Coronary angioplasty reduces free wall rupture and improves mortality and morbidity of acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Free wall rupture (FWR) is one of the major causes of mortality in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). To what extent coronary angioplasty for AMI would modify the predictors of FWR is not clear. METHODS: In prospective database of consecutive 3,138 AMI patients seen between May 1985 to May 2002, 3,096 patients (98.7%) who underwent emergent coronary angiography were analyzed retrospectively. The incidence of FWR was determined by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: FWR after admission occurred in 40 (1.3%) patients. A higher rate of FWR was associated with: 1) not having coronary angioplasty (3.2% vs. 0.9%, p< 0.0001); 2) thrombolytic agents usage (2.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.004); 3) female gender (2.5% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.0004); 4) failed reperfusion (5.4% vs. 0.9%, p< 0.0001); and 5) LMT-related infarct (4.7% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.02) in univariate analysis. Five conditions were identified as significant protective or predictive factors of FWR in multivariate logistic regression analysis: having coronary angioplasty (odds ratio [OR]: 0.45, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.22-0.94, p = 0.03), failed reperfusion (OR: 4.57, 95% CI: 2.31-9.05, p< 0.0001), LMT-related infarct (OR: 4.96, 95% CI: 1.42-17.34, p = 0.01), female gender (OR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.11-4.25, p = 0.02) and age (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.00-1.07, p = 0.03). Coronary angioplasty alone resulted in a lower incidence of FWR (0.5%) than thrombolysis alone (1.6%, p = 0.02), coronary angioplasty with thrombolysis (3.3%, p< 0.0001) and without either treatment (6.3%, p< 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Angiographic reperfusion success was the most significant protective factor from FWR. Coronary angioplasty reduced FWR complicating AMI and its concomitant fatality.

[Early phase II dose-finding study of exemestane in postmenopausal patients with advanced/recurrent breast cancer].

Exemestane was administered orally to postmenopausal women with advanced/recurrent breast cancer at a dose of 10 mg/day or 25 mg/day once daily for more than 8 weeks in order to evaluate the drug's anti-tumor effects and safety in a dose-finding study. The response rate (CR + PR) in the 10 mg and 25 mg group was 25.0% (8/32) and 31.4% (11/35), respectively, demonstrating no significant differences between the two groups, yet a higher efficacy rate was observed in 25 mg group. The efficacy rate in hormone-treatment-resistant patients within the 10 mg and 25 mg groups was 14.3% (3/21) and 26.1% (6/23), respectively, demonstrating more than a 20% response rate in 25 mg group. Incidences of the adverse events of which relevance to the drug could not be excluded were 30.6% (11/36) in the 10 mg group. 13.9% (5/36) in the 25 mg group and 22.2% (16/72) in the total group. The major adverse events were, hot flashes, numbness of the limbs, nausea, headache etc. Abnormal findings in clinical laboratory tests were as follows: ALP increase; GOT increase; GPT increase; gamma-GTP increase; total cholesterol increase; urinary sediment present. Abnormal findings in endocrine function were as follows: aldosterone decrease; testosterone.cortisol.DHEA-S decrease. But discontinuation due to abnormal laboratory findings was not found. No abnormal findings in physical tests were observed. A significant decrease in plasma estrogen concentration at week 4 was observed in both the 10 mg and 25 mg groups compared with baseline. These low levels were maintained throughout the study period. On the basis of these results, the efficacy of exemestane 25 mg/day was verified to be slightly higher than 10 mg/day. In addition the safety profile had no major adverse events to notice. In these patients with advanced/recurrent breast cancer, 25 mg/day was recommended as the most appropriate dose to be used clinically.