainty. Holding average benefits fixed, risk-averse consumers value interventions more when they reduce outcome uncertainty ('insurance value') and/or when they provide a chance at positively skewed outcomes ('value of hope'). Finally, we provide a coherent way to combine improvements in QoL and life expectancy (LE) when people have diminishing returns to QoL. CONCLUSION: This new approach obviates the need for increasingly prevalent and ad hoc exceptions to CEA for end-of-life care, rare disease, and very severe disease (eg, cancer). Our methods also show that the value of improving QoL for disabled people is greater than for comparable non-disabled people, thus resolving an ongoing and mathematically legitimate objection to CEA raised by advocates for disabled people. Our Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness (GRACE) approach helps align HTA practice with realistic preferences for health and risk.

Feasibility of Measuring Preferences for Chemotherapy Among Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivors Using a Direct Rank Ordering Multicriteria Decision Analysis Versus a Time Trade-Off.

OBJECTIVES: Chemotherapy is increasingly a preference-based choice among women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a promising but underutilized method to facilitate shared decision making. We explored the feasibility of conducting an MCDA using direct rank ordering versus a time trade-off (TTO) to assess chemotherapy choice in a large population-based sample. METHODS: We surveyed 904 early-stage breast cancer survivors who were within 5 years of diagnosis and reported to the Western Washington State Cancer System and Kaiser Permanente Northern California registries. Direct rank ordering of 11 criteria and TTO surveys were conducted from September 2015 to July 2016; clinical data were obtained from registries or medical records. Multivariable regressions estimated post hoc associations between the MCDA, TTO, and self-reported chemotherapy receipt, considering covariates. RESULTS: Survivors ranged in age from 25 to 74 years and 73.9% had stage I tumors. The response rate for the rank ordering was 81.0%; TTO score was 94.2%. A one-standard deviation increase in the difference between the chemotherapy and no chemotherapy MCDA scores was associated with a 75.1% (95% confidence interval 43.9-109.7%; p < 0.001) increase in the adjusted odds of having received chemotherapy; no association was found between the TTO score and chemotherapy receipt. CONCLUSIONS: A rank-order-based MCDA was feasible and was associated with chemotherapy choice. Future research should consider developing and testing this MCDA for use in clinical encounters. Additional research is required to develop a TTO-based model and test its properties against a pragmatic MCDA to inform future shared decision-making tools.

The impact of gene expression profile testing on confidence in chemotherapy decisions and prognostic expectations.

PURPOSE: Little is known about whether gene expression profile (GEP) testing and specific recurrence scores (e.g., medium risk) improve women's confidence in their chemotherapy decision or perceived recurrence risk. We evaluate the relationship between these outcomes and GEP testing. METHODS: We surveyed women eligible for GEP testing (stage I or II, Gr1-2, ER+, HER2-) identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry of Washington or Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 2012 to 2016, approximately 0-4 years from diagnosis (N = 904, RR = 45.4%). Confidence in chemotherapy was measured as confident (Very, completely) versus Not Confident (Somewhat, A little, Not At All); perceived risk recurrence was recorded numerically (0-100%). Women reported their GEP test receipt (Yes, No, Unknown) and risk recurrence score (High, Intermediate, Low, Unknown). In our analytic sample (N = 833), we propensity score weighted the three test receipt cohorts and used propensity weighted multivariable regressions to examine associations between the outcomes and the three test receipt cohorts, with receipt stratified by score. RESULTS: 29.5% reported an unknown GEP test receipt; 86% being confident. Compared to no test receipt, an intermediate score (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.58), unknown score (aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.05-0.18), and unknown test receipt (aOR 0.37; 95% CI 0.24-0.57) were less likely to report confidence. Most women greatly overestimated their recurrence risk regardless of their test receipt or score. CONCLUSIONS: GEP testing was not associated with greater confidence in chemotherapy decisions. Better communication about GEP testing and the implications for recurrence risk may improve women's decisional confidence.

Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profile Testing in Community Practice.

