Pelvic Intraoperative Neuromonitoring Prevents Dysfunction in Patients With Rectal Cancer: Results From a Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of a NEUROmonitoring System (NEUROS).

OBJECTIVE: This NEUROmonitoring System (NEUROS) trial assessed whether pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring (pIONM) could improve urogenital and ano-(neo-)rectal functional outcomes in patients who underwent total mesorectal excisions (TMEs) for rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: High-level evidence from clinical trials is required to clarify the benefits of pIONM. METHODS: NEUROS was a 2-arm, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial that included 189 patients with rectal cancer who underwent TMEs at 8 centers, from February 2013 to January 2017. TMEs were performed with pIONM (n=90) or without it (control, n=99). The groups were stratified according to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and sex, with blocks of variable length. Data were analyzed according to a modified intention-to-treat protocol. The primary endpoint was a urinary function at 12 months after surgery, assessed with the International Prostate Symptom Score, a patient-reported outcome measure. Deterioration was defined as an increase of at least 5 points from the preoperative score. Secondary endpoints were sexual and anorectal functional outcomes, safety, and TME quality. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis included 171 patients. Marked urinary deterioration occurred in 22/171 (13%) patients, with significantly different incidence between groups (pIONM: n=6/82, 8%; control: n=16/89, 19%; 95% confidence interval, 12.4-94.4; P =0.0382). pIONM was associated with better sexual and ano-(neo)rectal function. At least 1 serious adverse event occurred in 36/88 (41%) in the pIONM group and 53/99 (54%) in the control group, none associated with the study treatment. The groups had similar TME quality, surgery times, intraoperative complication incidence, and postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: pIONM is safe and has the potential to improve functional outcomes in rectal cancer patients undergoing TME.

Effect of High-Caloric Nutrition on Survival in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: Weight loss has been identified as a negative prognostic factor in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, but there is no evidence regarding whether a high-caloric diet increases survival. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the efficacy of a high-caloric fatty diet (HCFD) for increasing survival. METHODS: A 1:1 randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, double-blinded trial (LIPCAL-ALS study) was conducted between February 2015 and September 2018. Patients were followed up at 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 months after randomization. The study was performed at 12 sites of the clinical and scientific network of German motor neuron disease centers (ALS/MND-NET). Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either HCFD (405kcal/day, 100% fat) or placebo in addition to riluzole (100mg/day). The primary endpoint was survival time, defined as time to death or time to study cutoff date. RESULTS: Two hundred one patients (80 female, 121 male, age = 62.4 ± 10.8 years) were included. The confirmatory analysis of the primary outcome survival showed a survival probability of 0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27-0.51) in the placebo group and 0.37 (95% CI = 0.25-0.49) in the HCFD group, both after 28 months (point in time of the last event). The hazard ratio was 0.97, 1-sided 97.5% CI = -∞ to 1.44, p = 0.44. INTERPRETATION: The results provide no evidence for a life-prolonging effect of HCFD for the whole amyotrophic lateral sclerosis population. However, post hoc analysis revealed a significant survival benefit for the subgroup of fast-progressing patients. ANN NEUROL 2020;87:206-216.

Peripheral blood and neuropsychological markers for the onset of action of antidepressant drugs in patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

BACKGROUND: In Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), treatment outcomes with currently available strategies are often disappointing. Therefore, it is sensible to develop new strategies to increase remission rates in acutely depressed patients. Many studies reported that true drug response can be observed within 14 days (early improvement) of antidepressant treatment. The identical time course of symptom amelioration after early improvement in patients treated with antidepressants of all classes or with placebo strongly suggests a common biological mechanism, which is not specific for a particular antidepressant medication. However, the biology underlying early improvement and final treatment response is not understood and there is no established biological marker as yet, which can predict treatment response for the individual patient before initiation or during the course of antidepressant treatment. Peripheral blood markers and executive functions are particularly promising candidates as markers for the onset of action and thus the prediction of final treatment outcome in MDD. METHODS/DESIGN: The present paper presents the rationales, objectives and methods of a multi-centre study applying close-meshed repetitive measurements of peripheral blood and neuropsychological parameters in patients with MDD and healthy controls during a study period of eight weeks for the identification of biomarkers for the onset of antidepressants' action in patients with MDD. Peripheral blood parameters and depression severity are assessed in weekly intervals from baseline to week 8, executive performance in bi-weekly intervals. Patients are participating in a randomized controlled multi-level clinical trial, healthy controls are matched according to mean age, sex and general intelligence. DISCUSSION: This investigation will help to identify a biomarker or a set of biomarkers with decision-making quality in the treatment of MDD in order to increase the currently disappointing remission rates of antidepressant treatment.

