Central vs site outcome adjudication in the IRIS trial.

BACKGROUND: Central adjudication of outcome events is the standard in clinical trial research. We examine the benefit of central adjudication in the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke (IRIS) trial and show how the benefit is influenced by outcome definition and features of the adjudicated events. METHODS: IRIS tested pioglitazone for prevention of stroke and myocardial infarction in patients with a recent transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. We compared the hazard ratios for study outcomes classified by site and central adjudication. We repeated the analysis for an updated stroke definition. RESULTS: The hazard ratios for the primary outcome were identical (0.76) and statistically significant regardless of adjudicator. The hazard ratios for stroke alone were nearly identical with site and central adjudication, but only reached significance with site adjudication (HR, 0.80; p = 0.049 vs. HR, 0.82; p = 0.09). Using the updated stroke definition, all hazard ratios were lower than with the original IRIS definition and statistically significant regardless of adjudication method. Agreement was higher when stroke type was certain, subtype was large vessel or cardioembolic, signs or symptoms lasted > 24 h, imaging showed a stroke, and when NIHSS was ≥3. DISCUSSION: Central stroke adjudication caused the hazard ratio for a main secondary outcome in IRIS (stroke alone) to be higher and lose statistical significant compared with site review. The estimate of treatment effects were larger with the updated stroke definition. There may be benefit of central adjudication for events with specific features, such as shorter symptom duration or normal brain imaging.

Scoring System to Optimize Pioglitazone Therapy After Stroke Based on Fracture Risk.

Background and Purpose- The insulin sensitizer, pioglitazone, reduces cardiovascular risk in patients after an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack but increases bone fracture risk. We conducted a secondary analysis of the IRIS trial (Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke) to assess the effect of pretreatment risk for fracture on the net benefits of pioglitazone therapy. Methods- IRIS was a randomized placebo-controlled trial of pioglitazone that enrolled patients with insulin resistance but without diabetes mellitus within 180 days of an ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Participants were recruited at 179 international centers from February 2005 to January 2013 and followed for a median of 4.8 years. Fracture risk models were developed from patient characteristics at entry. Within fracture risk strata, we quantified the effects of pioglitazone compared with placebo by estimating the relative risks and absolute 5-year risk differences for fracture and stroke or myocardial infarction. Results- The fracture risk model included points for age, race-ethnicity, sex, body mass index, disability, and medications. The relative increment in fracture risk with pioglitazone was similar in the lower (

Pioglitazone after Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events despite current preventive therapies. The identification of insulin resistance as a risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction raised the possibility that pioglitazone, which improves insulin sensitivity, might benefit patients with cerebrovascular disease. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3876 patients who had had a recent ischemic stroke or TIA to receive either pioglitazone (target dose, 45 mg daily) or placebo. Eligible patients did not have diabetes but were found to have insulin resistance on the basis of a score of more than 3.0 on the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: By 4.8 years, a primary outcome had occurred in 175 of 1939 patients (9.0%) in the pioglitazone group and in 228 of 1937 (11.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the pioglitazone group, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.93; P=0.007). Diabetes developed in 73 patients (3.8%) and 149 patients (7.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.17; P=0.52). Pioglitazone was associated with a greater frequency of weight gain exceeding 4.5 kg than was placebo (52.2% vs. 33.7%, P<0.001), edema (35.6% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001), and bone fracture requiring surgery or hospitalization (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients without diabetes who had insulin resistance along with a recent history of ischemic stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke or myocardial infarction was lower among patients who received pioglitazone than among those who received placebo. Pioglitazone was also associated with a lower risk of diabetes but with higher risks of weight gain, edema, and fracture. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00091949.).

Effects of pioglitazone on cognitive function in patients with a recent ischaemic stroke or TIA: a report from the IRIS trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with cerebrovascular disease are at increased risk for cognitive dysfunction. Modification of vascular risk factors, including insulin resistance, could improve poststroke cognitive function. METHODS: In the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke (IRIS) trial, patients with a recent ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) were randomised to pioglitazone (target 45 mg daily) or placebo. All patients were insulin resistant based on a Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance score >3.0. For this preplanned analysis of cognitive function, we examined the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) score (maximum score, 100) during follow-up. Patients were tested at baseline and annually for up to 5 years. Longitudinal mixed model methods were used to compare changes in the 3MS over time. RESULTS: Of the 3876 IRIS participants, 3398 had a 3MS score at baseline and at least once during follow-up and were included in the analysis. Median 3MS score at baseline was 97 (IQR 93-99). The average overall least squared mean 3MS score increased by 0.27 in the pioglitazone group and by 0.29 in the placebo group (mean difference between treatment groups -0.02; 95% CI -0.33 to 0.28, p=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Among insulin-resistant patients with a recent ischaemic stroke or TIA, pioglitazone did not affect cognitive function, as measured by the 3MS, over 5 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00091949; Results.

