<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_397"
                     title="AAPM: Nerve Growth Factor Antibody  May Reduce Pain (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/AAPM/tb/18300?impressionId=1265804972571"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;SAN ANTONIO  --  A humanized monoclonal antibody against nerve growth factor provided relief in three chronic pain syndromes, according to a summary of small studies reported as an abstract here.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Treatment with tanezumab led to statistically or clinically significant reductions in pain for patients with osteoarthritis, chronic lower back pain, and interstitial cystitis. The most common adverse events were transient abnormal peripheral sensations, which generally occurred only after the first infusion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Patients with these three different pain syndromes all had significant improvement when treated with tanezumab,&quot; Leslie Tive, PhD, of Pfizer, said in an interview at the American Academy of Pain Medicine meeting. &quot;The pain relief was sustained over time, and patient acceptance was good.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Nerve growth factor is increased in many types of chronic pain and therefore represents an attractive target for therapy,&quot; she added. &quot;Tanezumab is being evaluated in some of these other conditions in ongoing studies.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A small phase I study showed that the humanized monoclonal antibody resulted in significant pain improvement in patients with osteoarthritis (&lt;em&gt;Arthritis Rheum&lt;/em&gt; 2005; 52: S461). Tive presented data from a phase II trial involving 400 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. They were randomized to placebo or to one of five tanezumab doses, administered on day one and day 56.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All five doses of tanezumab resulted in significant reductions (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05) versus placebo after one week and were sustained through 16 weeks. As assessed by a visual analog scale, the mean change in pain on walking from baseline to week 16 ranged from 30 to 45 points (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001), a two- to threefold difference compared with placebo.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The trial in chronic low back pain involved 217 adults with Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders category 1 or 2 pain for at least three months. The primary location of the pain was between the 12th thoracic vertebra and the lower gluteal folds.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eligibility criteria included a score of at least 4 on an 11-point pain scale on at least four occasions in the five days before randomization, as indicated by entries in an electronic pain diary.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to a single infusion of tanezumab, to oral naproxen, or to placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in mean Lower Back Pain Index score from baseline to six weeks, averaged over the last seven days.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Beginning at week one and continuing through week six, patients who were randomized to either dose of tanezumab had significantly greater improvement in pain than those who took the placebo (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05 to &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001), and compared with the naproxen group beginning at week two (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05 to &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The interstitial cystitis study included 64 men and women who had a score &amp;#8805;13 on Pelvic Pain Symptom/Frequency questionnaire, &amp;#8805;7 score on the O&apos;Leary-Sant Interstitial Cystitis index, and micturition frequency &amp;#8805;8 times a day, as recorded in an electronic diary for at least five consecutive days prior to randomization.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized to intravenous tanezumab or matching placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to six weeks in the 11-point pain scale. A difference of at least one point from placebo was considered clinically significant. Statistical significance was not evaluated.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The mean difference between tanezumab and placebo was -0.7 at week two, increasing to -1.1 at week four and -1.4 at week six. The advantage versus placebo was maintained at week 10 (-0.9) and week 16 (-0.5).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adverse events were evaluated for all patients combined in the three studies. Adverse events were reported by 66.3% of tanezumab patients, 61.4% of naproxen patients, and 59.3% of placebo patients. Serious and severe adverse events occurred in 1.6% to 3.4% of patients and 4.8% to 5.7%, respectively.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Tive said 14.4% of tanezumab patients reported abnormal peripheral sensations, the most common being paresthesia (7.1%), hyperesthesia (4.1%), and hypoesthesia (3.9%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The studies included in the summary were funded by Pfizer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Investigators included several Pfizer employees.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_467"