Autologous Iliac Bone Graft Compared with Biphasic Hydroxyapatite and Calcium Sulfate Cement for the Treatment of Bone Defects in Tibial Plateau Fractures: A Prospective, Randomized, Open-Label, Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Bone-graft substitutes are commonly used for the augmentation of traumatic bone defects in tibial plateau fractures. However, their clinical performance compared with that of autologous bone-grafting, the gold standard in bone defect reconstruction, still remains under debate. This study investigates the differences in quality of life, pain, and radiographic outcomes in the treatment of tibial plateau fracture-associated bone defects with either autologous bone grafts or a bioresorbable hydroxyapatite and calcium sulfate cement (CERAMENT BONE VOID FILLER [CBVF]; BONESUPPORT). METHODS: In this study, 135 patients with acute depression and split-depression fractures of the proximal part of the tibia (OTA/AO types 41-B2 and 41-B3) were enrolled in a prospective, controlled, randomized, multicenter trial including 20 hospitals in Germany. Patients were randomized to receive either autologous iliac bone graft or CBVF for reconstruction of the bone defect. The primary outcome measures were the Short Form (SF)-12 version 2 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score at week 26 (the study was designed to show noninferiority of the CBVF with regard to the PCS with a prespecified margin of -5 points) and the pain level at 26 weeks postoperatively measured by a visual analog scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes were the SF-12 version 2 Mental Component Summary (MCS) and SF-12 PCS scores at weeks 1, 6, and 12 and bone-healing on radiographs. RESULTS: Age, sex, fixation methods, and fracture pattern were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the SF-12 PCS or VAS scores at postoperative week 26. There was a significant reduction of blood loss (p = 0.007) and pain levels (p = 0.008) at postoperative day 1 in the CBVF group. The rates of fracture-healing, defect remodeling, and articular subsidence were not significantly different (p > 0.05) in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bioresorbable CBVF was noninferior to autologous bone graft with regard to both patient-reported and radiographic outcomes in tibial plateau fractures of OTA/AO types 41-B2 and 41-B3. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Methylphenidate, modafinil, and caffeine for cognitive enhancement in chess: A double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

Stimulants and caffeine have been proposed for cognitive enhancement by healthy subjects. This study investigated whether performance in chess - a competitive mind game requiring highly complex cognitive skills - can be enhanced by methylphenidate, modafinil or caffeine. In a phase IV, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 39 male chess players received 2×200mg modafinil, 2×20mg methylphenidate, and 2×200mg caffeine or placebo in a 4×4 crossover design. They played twenty 15-minute games during two sessions against a chess program (Fritz 12; adapted to players' strength) and completed several neuropsychological tests. Marked substance effects were observed since all three substances significantly increased average reflection time per game compared to placebo resulting in a significantly increased number of games lost on time with all three treatments. Treatment effects on chess performance were not seen if all games (n=3059) were analysed. Only when controlling for game duration as well as when excluding those games lost on time, both modafinil and methylphenidate enhanced chess performance as demonstrated by significantly higher scores in the remaining 2876 games compared to placebo. In conjunction with results from neuropsychological testing we conclude that modifying effects of stimulants on complex cognitive tasks may in particular result from more reflective decision making processes. When not under time pressure, such effects may result in enhanced performance. Yet, under time constraints more reflective decision making may not improve or even have detrimental effects on complex task performance.

Randomized controlled study of early medication change for non-improvers to antidepressant therapy in major depression--The EMC trial.

Patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and no improvement after two weeks of antidepressant pharmacotherapy have a high risk of treatment failure. The aim of the study was to determine whether an early medication change (EMC) strategy is superior to a guideline-based treatment in MDD patients without improvement after two weeks of antidepressant pharmacotherapy. Eight-hundred-and-eighty-nine patients with MDD were enrolled, 879 patients received the SSRI escitalopram. Of those, 192 patients had no improvement, defined as a reduction of < 20% on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) after 14 days of treatment, and were randomly assigned to open treatment with the EMC strategy (n = 97; venlafaxine XR for study days 15-56; in case of sustained non-improvement on day 28, lithium augmentation for days 29-56) or TAU (n = 95; escitalopram continuation; non-responders on day 28 were switched to venlafaxine XR for four weeks, i.e. days 29-56). The primary outcome was remission (HAMD-17 ≤ 7) after 8 weeks of treatment as assessed by blinded raters. Remission rates were 24% for EMC and 16% for TAU, which was not significantly different (p = 0.2056). Sensitivity analyses for the primary and secondary effectiveness endpoints consistently showed favorable results for patients randomized to EMC. The results confirm data from post-hoc analyses of clinical trials showing that early non-improvement identifies patients who likely need alternate interventions. However, the herein used two-step switch/augmentation strategy for this risk group was not more effective than the control intervention. Alternate strategies and other design aspects are discussed in order to support researchers addressing the same research question.

CERAMENT treatment of fracture defects (CERTiFy): protocol for a prospective, multicenter, randomized study investigating the use of CERAMENT™ BONE VOID FILLER in tibial plateau fractures.

BACKGROUND: Bone graft substitutes are widely used for reconstruction of posttraumatic bone defects. However, their clinical significance in comparison to autologous bone grafting, the gold-standard in reconstruction of larger bone defects, still remains under debate. This prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study investigates the differences in pain, quality of life, and cost of care in the treatment of tibia plateau fractures-associated bone defects using either autologous bone grafting or bioresorbable hydroxyapatite/calcium sulphate cement (CERAMENT™|BONE VOID FILLER (CBVF)). METHODS/DESIGN: CERTiFy (CERament™ Treatment of Fracture defects) is a prospective, multicenter, controlled, randomized trial. We plan to enroll 136 patients with fresh traumatic depression fractures of the proximal tibia (types AO 41-B2 and AO 41-B3) in 13 participating centers in Germany. Patients will be randomized to receive either autologous iliac crest bone graft or CBVF after reduction and osteosynthesis of the fracture to reconstruct the subchondral bone defect and prevent the subsidence of the articular surface. The primary outcome is the SF-12 Physical Component Summary at week 26. The co-primary endpoint is the pain level 26 weeks after surgery measured by a visual analog scale. The SF-12 Mental Component Summary after 26 weeks and costs of care will serve as key secondary endpoints. The study is designed to show non-inferiority of the CBVF treatment to the autologous iliac crest bone graft with respect to the physical component of quality of life. The pain level at 26 weeks after surgery is expected to be lower in the CERAMENT bone void filler treatment group. DISCUSSION: CERTiFy is the first randomized multicenter clinical trial designed to compare quality of life, pain, and cost of care in the use of the CBVF and the autologous iliac crest bone graft in the treatment of tibia plateau fractures. The results are expected to influence future treatment recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01828905.

Rationale and design of the randomised clinical trial comparing early medication change (EMC) strategy with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with major depressive disorder--the EMC trial.

BACKGROUND: In major depressive disorder (MDD), the traditional belief of a delayed onset of antidepressants' effects has lead to the concept of current guidelines that treatment durations should be between 3-8 weeks before medication change in case of insufficient outcome. Post hoc analyses of clinical trials, however, have shown that improvement usually occurs within the first 10-14 days of treatment and that such early improvement (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD] decrease >or=20%) has a substantial predictive value for final treatment outcome. Even more important, non-improvement (HAMD decrease <20%) after 14 days of treatment was found to be highly predictive for a poor final treatment outcome. METHODS/DESIGN: The EMC trial is a phase IV, multi-centre, multi-step, randomized, observer-blinded, actively controlled parallel-group clinical trial to investigate for the first time prospectively, whether non-improvers after 14 days of antidepressant treatment with an early medication change (EMC) are more likely to attain remission (HAMD-17