Purpose Gene expression profile (GEP) testing can support chemotherapy decision making for patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative breast cancers. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of one GEP test, Onco type DX (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA), in community practice with test-eligible patients age 40 to 79 years. Methods A simulation model compared 25-year societal incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of community Onco type DX use from 2005 to 2012 versus usual care in the pretesting era (2000 to 2004). Inputs included Onco type DX and chemotherapy data from an integrated health care system and national and published data on Onco type DX accuracy, chemotherapy effectiveness, utilities, survival and recurrence, and Medicare and patient costs. Sensitivity analyses varied individual parameters; results were also estimated for ideal conditions (ie, 100% testing and adherence to test-suggested treatment, perfect test accuracy, considering test effects on reassurance or worry, and lowest costs). Results Twenty-four percent of test-eligible patients had Onco type DX testing. Testing was higher in younger patients and patients with stage I disease ( v stage IIA), and 75.3% and 10.2% of patients with high and low recurrence risk scores received chemotherapy, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio for testing ( v usual care) was $188,125 per QALY. Considering test effects on worry versus reassurance decreased the cost-effectiveness ratio to $58,431 per QALY. With perfect test accuracy, the cost-effectiveness ratio was $28,947 per QALY, and under ideal conditions, it was $39,496 per QALY. Conclusion GEP testing is likely to have a high cost-effectiveness ratio on the basis of community practice patterns. However, realistic variations in assumptions about key variables could result in GEP testing having cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of other accepted interventions. The differences in cost-effectiveness ratios on the basis of community versus ideal conditions underscore the importance of considering real-world implementation when assessing the new technology.

Using Multicriteria Approaches to Assess the Value of Health Care.

Practitioners of cost-utility analysis know that their models omit several important factors that often affect real-world decisions about health care options. Furthermore, cost-utility analyses typically reflect only single perspectives (e.g., individual, business, and societal), further limiting the value for those with different perspectives (patients, providers, payers, producers, and planners-the 5Ps). We discuss how models based on multicriteria analyses, which look at problems from many perspectives, can fill this void. Each of the 5Ps can use multicriteria analyses in different ways to aid their decisions. Each perspective may lead to different value measures and outcomes, whereas no single-metric approach (such as cost-utility analysis) can satisfy all these stakeholders. All stakeholders have unique ways to measure value, even if assessing the same health intervention. We illustrate the benefits of this approach by comparing the value of five different hypothetical treatment choices for five hypothetical patients with cancer, each with different preference structures. Nine attributes describe each treatment option. We add a brief discussion regarding the use of these approaches in group-based decisions. We urge that methods to value health interventions embrace the multicriteria approaches that we discuss, because these approaches 1) increase transparency about the decision process, 2) allow flight simulator-type evaluation of alternative interventions before actual investment or deployment, 3) help focus efforts to improve data in an efficient manner, 4) at least in some cases help facilitate decision convergence among stakeholders with differing perspectives, and 5) help avoid potential cognitive errors known to impair intuitive judgments.

Oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation in breast cancer multigene testing.

PURPOSE: Multigene testing for breast cancer recurrence risk became available in 2007, yet many eligible patients remain untested. This study evaluated variation in testing rates, and oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation, in a setting without financial influences on testing. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic data and oncologist surveys within Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care system. Analyses included all 2974 test eligible patients from 2013 to 2015, 113 oncologists, and 15 practice groups. Receipt of multigene testing was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS: Overall, 39% of eligible patients had multigene testing, but rates varied widely among practice groups, ranging from 24 to 48% after case mix adjustment. This 24% difference among practices was greater than the variation associated with most patient characteristics, including comorbidities and race/ethnicity, and similar to that associated with tumor size. Practice group and oncologist factors were statistically significant contributors to the variation in testing after adjusting for patient factors. Patients were more likely to be tested if they had a female oncologist (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21-2.12) or were in a practice whose chief had a high testing rate (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12-1.29 per 10% increase in the percent tested). CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist and leadership practices play a key role in the variation in genomic test use for cancer recurrence risk even in a healthcare system without financial barriers to testing and could be a leverage point for implementing desired practice changes for new genomic advances.

Evaluating Frameworks That Provide Value Measures for Health Care Interventions.