Neuropsychiatric Symptoms and Caregiver Burden in Individuals With Alzheimer's Disease: The TEAM-AD VA Cooperative Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease (AD) and their association with caregiver burden. METHODS: Secondary analyses of baseline data from the Trial of Vitamin E and Memantine in Alzheimer's Disease (TEAM-AD) (N=613). Neuropsychiatric Inventory were used to measure severity of NPS and caregiver activity survey to measure caregiver burden. RESULTS: A total of 87% of patients displayed at least 1 NPS; 70% displayed clinically meaningful NPS. The most common symptoms were apathy (47%), irritability (44%), agitation (42%), and depression (40%). Those with moderate AD had more severe NPS than those with mild AD ( P = .03). Neuropsychiatric symptoms were significantly associated with caregiver time after adjusting for age, education, cognitive function, and comorbidity ( P-value < .0001) with every point increase in NPS associated with a 10-minute increase in caregiver time. CONCLUSION: Neuropsychiatric symptoms were prevalent in both mild and moderate AD, even in patients receiving treatment with an acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, and were more severe in moderate AD and associated with greater caregiver time.

Colonoscopy vs. Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM): Rationale for Study Design.

RATIONALE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is preventable through screening, with colonoscopy and fecal occult blood testing comprising the two most commonly used screening tests. Given the differences in complexity, risk, and cost, it is important to understand these tests' comparative effectiveness. STUDY DESIGN: The CONFIRM Study is a large, pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, parallel group trial to compare screening with colonoscopy vs. the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) in 50,000 average risk individuals. CONFIRM examines whether screening colonoscopy will be superior to a FIT-based screening program in the prevention of CRC mortality measured over 10 years. Eligible individuals 50-75 years of age and due for CRC screening are recruited from 46 Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. Participants are randomized to either colonoscopy or annual FIT. Results of colonoscopy are managed as per usual care and study participants are assessed for complications. Participants testing FIT positive are referred for colonoscopy. Participants are surveyed annually to determine if they have undergone colonoscopy or been diagnosed with CRC. The primary endpoint is CRC mortality. The secondary endpoints are (1) CRC incidence (2) complications of screening colonoscopy, and (3) the association between colonoscopists' characteristics and neoplasia detection, complications and post-colonoscopy CRC. CONFIRM leverages several key characteristics of the VA's integrated healthcare system, including a shared medical record with national databases, electronic CRC screening reminders, and a robust national research infrastructure with experience in conducting large-scale clinical trials. When completed, CONFIRM will be the largest intervention trial conducted within the VA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01239082).

Combined angiotensin inhibition for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: Combination therapy with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) decreases proteinuria; however, its safety and effect on the progression of kidney disease are uncertain. Methods We provided losartan (at a dose of 100 mg per day) to patients with type 2 diabetes, a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of at least 300, and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of 30.0 to 89.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area and then randomly assigned them to receive lisinopril (at a dose of 10 to 40 mg per day) or placebo. The primary end point was the first occurrence of a change in the estimated GFR (a decline of ≥ 30 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) if the initial estimated GFR was ≥ 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) or a decline of ≥ 50% if the initial estimated GFR was <60 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2)), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), or death. The secondary renal end point was the first occurrence of a decline in the estimated GFR or ESRD. Safety outcomes included mortality, hyperkalemia, and acute kidney injury. Results The study was stopped early owing to safety concerns. Among 1448 randomly assigned patients with a median follow-up of 2.2 years, there were 152 primary end-point events in the monotherapy group and 132 in the combination-therapy group (hazard ratio with combination therapy, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.12; P=0.30). A trend toward a benefit from combination therapy with respect to the secondary end point (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.05; P=0.10) decreased with time (P=0.02 for nonproportionality). There was no benefit with respect to mortality (hazard ratio for death, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.49; P=0.75) or cardiovascular events. Combination therapy increased the risk of hyperkalemia (6.3 events per 100 person-years, vs. 2.6 events per 100 person-years with monotherapy; P<0.001) and acute kidney injury (12.2 vs. 6.7 events per 100 person-years, P<0.001). Conclusions Combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor and an ARB was associated with an increased risk of adverse events among patients with diabetic nephropathy. (Funded by the Cooperative Studies Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development; VA NEPHRON-D ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00555217.).