                     title="FDA Unveils New Safety Plan for Medical Imaging"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Radiology/DiagnosticRadiology/tb/18398?impressionId=1265804972571"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON  --  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it wants to issue new safety requirements for manufacturers of computed tomography (CT) and fluoroscopic devices to reduce unnecessary radiation from medical imaging.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The FDA&apos;s plan focuses on three procedures with high radiation doses: CT, nuclear medicine studies, and fluoroscopy. These are the greatest contributors to total radiation exposure within the U.S. population, the FDA said. That&apos;s because they require much higher radiation doses than other radiographic procedures, such as standard X-rays, dental X-rays, and mammography.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The amount of radiation Americans are exposed to from medical imaging has dramatically increased over the past 20 years,&quot; Jeffrey Shuren, MD, director of the FDA&apos;s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in a prepared statement. &quot;The goal of FDA&apos;s initiative is to support the benefits associated with medical imaging while minimizing the risks.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While the three procedures have led to early diagnosis of disease, they expose patients to ionizing radiation that may increase lifetime cancer risk  --  although there is debate within the medical community about the extent of the danger.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Radiologist Joseph Schoepf, MD, director of Cardiovascular Imaging at the Medical University of South Carolina, lauded the FDA&apos;s initiative and said it would restore the public&apos;s trust in imaging.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is important to note, however, that an increase in cancer mortality [from radiation] has not been observed,&quot; he added. &quot;On the contrary, cancer mortality has dramatically decreased over the past decades, in step with increased utilization of medical imaging.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;Archives of Internal Medicine &lt;/em&gt;recently published results from two studies indicating that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Radiology/DiagnosticRadiology/17530&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Radiology/DiagnosticRadiology/17530&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; title=&quot;CT&amp;#8200;Scans&amp;#8200;May&amp;#8200;Deliver&amp;#8200;Higher-than-Expected&amp;#8200;Radiation&amp;#8200;Doses&quot;&gt;CT scans deliver much higher doses of radiation &lt;/a&gt;than previously thought. The FDA has noted that a patient would have to get 400 standard chest X-rays to be exposed to the same level of radiation as just one CT abdomen scan.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an accompanying editorial, the journal&apos;s editor, Rita Redberg, MD, wrote that the studies &quot;make us question if we have gotten carried away in our enthusiasm&quot; for CT.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It&apos;s becoming clear, she said, that the large doses of radiation from CT scans will lead to additional cancers, which must be taken into account when physicians consider CT for their patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By working with healthcare providers and other federal agencies, the FDA says it hopes to promote safer use of medical imaging and increase patient awareness of their radiation exposure. Part of that involves pushing providers to justify their radiation procedures and optimize the radiation dose in each one.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;Schoepf, who serves on several American College of Radiology committees that discuss the proper used of various imaging procedures, approved of the FDA&apos;s goal but cautioned against restrictions that would hinder clinicians.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;There is indeed a need for enhanced transparency, better patient education, more dialogue between patients and their healthcare providers, and increased involvement of the patient in the decision process leading up to an imaging study,&quot; Schoepf said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;&quot;What is often forgotten in this discussion is that serious injury or death, resulting from missing a potentially life-threatening diagnosis if no imaging is performed, is a much greater, more imminent, and very real risk.&quot;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In its statement, the FDA said it wants to boost efforts to develop at least one national registry of radiation doses that will capture information from a variety of imaging studies that can be used to establish benchmarks for healthcare facilities to use with patients.&lt;/p&gt;


 &lt;p&gt;Donald Frush, MD, a radiologist at Duke Medical Center and expert in CT radiation doses in children, said that radiation doses for CT examination vary widely, depending on the size of the patient and the body area scanned, among other things.&lt;/p&gt;
    &lt;p&gt;&quot;However, sometimes this variation is not necessary, and the dose may be excessive,&quot; Frush said.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The ACR launched a similar registry about a year ago, according to spokesman Shawn Farley. The database is intended as a guide so a radiologist can quickly see how levels of radiation delivered in other practices and hospitals compare to what he or she is delivering.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Now that the FDA has come out in favor of doing that, we&apos;re hoping that will put a little more weight behind the process and make more facilities want to take part in this,&quot; Farley told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;


 &lt;p&gt;Schoepf noted that European governments already require a permanent record of radiation exposure for each patient.&lt;/p&gt;
    &lt;p&gt;As a result, manufacturers of radiation equipment, most of whom sell their products in Europe, already have that capability, he said. So it shouldn&apos;t be difficult to implement the same standard in the U.S.&lt;/p&gt;
    &lt;p&gt;&quot;Radiation exposure should be no secret,&quot; Schoepf said.&lt;/p&gt;


&lt;p&gt;The FDA will hold a public meeting March 30 and 31 to hear comments on what types of safety requirements to establish for manufacturers of CT and fluoroscopic devices. Requirements might include: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;That the radiation device display, record, and report equipment settings and radiation dose&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Alerting users when the dose exceeds the optimal dose for most patients&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Increased training for users&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Ability to capture and transmit radiation dose information to a patient&apos;s electronic medical record in addition to national dose registries &lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_466"