The recent acceleration of scientific discovery has led to greater choices in health care. New technologies, diagnostic tests, and pharmaceuticals have widely varying impact on patients and populations in terms of benefits, toxicities, and costs, stimulating a resurgence of interest in the creation of frameworks intended to measure value in health. Many of these are offered by providers and/or advocacy organizations with expertise and interest in specific diseases (e.g., cancer and heart disease). To help assess the utility of and the potential biases embedded in these frameworks, we created an evaluation taxonomy with seven basic components: 1) define the purpose; 2) detail the conceptual approach, including perspectives, methods for obtaining preferences of decision makers (e.g., patients), and ability to incorporate multiple dimensions of value; 3) discuss inclusions and exclusions of elements included in the framework, and whether the framework assumes clinical intervention or offers alternatives such as palliative care or watchful waiting; 4) evaluate data sources and their scientific validity; 5) assess the intervention's effect on total costs of treating a defined population; 6) analyze how uncertainty is incorporated; and 7) illuminate possible conflicts of interest among those creating the framework. We apply the taxonomy to four representative value frameworks recently published by professional organizations focused on treatment of cancer and heart disease and on vaccine use. We conclude that each of these efforts has strengths and weaknesses when evaluated using our taxonomy, and suggest pathways to enhance the utility of value-assessing frameworks for policy and clinical decision making.

Quisinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone combination therapy for relapsed multiple myeloma.

The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of quisinostat + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma was evaluated in a phase-1b, open-label, multicenter, '3 + 3' dose-escalation study. Patients received escalating doses of oral quisinostat (6 mg [n = 3], 8 mg [n = 3], 10 mg [n = 6], and 12 mg [n = 6] on days 1, 3, and 5/week) plus subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2)) and oral dexamethasone (20 mg) in cycles of 21 (cycles 1-8) or 35 d (cycles 9-11) until MTD was determined. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported in 6/8 mg groups except ventricular fibrillation (Grade 4 cardiac arrest, n = 1 [10 mg] cycle 6) and clinically significant cardiac toxicities (Grade 3 QTc prolongation, Grade 3 atrial fibrillation, n = 2 [12 mg]). Thrombocytopenia (n = 11), asthenia (n = 10), and diarrhea (n = 12) were most common adverse events. Overall, 88.2% patients achieved treatment response, median duration of response, and median progression-free survival were 9.4 and 8.2 months, respectively. The MTD of quisinostat was established as 10 mg thrice weekly oral dose with bortezomib + dexamethasone.