Effects of folic acid supplementation on overall and site-specific cancer incidence during the randomised trials: meta-analyses of data on 50,000 individuals.

BACKGROUND: Some countries fortify flour with folic acid to prevent neural tube defects but others do not, partly because of concerns about possible cancer risks. We aimed to assess any effects on site-specific cancer rates in the randomised trials of folic acid supplementation, at doses higher than those from fortification. METHODS: In these meta-analyses, we sought all trials completed before 2011 that compared folic acid versus placebo, had scheduled treatment duration at least 1 year, included at least 500 participants, and recorded data on cancer incidence. We obtained individual participant datasets that included 49,621 participants in all 13 such trials (ten trials of folic acid for prevention of cardiovascular disease [n=46,969] and three trials in patients with colorectal adenoma [n=2652]). All these trials were evenly randomised. The main outcome was incident cancer (ignoring non-melanoma skin cancer) during the scheduled treatment period (among participants who were still free of cancer). We compared those allocated folic acid with those allocated placebo, and used log-rank analyses to calculate the cancer incidence rate ratio (RR). FINDINGS: During a weighted average scheduled treatment duration of 5·2 years, allocation to folic acid quadrupled plasma concentrations of folic acid (57·3 nmol/L for the folic acid groups vs 13·5 nmol/L for the placebo groups), but had no significant effect on overall cancer incidence (1904 cancers in the folic acid groups vs 1809 cancers in the placebo groups, RR 1·06, 95% CI 0·99­1·13, p=0·10). There was no trend towards greater effect with longer treatment. There was no significant heterogeneity between the results of the 13 individual trials (p=0·23), or between the two overall results in the cadiovascular prevention trials and the adenoma trials (p=0·13). Moreover, there was no significant effect of folic acid supplementation on the incidence of cancer of the large intestine, prostate, lung, breast, or any other specific site. INTERPRETATION: Folic acid supplementation does not substantially increase or decrease incidence of site-specific cancer during the first 5 years of treatment. Fortification of flour and other cereal products involves doses of folic acid that are, on average, an order of magnitude smaller than the doses used in these trials. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, Food Standards Agency.

Pioglitazone for secondary prevention after ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack: rationale and design of the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent vascular events remain a major source of morbidity and mortality after stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). The IRIS Trial is evaluating an approach to secondary prevention based on the established association between insulin resistance and increased risk for ischemic vascular events. Specifically, IRIS will test the effectiveness of pioglitazone, an insulin-sensitizing drug of the thiazolidinedione class, for reducing the risk for stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) among insulin resistant, nondiabetic patients with a recent ischemic stroke or TIA. DESIGN: Eligible patients for IRIS must have had insulin resistance defined by a Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance > 3.0 without meeting criteria for diabetes. Within 6 months of the index stroke or TIA, patients were randomly assigned to pioglitazone (titrated from 15 to 45 mg/d) or matching placebo and followed for up to 5 years. The primary outcome is time to stroke or MI. Secondary outcomes include time to stroke alone, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, cognitive decline, and all-cause mortality. Enrollment of 3,876 participants from 179 sites in 7 countries was completed in January 2013. Participant follow-up will continue until July 2015. SUMMARY: The IRIS Trial will determine whether treatment with pioglitazone improves cardiovascular outcomes of nondiabetic, insulin-resistant patients with stroke or TIA. Results are expected in early 2016.

Effect of vitamin E and memantine on functional decline in Alzheimer disease: the TEAM-AD VA cooperative randomized trial.