                     title="Surgery Trumps Lifestyle Change for Teen Weight Loss (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Obesity/tb/18397?impressionId=1265804972571"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Gastric banding resulted in significantly greater weight loss in obese teens than an intensive lifestyle modification program, a randomized trial showed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the two-year study, 84% of patients in the surgery group lost at least half of their excess weight, compared with 12% who underwent the lifestyle intervention (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001), according to Paul O&apos;Brien, MD, of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;None of the teens who had surgery had metabolic syndrome at the end of follow-up, compared with 22% in the control group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.025), the researchers reported in the Feb. 10 issue of the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Medical Association&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although the improvements were substantial, O&apos;Brien and his colleagues stressed that &quot;the gastric banding approach to weight loss is not a quick fix.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;For optimal effectiveness,&quot; they wrote, &quot;it requires long-term supportive follow-up by trained health professionals.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that the study demonstrates that lifestyle interventions can be effective for some teens and should remain the first option.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Surgeons contacted for comment on the study unanimously touted the results as evidence that bariatric surgery can be a safe and effective means of weight loss for obese adolescents, a topic that remains controversial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;J. Christopher Eagon, MD, a bariatric surgeon at Washington University in St. Louis, noted in an e-mail that the significance of the study lies in the fact that participants were randomized between surgery and medical management of weight.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This helps to eliminate biases that may have been present in other studies of the effectiveness of bariatric surgery and should make the case for the benefits of surgery more compelling,&quot; Eagon wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There are more than five million obese adolescents in the U.S., according to O&apos;Brien and his colleagues, and obesity-related complications, once rare in pediatric populations, are becoming more common.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Because of the generally disappointing results of lifestyle programs aimed at improving diet, increasing exercise, and modifying unhealthy behaviors, bariatric surgery, widely used in adults, has been explored as a strategy for reducing weight in these patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But no randomized trials of bariatric surgery had been conducted in adolescents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So O&apos;Brien&apos;s group randomized 50 obese teens ages 14 to 18 (mean 16.5) to laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding or an intensive, supervised lifestyle modification program.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The participants all had a body mass index of at least 35 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; and had obesity-related complications, such as hypertension, metabolic syndrome, asthma, back pain, physical limitations, and psychosocial difficulties.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All had previously failed to lose weight through lifestyle changes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Before the study began, prospective participants attended a two-month program teaching them about healthy eating and the importance of physical activity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those randomized to the lifestyle intervention were on a diet of 800 to 2,000 calories a day, and were instructed to increase activity and decrease sedentary behavior at regular visits with a physician, dietitian, exercise coordinator, nurse, and sports medicine physician. The program included six weeks with a personal trainer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Teens in the surgery group were given instructions on correct eating and exercising at regular visits.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Through two years, all but one of the teens in the surgery group completed the study; 18 of 25 in the lifestyle group completed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The mean weight loss was significantly greater in the surgery group (76.3 pounds versus 6.6), which equated to a significantly greater percentage of excess weight lost (78.8% versus 13.2%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The mean decrease in BMI was 12.7 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in the surgery group and 1.3 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in the lifestyle modification group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All differences were significant at &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Insulin sensitivity improved in both groups, but to a larger extent in the surgery group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Quality of life was also improved in the surgery group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, adverse events occurred at similar rates in the surgery (48%) and lifestyle modification (44%) groups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There were no perioperative adverse events in the surgery group, but seven patients required revisional procedures during follow-up, for proximal pouch dilatation or tubing injury.