Ibrutinib combined with bendamustine and rituximab compared with placebo, bendamustine, and rituximab for previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (HELIOS): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma relapse after initial therapy. Bendamustine plus rituximab is often used in the relapsed or refractory setting. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adding ibrutinib, an oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), to bendamustine plus rituximab in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma. METHODS: The HELIOS trial was an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in adult patients (≥18 years of age) who had active chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma with measurable lymph node disease (>1·5 cm) by CT scan, and had relapsed or refractory disease following one or more previous lines of systemic therapy consisting of at least two cycles of a chemotherapy-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and kidney function. Patients with del(17p) were excluded because of known poor response to bendamustine plus rituximab. Patients who had received previous treatment with ibrutinib or other BTK inhibitors, refractory disease or relapse within 24 months with a previous bendamustine-containing regimen, or haemopoietic stem-cell transplant were also excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system to receive bendamustine plus rituximab given in cycles of 4 weeks' duration (bendamustine: 70 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 2-3 in cycle 1, and days 1-2 in cycles 2-6; rituximab: 375 mg/m(2) on day 1 of cycle 1, and 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of cycles 2-6 for a maximum of six cycles) with either ibrutinib (420 mg daily orally) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were stratified according to whether they were refractory to purine analogues and by number of previous lines of therapy. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival. Crossover to ibrutinib was permitted for patients in the placebo group with IRC-confirmed disease progression. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and is continuing for further long-term follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01611090. FINDINGS: Between Sept 19, 2012, and Jan 21, 2014, 578 eligible patients were randomly assigned to ibrutinib or placebo in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab (289 in each group). The primary endpoint was met at the preplanned interim analysis (March 10, 2015). At a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 13·7-20·7), progression-free survival was significantly improved in the ibrutinib group compared with the placebo group (not reached in the ibrutinib group (95% CI not evaluable) vs 13·3 months (11·3-13·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·203, 95% CI 0·150-0·276; p<0·0001). IRC-assessed progression-free survival at 18 months was 79% (95% CI 73-83) in the ibrutinib group and 24% (18-31) in the placebo group (HR 0·203, 95% CI 0·150-0·276; p<0·0001). The most frequent all-grade adverse events were neutropenia and nausea. 222 (77%) of 287 patients in the ibrutinib group and 212 (74%) of 287 patients in the placebo group reported grade 3-4 events; the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in both groups were neutropenia (154 [54%] in the ibrutinib group vs 145 [51%] in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (43 [15%] in each group). A safety profile similar to that previously reported with ibrutinib and bendamustine plus rituximab individually was noted. INTERPRETATION: In patients eligible for bendamustine plus rituximab, the addition of ibrutinib to this regimen results in significant improvements in outcome with no new safety signals identified from the combination and a manageable safety profile. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Impact of cytochrome P450 3A4 inducer and inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin in patients with advanced malignancies: open-label, multicenter studies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and survival of trabectedin, metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 enzyme, when coadministered with rifampin (CYP3A4 inducer) or ketoconazole (CYP3A4 inhibitor) in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Two phase 1/2a, 2-way crossover studies were conducted. For rifampin study, 12 patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with rifampin (600 mg/day, 6-days), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.). In ketoconazole study, eight patients were randomized (1:1) to sequence of a cycle of trabectedin (0.58 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.) coadministered with ketoconazole (200 mg, twice-daily, 15-doses), and a cycle of trabectedin monotherapy (1.3 mg/m(2), 3 h, i.v.). RESULTS: The systemic exposure (geometric means) of trabectedin was decreased [22% (C max) and 31% (AUClast)] with rifampin coadministration and increased [22% (C max) and 66% (AUClast)] with ketoconazole coadministration. This correlated with an increased clearance with rifampin (39.6-59.8 L/h) and a decreased clearance with ketoconazole (20.3-12.0 L/h). Consistent with earlier studies, the most common (≥40%) treatment-emergent adverse events in both studies were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hepatic function abnormal, anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of rifampin or ketoconazole altered the pharmacokinetics of trabectedin, but no new safety signals were observed. Coadministration of trabectedin with potent CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers should be avoided if possible. If coadministration of trabectedin with a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor is required, close monitoring for toxicities is recommended, so that appropriate dose reductions can be instituted as warranted.

A phase I study of quisinostat (JNJ-26481585), an oral hydroxamate histone deacetylase inhibitor with evidence of target modulation and antitumor activity, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of quisinostat, a novel hydroxamate, pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this first-in-human phase I study, quisinostat was administered orally, once daily in three weekly cycles to patients with advanced malignancies, using a two-stage accelerated titration design. Three intermittent schedules were subsequently explored: four days on/three days off; every Monday, Wednesday, Friday (MWF); and every Monday and Thursday (M-Th). Toxicity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical efficacy were evaluated at each schedule. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were treated in continuous daily (2-12 mg) and three intermittent dosing schedules (6-19 mg). Treatment-emergent adverse events included: fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, lethargy, and vomiting. DLTs observed were predominantly cardiovascular, including nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, ST/T-wave abnormalities, and other tachyarhythmias. Noncardiac DLTs were fatigue and abnormal liver function tests. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of quisinostat increased proportionally with dose. Pharmacodynamic evaluation showed increased acetylated histone 3 in hair follicles, skin and tumor biopsies, and in peripheral blood mononuclear cells as well as decreased Ki67 in skin and tumor biopsies. A partial response lasting five months was seen in one patient with melanoma. Stable disease was seen in eight patients (duration 4-10.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: The adverse event profile of quisinostat was comparable with that of other HDACi. Intermittent schedules were better tolerated than continuous schedules. On the basis of tolerability, pharmacokinetic predictions, and pharmacodynamic effects, the recommended dose for phase II studies is 12 mg on the MWF schedule.

Rapamycin does not improve insulin sensitivity despite elevated mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 activity in muscles of ob/ob mice.