IMPORTANCE: Although vitamin E and memantine have been shown to have beneficial effects in moderately severe Alzheimer disease (AD), evidence is limited in mild to moderate AD. OBJECTIVE: To determine if vitamin E (alpha tocopherol), memantine, or both slow progression of mild to moderate AD in patients taking an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial involving 613 patients with mild to moderate AD initiated in August 2007 and concluded in September 2012 at 14 Veterans Affairs medical centers. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received either 2000 IU/d of alpha tocopherol (n = 152), 20 mg/d of memantine (n = 155), the combination (n = 154), or placebo (n = 152). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study/Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) Inventory score (range, 0-78). Secondary outcomes included cognitive, neuropsychiatric, functional, and caregiver measures. RESULTS: Data from 561 participants were analyzed (alpha tocopherol = 140, memantine = 142, combination = 139, placebo = 140), with 52 excluded because of a lack of any follow-up data. Over the mean (SD) follow-up of 2.27 (1.22) years, ADCS-ADL Inventory scores declined by 3.15 units (95% CI, 0.92 to 5.39; adjusted P = .03) less in the alpha tocopherol group compared with the placebo group. In the memantine group, these scores declined 1.98 units less (95% CI, -0.24 to 4.20; adjusted P = .40) than the placebo group's decline. This change in the alpha tocopherol group translates into a delay in clinical progression of 19% per year compared with placebo or a delay of approximately 6.2 months over the follow-up period. Caregiver time increased least in the alpha tocopherol group. All-cause mortality and safety analyses showed a difference only on the serious adverse event of "infections or infestations," with greater frequencies in the memantine (31 events in 23 participants) and combination groups (44 events in 31 participants) compared with placebo (13 events in 11 participants). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with mild to moderate AD, 2000 IU/d of alpha tocopherol compared with placebo resulted in slower functional decline. There were no significant differences in the groups receiving memantine alone or memantine plus alpha tocopherol. These findings suggest benefit of alpha tocopherol in mild to moderate AD by slowing functional decline and decreasing caregiver burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00235716.

Vitamin E and memantine in Alzheimer's disease: clinical trial methods and baseline data.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been associated with both oxidative stress and excessive glutamate activity. A clinical trial was designed to compare the effectiveness of (i) alpha-tocopherol, a vitamin E antioxidant; (ii) memantine (Namenda), an N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist; (iii) their combination; and (iv) placebo in delaying clinical progression in AD. METHODS: The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program initiated a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in August 2007, with enrollment through March 2012 and follow-up continuing through September 2012. Participants with mild-to-moderate AD who were taking an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor were assigned randomly to 2000 IU/day of alpha-tocopherol, 20 mg/day memantine, 2000 IU/day alpha-tocopherol plus 20 mg/day memantine, or placebo. The primary outcome for the study is the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study/Activities of Daily Living Inventory. Secondary outcome measures include the Mini-Mental State Examination; the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, cognitive portion; the Dependence Scale; the Neuropsychiatric Inventory; and the Caregiver Activity Survey. Patient follow-up ranged from 6 months to 4 years. RESULTS: A total of 613 participants were randomized. The majority of the patients were male (97%) and white (86%), with a mean age of 79 years. The mean Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study/Activities of Daily Living Inventory score at entry was 57 and the mean Mini-Mental State Examination score at entry was 21. CONCLUSION: This large multicenter trial will address the unanswered question of the long-term safety and effectiveness of alpha-tocopherol, memantine, and their combination in patients with mild-to-moderate AD taking an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. The results are expected in early 2013.

Efficacy and safety of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in the elderly-The I-70 Study: A randomized clinical trial.

Background: There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in the elderly. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation in patients 70 years and older. Methods: Patients (n = 167) aged 70 years or older and eligible for ICD implantation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either optimal medical therapy (OMT) (n = 85) or OMT plus ICD (n = 82). Results: Of the 167 participants (mean age 76.4 years; 165 men), 144 completed the study protocol according to their assigned treatment. Average participant follow-up was 31.5 months. Mortality was similar between the 2 groups: 27 deaths in OMT vs 26 death in ICD (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.53-1.57), but there was a trend favoring the ICD over the first 36 months of follow-up. Rates of sudden death (7 vs 5; P = .81) and all-cause hospitalization (2.65 events per participant in OMT vs 3.09 in ICD; P = .31) were not statistically significantly different. Eleven participants randomized to ICD received appropriate therapy. Five participants received an inappropriate therapy that included at least 1 ICD shock. Conclusion: The study did not recruit to target sample size, and accumulated data did not show benefit of ICD therapy in patients 70 years or older. Future studies similar in design might be feasible but will need to contend with patient treatment preference given the large number of patients who do not want an ICD implanted. Further research is needed to determine whether the ICD is effective in prolonging life among elderly device candidates.

Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Effective rehabilitative therapies are needed for patients with long-term deficits after stroke. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving 127 patients with moderate-to-severe upper-limb impairment 6 months or more after a stroke, we randomly assigned 49 patients to receive intensive robot-assisted therapy, 50 to receive intensive comparison therapy, and 28 to receive usual care. Therapy consisted of 36 1-hour sessions over a period of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in motor function, as measured on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery after Stroke, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were scores on the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. Secondary analyses assessed the treatment effect at 36 weeks. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the mean Fugl-Meyer score for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy was better than that for patients receiving usual care (difference, 2.17 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.23 to 4.58) and worse than that for patients receiving intensive comparison therapy (difference, -0.14 points; 95% CI, -2.94 to 2.65), but the differences were not significant. The results on the Stroke Impact Scale were significantly better for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy than for those receiving usual care (difference, 7.64 points; 95% CI, 2.03 to 13.24). No other treatment comparisons were significant at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses showed that at 36 weeks, robot-assisted therapy significantly improved the Fugl-Meyer score (difference, 2.88 points; 95% CI, 0.57 to 5.18) and the time on the Wolf Motor Function Test (difference, -8.10 seconds; 95% CI, -13.61 to -2.60) as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with long-term upper-limb deficits after stroke, robot-assisted therapy did not significantly improve motor function at 12 weeks, as compared with usual care or intensive therapy. In secondary analyses, robot-assisted therapy improved outcomes over 36 weeks as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00372411.)

Medication adherence assessment in a clinical trial with centralized follow-up and direct-to-patient drug shipments.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of adherence to study medications is a common challenge in clinical research. Counting unused study medication is the predominant method by which adherence is assessed in outpatient clinical trials but it has limitations that include questionable validity and burdens on research personnel. PURPOSE: To compare capsule counts, patient questionnaire responses, and plasma drug levels as methods of determining adherence in a clinical trial that had 2056 participants and used centralized drug distribution and patient follow-up. METHODS: Capsule counts from study medication bottles returned by participants and responses to questions regarding adherence during quarterly telephone interviews were averaged and compared. Both measures were compared to plasma drug levels obtained at the 3-month study visit of patients in the treatment group. Counts and questionnaire responses were converted to adherence rates (doses taken divided by days elapsed) and were categorized by stringent (≥85.7%) and liberal (≥71.4%) definitions. We calculated the prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa to assess agreement between the two measures. RESULTS: Using a pre-paid mailer, participants returned 76.0% of study medication bottles to the central pharmacy. Both capsule counts and questionnaire responses were available for 65.8% of participants and were used to assess adherence. Capsule counts identified more patients who were under-adherent (18.8% by the stringent definition and 7.5% by the liberal definition) than self-reports did (10.4% by the stringent definition and 2.1% by the liberal definition). The prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa was 0.58 (stringent) and 0.83 (liberal), indicating fair and very good agreement, respectively. Both measures were also in agreement with plasma drug levels determined at the 3-month visit (capsule counts: p = 0.005 for the stringent and p = 0.003 for the liberal definition; questionnaire: p = 0.002 for both adherence definitions). LIMITATIONS: Inconsistent bottle returns and incomplete notations of medication start and stop dates resulted in missing data but exploratory missing data analyses showed no reason to believe that the missing data resulted in systematic bias. CONCLUSIONS: Depending upon the definition of adherence, there was fair to very good agreement between questionnaire results and capsule counts among returned study bottles, confirmed by plasma drug levels. We conclude that a self-report of medication adherence is potentially comparable to capsule counts as a method of assessing adherence in a clinical trial, if a relatively low adherence threshold is acceptable, but adherence should be confirmed by other measures if a high adherence threshold is required.

Baseline Features and Reasons for Nonparticipation in the Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) Study, a Colorectal Cancer Screening Trial.