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers said eating small meals slowly is an important way to avoid these problems.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an accompanying editorial, Edward Livingston, MD, a surgeon at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, said the high rate of revisional procedures is significant because the study authors &quot;are among the most experienced group in the world with these operations, suggesting that these complication rates will probably be higher in actual community practice.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Added Jonathan Schoen, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the University of Colorado Hospital in Denver, in an e-mail: &quot;One thing to keep in mind is that the results they get in Australia with the band are the best in the world and are not uniformly reproducible.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In addition to the uncertain generalizability to other settings, the researchers said the study may be limited by its length, which may not be long enough to assess outcomes from the surgery over time.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by a grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council. The laparoscopic adjustable gastric bands used in the study were provided by the manufacturer, Allergan. The Center for Obesity Research and Education receives an unrestricted research support grant from Allergan.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;O&apos;Brien did not make any financial disclosures. One of his co-authors reported having relationships with Allergan, Bariatric Advantage, Scientific Intake, SP Health Co., Optifast, Abbott Australasia, Eli Lilly Australia, Merck Sharp &amp;amp; Dohme Australia, Nestle Australia, and Roche Products Australia.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Livingston did not make any financial disclosures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_465"
                     title="Genetic Pathways Play Role in NSCLC Survival (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/LungCancer/tb/18396?impressionId=1265804972571"
                     
      Researchers say they&apos;ve found genetic characteristics associated with age and sex differences observed in recurrence-free survival among non-small cell lung cancer patients.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Older patients at higher risk for recurrence had increased activation of wound-healing and invasiveness pathways, while high-risk women had increased activation of invasiveness and &lt;em&gt;STAT3&lt;/em&gt; pathways, Anil Potti, MD, of Duke University, and colleagues reported in the Feb. 10 issue of the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Medical Association&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;High-risk men had increased activation of the &lt;em&gt;STAT3&lt;/em&gt;, tumor necrosis factor, &lt;em&gt;EGFR&lt;/em&gt;, and wound-healing pathways, Potti the researchers found.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;&quot;This analysis represents one of the first large-scale attempts to comprehensively characterize the biology of early-stage [non-small cell lung cancer] at a molecular pathway level and demonstrates a clear distinction in gene expression profiles within relevant age and sex categories,&quot; they wrote.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There&apos;s lots of evidence that clinical and pathologic factors are clinically relevant, the researchers noted, but little is known about the underlying biological differences in lung tumor gene expression among patients with different characteristics, including age and gender.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So Potti and colleagues conducted a retrospective analysis of 787 patients with predominantly early stage non-small cell lung cancer at Duke University from July 2008 to June 2009.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They stratified their results by risk of recurrence, age, and gender.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They found that high-risk patients under 70 had greater activation of the &lt;em&gt;Src&lt;/em&gt; and tumor necrosis factor pathways than low-risk patients (25% versus 6%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001; and 76% versus 42%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001, respectively).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In patients 70 and older, those at high risk for recurrence had greater activation of the wound-healing and invasiveness pathways than low-risk patients (40% versus 24%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.02; and 64% versus 20%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001, respectively).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Although this is a novel finding, biologically this is not entirely unexpected,&quot; the researchers wrote in reference to the data in older patients. &quot;The invasiveness and wound-healing gene signatures likely identify tumors at high risk of metastasis, along with the wound-healing signature identifying activation of angiogenesis pathways.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their findings also corroborated previous evidence that biology and clinical course of the disease are sex-specific, as the analysis found that women had significantly better progression-free survival than men (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.008).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In general, men had a higher probability of activation of these pathways than women:&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;Chromosomal instability (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.001)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Epigenetic stem cell (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.03)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Invasiveness (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.005)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;Myc&lt;/em&gt; (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.02)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Wound-healing (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.004)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Women, meanwhile, had a higher probability of activation of the &lt;em&gt;E2F1&lt;/em&gt; pathway (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.04).