Biomedical subjects

Ping-Yu Liu

Publications and source records attributed to Ping-Yu Liu.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Randomized trial of adjuvant intraperitoneal alpha-interferon in stage III ovarian cancer patients who have no evidence of disease after primary surgery and chemotherapy: An intergroup study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the improvement in progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer associated with platinum-taxane chemotherapy, strategies are needed to prevent the greater than 70% recurrence rate. METHOD: The Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) initiated a phase III intergroup trial of alpha-interferon (IFNalpha-26, Schering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ) in weekly doses of 50 x 10(6) IU (for 6 doses) versus observation only in patients with no pathological evidence of residual disease at second-look surgery in 1988. RESULTS: Patient accrual was extremely slow and the trial was permanently closed in 1999 by the SWOG Data and Safety Monitoring Committee with 74 registered patients. Of these patients, 70 were evaluable for progression-free and overall survival. There was no significant difference between the two study arms in relation to median progression-free survival (P = 0.56). The median survival duration associated with intraperitoneal alpha-interferon had not been reached versus 87 months on the observation arm. In general, intraperitoneal alpha-interferon was well tolerated. There were no treatment-related deaths or grade 4 adverse events. Although no efficacy conclusions can be drawn from this prematurely closed trial, it should be noted that 57% of the patients on the observation arm recurred and all died, whereas 63% recurred and only 43% died on the intraperitoneal alpha-interferon arm. CONCLUSION: Although this was a negative study, there should continue to be interest in the use of biological therapy to improve survival of patients in complete remission following primary chemotherapy.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

A multicenter, prospective, randomized, comparative evaluation of dual- versus triple-lumen catheters for hemodialysis and apheresis in 485 patients.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to compare a new temporary triple-lumen catheter (TLC) for dialysis that has a third lumen devoted to fluid and medication administration or blood sampling with a marketed dual-lumen catheter (DLC). METHODS: Four hundred eighty-five patients referred for acute hemodialysis or apheresis were randomly assigned to either a TLC or DLC in a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. RESULTS: Analysis of blood flow rates was completed on 464 patients (228 patients, DLC; 236 patients, TLC) with a total of 1,681 hemodialysis (808 treatments, DLC; 873 treatments, TLC) and 82 apheresis treatments (37 treatments, DLC; 45 treatments, TLC). During hemodialysis, a median achieved flow rate (AFR) of 267 mL/min was realized for both groups (P = 0.58). During apheresis, a median AFR of 72.5 mL/min (range, 50 to 150 mL/min) was achieved in the DLC group, and 87 mL/min (range, 60 to 150 mL/min), in the TLC group (P = 0.14). Three hundred ninety-three patients (193 patients, DLC; 200 patients, TLC) had blood and catheter tip cultures performed on removal, and catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) status was determined. Thirty-one patients (7.9%) had a CRBSI: 16 patients (8.3%), DLC; and 15 patients (7.5%), TLC (P= 0.77). Incidence densities of CRBSI were 12.4/1,000 DLC-days and 10.2/1,000 TLC-days (P = 0.59). The CRBSI incidence of 18.2/1,000 catheter-days for femoral sites was significantly greater than the 7/1,000 catheter-days for jugular sites (P = 0.02) and 6.6/1,000 catheter-days for combined jugular and subclavian sites (P = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, antibiotic use was the only factor related to CRBSI (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 0.76). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of other complications between the 2 catheters. CONCLUSION: Results show that the new TLC is similar to the marketed DLC.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Factorial design considerations.

PURPOSE: Factorial designs may be proposed to test extra questions within a clinical trial. A common approach to sample size and analysis for factorial trials assumes no statistical interactions and does not adjust for multiple testing. This investigation considered the trade-off between potential gains from testing more questions with fewer patients versus how often a factorial trial might arrive at an incorrect conclusion. METHODS: A simulation study of a 2 x 2 design (observation v chemotherapy v radiation therapy v the combination) was performed under various conditions, including effect of one, both, or neither treatment and absence or presence of statistical interaction (effect of one treatment differed according to the presence of the other). Three analysis approaches were investigated, one assuming no interaction, a second testing first for interaction, and the third testing for interaction as well as adjusting for multiple testing. The approaches were compared with respect to the probability of selecting the correct treatment arm. RESULTS: No one approach was superior. Testing for interaction was beneficial in some settings but detrimental in others. Under some scenarios, the factorial design improved efficiency, but under others, all three approaches resulted in poor probability of selecting the correct treatment arm at the end of the trial. CONCLUSION: Extra efficiency is possible, but it is difficult to predict when favorable conditions exist. If a factorial design is used, potential efficiency gains should be weighed against potential loss of power to arrive at the correct conclusion under possible scenarios of interest.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