Importance: The Colonoscopy Versus Fecal Immunochemical Test in Reducing Mortality From Colorectal Cancer (CONFIRM) randomized clinical trial sought to recruit 50 000 adults into a study comparing colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality outcomes after randomization to either an annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy. Objective: To (1) describe study participant characteristics and (2) examine who declined participation because of a preference for colonoscopy or stool testing (ie, fecal occult blood test [FOBT]/FIT) and assess that preference's association with geographic and temporal factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study within CONFIRM, which completed enrollment through 46 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between May 22, 2012, and December 1, 2017, with follow-up planned through 2028, comprised veterans aged 50 to 75 years with an average CRC risk and due for screening. Data were analyzed between March 7 and December 5, 2022. Exposure: Case report forms were used to capture enrolled participant data and reasons for declining participation among otherwise eligible individuals. Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the cohort overall and by intervention. Among individuals declining participation, logistic regression was used to compare preference for FOBT/FIT or colonoscopy by recruitment region and year. Results: A total of 50 126 participants were recruited (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [6.9] years; 46 618 [93.0%] male and 3508 [7.0%] female). The cohort was racially and ethnically diverse, with 748 (1.5%) identifying as Asian, 12 021 (24.0%) as Black, 415 (0.8%) as Native American or Alaska Native, 34 629 (69.1%) as White, and 1877 (3.7%) as other race, including multiracial; and 5734 (11.4%) as having Hispanic ethnicity. Of the 11 109 eligible individuals who declined participation (18.0%), 4824 (43.4%) declined due to a stated preference for a specific screening test, with FOBT/FIT being the most preferred method (2820 [58.5%]) vs colonoscopy (1958 [40.6%]; P < .001) or other screening tests (46 [1.0%] P < .001). Preference for FOBT/FIT was strongest in the West (963 of 1472 [65.4%]) and modest elsewhere, ranging from 199 of 371 (53.6%) in the Northeast to 884 of 1543 (57.3%) in the Midwest (P = .001). Adjusting for region, the preference for FOBT/FIT increased by 19% per recruitment year (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.25). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional analysis of veterans choosing nonenrollment in the CONFIRM study, those who declined participation more often preferred FOBT or FIT over colonoscopy. This preference increased over time and was strongest in the western US and may provide insight into trends in CRC screening preferences.

An economic analysis of robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke is a leading cause of disability. Rehabilitation robotics have been developed to aid in recovery after a stroke. This study determined the additional cost of robot-assisted therapy and tested its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We estimated the intervention costs and tracked participants' healthcare costs. We collected quality of life using the Stroke Impact Scale and the Health Utilities Index. We analyzed the cost data at 36 weeks postrandomization using multivariate regression models controlling for site, presence of a prior stroke, and Veterans Affairs costs in the year before randomization. RESULTS: A total of 127 participants were randomized to usual care plus robot therapy (n=49), usual care plus intensive comparison therapy (n=50), or usual care alone (n=28). The average cost of delivering robot therapy and intensive comparison therapy was $5152 and $7382, respectively (P<0.001), and both were significantly more expensive than usual care alone (no additional intervention costs). At 36 weeks postrandomization, the total costs were comparable for the 3 groups ($17 831 for robot therapy, $19 746 for intensive comparison therapy, and $19 098 for usual care). Changes in quality of life were modest and not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: The added cost of delivering robot or intensive comparison therapy was recuperated by lower healthcare use costs compared with those in the usual care group. However, uncertainty remains about the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted rehabilitation compared with traditional rehabilitation. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00372411.

National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Family History and Improving Health.

National Institutes of Health consensus and state-of-the science statements are prepared by independent panels of health professionals and public representatives on the basis of 1) the results of a systematic literature review prepared under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); 2) presentations by investigators working in areas relevant to the conference questions during a 2-day public session; 3) questions and statements from conference attendees during open discussion periods that are part of the public session; and 4) closed deliberations by the panel during the remainder of the second day and morning of the third. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the National Institutes of Health or the U.S. government. The statement reflects the panel's assessment of medical knowledge available at the time the statement was written. Thus, it provides a "snapshot in time" of the state of knowledge on the conference topic. When reading the statement, keep in mind that new knowledge is inevitably accumulating through medical research.