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When stratified by risk, high-risk women had increased activation of the invasiveness and &lt;em&gt;STAT3&lt;/em&gt; pathways compared with low-risk women (99% versus 2%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001; and 72% versus 35%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001, respectively).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Compared with low-risk men, those with high risk had increased activation of the following pathways:&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;STAT3&lt;/em&gt; (87% versus 18%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Tumor necrosis factor (90% versus 46%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001) &lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;&lt;em&gt;EGFR&lt;/em&gt; (13% versus 2%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Wound-healing pathways (50% versus 22%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Multivariate analyses confirmed pathway-based subphenotypes in women (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.03, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001) and in patients under 70 (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.71, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.003).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;While differences in clinical outcomes and the biology of [non-small cell lung cancer] based on age and sex have been previously noted, we were able to describe the molecular networks contributing to these differences,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They said the findings are &quot;apt for therapeutic interventions when planning clinical trials with drugs that target specific pathway-related abnormalities or tumor biology.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;With genomic assays now being increasingly practical and clinically applicable, with turnaround times of five to seven days,&quot; they concluded, &quot;we believe our findings, while hypothesis generating and needing further validation, represent a step forward in defining pathway-driven cohorts of [non-small cell lung cancer] that likely explain the age-and sex-specific differences.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by grants from the Emilene Brown Cancer Research Fund, the Harold and Linda Chapman Lung Cancer Fund, the Jimmy V Foundation, the American Cancer Society, and the National Cancer Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_464"
                     title="COLUMN: &apos;Meaningful Use&apos; -- You Can Do This!"
                     score="0.01"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Columns/18394?impressionId=1265804972571"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Certified EHR technology used in a meaningful way is one piece of a broader Health Information Technology (HIT in techie jargon) infrastructure intended to reform the healthcare system and improve healthcare quality, efficiency, and patient safety.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under the HITECH Act, the Medicare EHR incentive programs provide payments up to $44,000 over five years to eligible professionals who are &quot;meaningful&quot; users of certified electronic health records.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Medicaid EHR program provides even bigger incentives  --  up to $63,750 over five years to practices with a 30% or higher Medicaid population for efforts to adopt, implement, or upgrade certified EHR technology or for meaningful use in the first year and up to another five years. (Pediatricians need only a 20% Medicaid patient volume to qualify.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The stimulus dollars have gotten our attention, especially in light of the eventual cuts to reimbursement scheduled to take effect in 2015 and beyond for those who don&apos;t use EHR technology.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On Jan. 13, 2010 two rules were published defining the certification criteria and the criteria for meaningful use of electronic health records. (The rules are available at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html&lt;/a&gt;.) A forthcoming rule will establish an EHR certification program. With the EHR vendors offering stimulus guarantees, the EHR certification program seems less of a concern.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CMS proposed three stages of &quot;meaningful use&quot; criteria over the initial years of the program given the ongoing advancement in EHR technology and standards, as well as changes in quality measurement and other healthcare-related reporting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The focus in Meaningful Use Stage 1 is on the capture of health information in coded format and: 
&lt;ul&gt; 
&lt;li&gt;The use of it to track key clinical conditions&lt;/li&gt; 
&lt;li&gt;The communication of coded health information for care coordination purposes&lt;/li&gt; 