Studies of cultured cells have indicated that the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) mediates the development of insulin resistance. Because a role for mTORC1 in the development of skeletal muscle insulin resistance has not been established, we studied mTORC1 activity in skeletal muscles of ob/ob (OB) mice and wild-type (WT) mice. In vivo insulin action was assessed in muscles of mice 15 min following an intraperitoneal injection of insulin or an equivalent volume of saline. In the basal state, the phosphorylation of S6K on Thr(389), mTOR on Ser(2448), and PRAS40 on Thr(246) were increased significantly in muscles from OB mice compared with WT mice. The increase in basal mTORC1 signaling was associated with an increase in basal PKB phosphorylation on Thr(308) and Ser(473). In the insulin-stimulated state, no differences existed in the phosphorylation of S6K on Thr(389), but PKB phosphorylation on Thr(308) and Ser(473) was significantly reduced in muscles of OB compared with WT mice. Despite elevated mTORC1 activity in OB mice, rapamycin treatment did not improve either glucose tolerance or insulin tolerance. These results indicate that the insulin resistance of OB mice is mediated, in part, by factors other than mTORC1.

The value of patient-reported health status in predicting short-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification for comparison of outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) typically includes only clinical measures of risk. Patient-reported health status may be an important independent predictor of short-term health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient-reported health status, as measured by the Physical and Mental Component Summary scores of the SF-36, predicts in-hospital mortality and prolonged length of stay after CABG, after controlling for other clinical predictors of those outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN: Prospective cohort study conducted from September 1993 to November 1995. SUBJECTS: One thousand seven hundred seventy-eight adults who underwent isolated CABG for myocardial ischemia. MEASURES: In-hospital mortality and prolonged length of stay (> 14 days). RESULTS: There were 27 deaths and 223 patients with prolonged length of stay in the study sample. A 10-point decrease in the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score increased the odds of in-hospital mortality by 61% (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.04-2.49), independent of established clinical risk factors. Similarly, a 10-point decrease in the PCS score increased the odds of prolonged length of stay by 33% (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.13-1.57). A 10-point decrease in the Mental Component Summary score (MCS) decreased the odds of mortality by 36% (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: The PCS score is independently and significantly associated with in-hospital mortality and prolonged length of stay, after controlling for clinical risk factors. The MCS score is independently and significantly associated only with mortality, though the direction of the effect is unexpected. The result likely reflects a property of the scoring of the MCS and not a finding of clinical substance. Although caution must be taken when interpreting the summary scores, the SF-36 yields information not otherwise captured by clinical data and may be useful in risk stratification for in-hospital mortality and prolonged length of stay after CABG.

Comparison of two culture methods for detection of tobramycin-resistant gram-negative organisms in the sputum of patients with cystic fibrosis.

A culture method utilizing quantitative plating on antibiotic-containing media has been proposed as a technique for the detection of tobramycin-resistant organisms that is more sensitive than standard methods. Typical sputum culture methods quantitate the relative amounts of each distinct morphotype, followed by antibiotic susceptibility testing of a single colony of each morphotype. Sputum specimens from 240 cystic fibrosis patients were homogenized, serially diluted, and processed in parallel by the standard method (MacConkey agar and OF basal medium with agar, polymyxin, bacitracin, and lactose) and by plating on antibiotic-containing media (MacConkey agar with tobramycin added at 25 microg/ml [MAC-25] and 100 microg/ml [MAC-100]). MICs of tobramycin were determined for all Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates by broth microdilution. Growth of P. aeruginosa on MAC-25 was considered to be equivalent to a tobramycin MIC of > or = 16 microg/ml, and growth on MAC-100 was considered to be equivalent to a tobramycin MIC of > or = 128 microg/ml. Analysis of method-specific detection rates showed that tobramycin-containing medium was more sensitive than the standard method for the detection of tobramycin-resistant P. aeruginosa, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, and Achromobacter xylosoxidans but was less sensitive for the detection of Burkholderia cepacia than the standard method. When MICs for P. aeruginosa that grew on tobramycin-containing medium were tested by broth microdilution, the MICs for 28 of 121 strains (23%) growing on MAC-25 and 22 of 56 strains (39%) growing on MAC-100 were MICs < 16 and < 128 microg/ml, respectively. Addition of a tobramycin-containing MacConkey plate to the routine media for sputum culture may provide additional, clinically relevant microbiologic data.