Effect of the MTHFR C677T and A1298C polymorphisms on survival in patients with advanced CKD and ESRD: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Abnormalities in the gene regulating methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) are associated with increased homocysteine levels and increased mortality in normal and chronic kidney disease (CKD) populations. STUDY DESIGN: Gene association study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: This was a substudy of 677 patients from 21 Veterans Affairs medical centers participating in a randomized clinical trial (Homocysteinemia in Kidney and End-Stage Renal Disease [HOST]) of the effect on all-cause mortality of vitamin-induced lowering of plasma homocysteine levels. Of 677 patients, 213 (31%) were treated by using dialysis (end-stage renal disease [ESRD]) and 464 (69%) had a Cockcroft-Gault estimated creatinine clearance less than 30 mL/min (advanced CKD). PREDICTOR: Polymorphisms C677T (rs1801133) and A1298C (rs1801131) of the MTHFR gene. OUTCOMES: Unadjusted and adjusted all-cause mortality. MEASUREMENTS: DNA was extracted from blood samples and amplified by means of polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The adjusted hazard ratio in a recessive model of the relationship between the C677T polymorphism and all-cause mortality in all patients was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 2.16; P = 0.05). In patients with ESRD with the mutant TT genotype, the adjusted hazard ratio for mortality in all patients was 2.27 (95% confidence interval, 1.07 to 4.84; P = 0.03); patients with advanced CKD showed a similar, although not significant, trend. The risk of myocardial infarction (P = 0.05) and composite risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, lower-extremity amputation, and mortality (P = 0.02) were greater in patients with ESRD with the mutant T allele at nucleotide 677. The overall relationship between the A1298C polymorphism and mortality was not significant (P = 0.6). LIMITATIONS: Participants were 98% men; DNA samples were not obtained at enrollment in HOST; linkage disequilibrium with another causal polymorphism is a potential confounding factor; and power was reduced by the limited number of participants. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide additional support for the hypothesis that the mutant TT genotype at nucleotide 677 of the gene regulating MTHFR activity may increase the mortality risk in patients with ESRD.

Homocysteine lowering and cognition in CKD: the Veterans Affairs homocysteine study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have high plasma total homocysteine (tHcy) levels, which may be a risk factor for cognitive impairment. Whether treatment with high-dose B vitamins to decrease high tHcy levels improves cognition in persons with kidney disease is unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: A substudy of 659 patients (mean age, 67.3 +/- 11.7 years) who participated in a randomized double-blind clinical trial 5 years in duration conducted in 36 US Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers of the effect on all-cause mortality of vitamin-induced lowering of plasma tHcy level. 236 (35.8%) were treated by using dialysis (ESRD) and 423 (64.2%) had a Cockcroft-Gault estimated creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min or less (advanced CKD). All had high tHcy levels (> or =15 micromol/L) at baseline. Cognitive assessments began during the follow-up period of the main trial 3 years after treatment began; participants subsequently were retested 1 year later to assess cognitive change. INTERVENTION: Daily high-dose B vitamin capsule (40 mg of folic acid, 100 mg of vitamin B(6), and 2 mg of vitamin B(12)) or placebo. OUTCOMES: Cognitive function at initial assessment and 1 year later. MEASUREMENTS: Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status-modified, supplemented with attention, working memory, and executive function tests. RESULTS: Initial cognitive function was impaired in approximately 19% of patients regardless of treatment assignment (vitamin or placebo) or kidney disease status (advanced CKD or ESRD). Treatment decreased tHcy levels by 26.7%. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses showed that treatment did not improve initial cognitive outcomes or affect subsequent cognitive status 1 year later. LIMITATIONS: Cognitive assessments began after treatment was initiated; cognitive assessment was limited. CONCLUSION: Treatment with high daily doses of B vitamins, which decreased tHcy levels, did not affect cognitive outcomes in patients with advanced CKD and ESRD.

Multicenter randomized trial of robot-assisted rehabilitation for chronic stroke: methods and entry characteristics for VA ROBOTICS.

BACKGROUND: Chronic upper extremity impairment due to stroke has significant medical, psychosocial, and financial consequences, but few studies have examined the effectiveness of rehabilitation therapy during the chronic stroke period. OBJECTIVE: . To test the safety and efficacy of the MIT-Manus robotic device for chronic upper extremity impairment following stroke. METHODS: . The VA Cooperative Studies Program initiated a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in November 2006 (VA ROBOTICS). Participants with upper extremity impairment >/=6 months poststroke were randomized to robot-assisted therapy (RT), intensive comparison therapy (ICT), or usual care (UC). RT and ICT consisted of three 1-hour treatment sessions per week for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was change in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity motor function score at 12 weeks relative to baseline. Secondary outcomes included the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. RESULTS: . A total of 127 participants were randomized: 49 to RT, 50 to ICT, and 28 to UC. The majority of participants were male (96%), with a mean age of 65 years. The primary stroke type was ischemic (85%), and 58% of strokes occurred in the anterior circulation. Twenty percent of the participants reported a stroke in addition to their index stroke. The average time from the index stroke to enrollment was 56 months (range, 6 months to 24 years). The mean Fugl-Meyer score at entry was 18.9. CONCLUSIONS: . VA ROBOTICS demonstrates the feasibility of conducting multicenter clinical trials to rigorously test new rehabilitative devices before their introduction to clinical practice. The results are expected in early 2010.