&lt;li&gt;Initial reporting of clinical quality measures and public health information&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The good news is that all results for all measures to be reported to CMS (for Medicare) or to the states (for Medicaid) will be done through attestation for the year 2011. In 2012, we&apos;ll be running all reports through certified EHR technology.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Attestation can be achieved &quot;through a secure mechanism, such as through claims-based reporting or an online portal.&quot; But providers will still be required to &quot;use certified EHR technology to capture the data elements and calculate the results for the applicable clinical quality measures,&quot; the CMS rule said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Practices that have already implemented an EHR must ensure that their software is appropriately certified and that their clinicians are fulfilling all of the meaningful-use requirements to qualify for the incentives.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So, you have just about two years to implement, iterate, rehearse, pilot, and test your own implementation against the meaningful use criteria.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The initial criteria are presented in health outcomes policy priorities with associated care goals. Here are just six of the 25 criteria for Stage 1 Meaningful Use:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Improving quality, safety, efficiency, and reducing health disparities.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Provide access to comprehensive patient health data for patient&apos;s healthcare team&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Use evidence-based order sets and CPOE&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Apply clinical decision support at the point of care&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Generate lists of patients who need care and use them to reach out to patients&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Report information for quality improvement and public reporting&lt;br&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Engage patients and families in their healthcare.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Provide patients and families with timely access to data, knowledge, and tools to make informed decisions and to manage their health.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Improve care coordination.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Exchange meaningful clinical information among professional healthcare team.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Improve care coordination.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Exchange meaningful clinical information among professional healthcare team.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Improve population and public health.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Communicate with public health agencies.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Health Outcomes Policy Priority:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Ensure adequate privacy and security protections for personal health information.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Care Goals:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Ensure privacy and security protections for confidential information through operating policies, procedures, and technologies and compliance with applicable law&lt;br&gt;
&amp;bull; Provide transparency of data sharing to patient&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Each of the Care Goals has defined objectives with specific measures that must be achieved to demonstrate meaningful use.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Following are examples of some of the objectives and what you&apos;ll have to do to meet each.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Maintain up-to-date problem list in ICD-9-CM or SNOMED-CT.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; 80% for unique patients.&lt;br&gt;
This objective will enable the user to manage problem lists that span multiple visits. If you&apos;ve been billing electronically, you&apos;ve already been capturing problems in ICD-9-CM format.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Generate and transmit prescriptions electronically.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; Transmit 75% of noncontrolled drug prescriptions electronically.&lt;br&gt;
Did you hop on the e-prescribing incentives? You&apos;re ahead of this one! If not, you&apos;ll need to enable e-prescribing.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Drug screening.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; Drug screening is enabled.&lt;br&gt;
Another easy objective to meet if you&apos;ve already implemented e-prescribing. If not, you&apos;ll need to be sure your system provides real-time alerts for drug-drug interactions and drug allergy contraindications, has an electronic formulary check, maintains drug-drug and drug-allergy warnings, and tracks the number of alerts that were responded to.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Maintain active medication list.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; 80% for unique patients.&lt;br&gt;
You&apos;ve been doing this too with your e-prescribing implementation. The system must be able to manage an active medication list and a medication history that spans multiple visits.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Record demographics.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; 80% for unique patients, including ALL data elements. Denominator is the number of patients seen.&lt;br&gt;
For each of your patients you should be aware of gender, race, ethnicity, date of birth, preferred language, and insurance type. You&apos;ll probably need to add fields for &quot;race&quot; and &quot;ethnicity&quot; to supplement the demographics you&apos;re already collecting.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective:&lt;/strong&gt; Record vital signs.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Measure:&lt;/strong&gt; 80% of patients seen age 2 and over, including ALL data elements. Denominator is total of unique patients age 2 and over seen.&lt;br&gt;
Your system must allow you to record height, weight, and blood pressure, calculate and display BMI, and plot and display growth charts for patients 2 to 20 years old, including BMI. If your system doesn&apos;t calculate BMI, ask your vendor when that will be updated in a release to your software.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;With the specific criteria objectives and measures such as these in hand you can implement the EHR and achieve meaningful use, improved healthcare quality and efficiency in operations.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It will take work, but it can be done!&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>