PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Yuko Y Palesch

Publications and source records attributed to Yuko Y Palesch.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

The ALIAS Pilot Trial: a dose-escalation and safety study of albumin therapy for acute ischemic stroke--I: Physiological responses and safety results.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In preclinical stroke models, high-dose human albumin confers robust neuroprotection. We investigated the safety and tolerability of this therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: The ALIAS (Albumin in Acute Stroke) Pilot Clinical Trial used a multiple-tier, open-label, dose-escalation design. Subjects with acute ischemic stroke (NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] of 6 or above) received a 2-hour infusion of 25% human albumin (ALB) beginning within 16 hours of stroke onset. Six successive ALB dose tiers were assessed ranging from 0.34 to 2.05 g/kg. Neurologic and cardiac function was sequentially monitored. At 3 months, the NIHSS, modified Rankin Scale, and Barthel Index were measured. RESULTS: Eighty-two subjects (mean age, 65 years) received ALB at 7.8+/-3.4 hours after stroke onset (mean+/-standard deviation). Forty-two patients also received standard-of-care intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). Vital signs were unaltered by ALB treatment. Dose-related increases in plasma albumin and mild hemodilution were maximal at 4 to 12 hours. Age-related plasma brain natriuretic peptide levels increased at 24 hours after ALB but did not predict cardiac adverse events. The sole ALB-related adverse event was mild or moderate pulmonary edema in 13.4% of subjects, which was readily managed with diuretics. In the tPA-treated subgroup, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in only one of 42 subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-five percent human albumin in doses ranging up to 2.05 g/kg was tolerated by patients with acute ischemic stroke without major dose-limiting complications. tPA therapy did not affect the safety profile of ALB. The companion article presents neurologic outcome data and efficacy analysis in these subjects.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

The ALIAS Pilot Trial: a dose-escalation and safety study of albumin therapy for acute ischemic stroke--II: neurologic outcome and efficacy analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: High-dose human albumin (ALB) is robustly neuroprotective in rodent stroke models. A phase I dose-escalation study was conducted to assess the safety of ALB therapy in ischemic stroke. We analyzed the data for preliminary evidence of treatment efficacy. METHODS: Eighty-two subjects with acute ischemic stroke (NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] of 6 or above) received 25% ALB beginning within 16 hours of stroke onset. Six successive ALB dose tiers were assessed (range, 0.34 to 2.05 g/kg). Forty-two patients also received standard-of-care intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). Efficacy outcomes were determined at 3 months. We compared the highest three, putatively therapeutic ALB dose tiers (1.37 to 2.05 g/kg) with the lowest three, presumed subtherapeutic doses (0.34 to 1.03 g/kg) and with historical cohort data derived from the NINDS rt-PA Stroke Study. RESULTS: After adjusting for the tPA effect, the probability of good outcome (defined as modified Rankin Scale 0 to 1 or NIH Stroke Scale 0 to 1 at 3 months) at the highest three ALB doses was 81% greater than in the lower dose-tiers (relative risk [RR], 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.94) and was 95% greater than in the comparable NINDS rt-PA Stroke Study cohort (RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.47 to 2.57). The tPA-treated subjects who received higher-dose ALB were three times more likely to achieve a good outcome than subjects receiving lower-dose ALB, suggesting a positive synergistic effect between ALB and tPA. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that high-dose ALB therapy may be neuroprotective after ischemic stroke. These results have led to a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled efficacy trial of ALB in acute ischemic stroke-the ALIAS Phase III Trial.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Applying a phase II futility study design to therapeutic stroke trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Most large, randomized phase III efficacy trials of therapeutic agents in ischemic stroke have failed to find treatment benefit. We determined whether some phase III studies could have been avoided if preceded by smaller single-arm phase II studies to evaluate the futility of proceeding to phase III. METHODS: To provide examples of the application of phase II methodology, we obtained primary outcome data for the active treatment group of 6 phase III ischemic stroke therapy trials. For each study, we estimated the sample size number required for a multistage single-arm study using parameters specified in the original study. We evaluated outcome data for the first number of subjects in the phase III study treatment arm ordered by enrollment dates. We compared the proportion of favorable outcomes to prespecified stopping criteria derived from a single-arm phase II futility design. If the observed proportion of favorable outcomes was less than the stopping criterion, we declared the treatment not sufficiently effective to warrant further evaluation in phase III. RESULTS: We identified 3 trials as futile in phase II; none of 3 showed treatment efficacy in phase III. In the 3 remaining phase II trials in which we did not show futility, one showed efficacy in phase III. CONCLUSIONS: Single-arm phase II futility studies have been underused in stroke research, but provide a strategy for discarding treatments likely to be ineffective in phase III trials.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2005

A responsive outcome for Parkinson's disease neuroprotection futility studies.

Futility studies are designed to test new treatments over a short period in a small number of subjects to determine if those treatments are worthy of larger and longer term studies, or if they should be abandoned. An appropriate outcome measure for a neuroprotection futility study in Parkinson's disease (sensitive to tracking disease progression in the short-term) has not been determined. Data sets from three clinical trials were used to compare Parkinson's disease outcome measures. Total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS; Mentation + Activities of Daily Living + Motor) change and Motor plus Activities of Daily Living UPDRS change, measured in untreated patients, required the smallest sample sizes of all the outcome measures explored. Other outcomes (UPDRS Motor, UPDRS Activities of Daily Living, and time to need levodopa) required somewhat larger sample sizes. Futility designs in Parkinson's disease are feasible in terms of short duration and small sample size requirements, and this design is being applied in two ongoing Parkinson's disease studies to select agents for future larger and longer term neuroprotection studies.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2005

Non-linearity of Parkinson's disease progression: implications for sample size calculations in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Estimation of sample size for long-term studies of neuroprotection in Parkinson's disease requires information on expected clinical decline. Values may be obtained by analyzing existing long-term data sets or by prediction models of clinical decline applied to available data from shorter-term trials. The most commonly used measure to track clinical decline is the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) but this measure is also affected by symptomatic therapy. Models can help better understand behavior of the UPDRS after initiation of symptomatic therapy when scores will improve and eventually start deteriorating again. PURPOSE: To understand how UPDRS scores progress after initiation of symptomatic therapy and how this progression impacts sample size calculations. METHODS: We developed a non-linear model of UPDRS after introduction of symptomatic therapy. The model is specified as a non-linear mixed effects model and is applied to three different data sets from clinical trials. The model is then used to produce estimates for the change in UPDRS and its associated variance for a period of up to five years of follow-up. The estimates produced by the model serve as the basis for sample-size calculations for different lengths of follow-up (one through five years) and for different values of clinically meaningful change in UPDRS. RESULTS: Despite differences in the short-term benefit of the dopaminergic drugs, after a period of approximately six months UPDRS scores progress linearly at an estimated rate of approximately three points a year. The sample size that is required for a clinical trial where the baseline coincides with initiation of symptomatic therapy is very large. On the other hand, if baseline is set at six months after initiation of symptomatic therapy then the sample size required decreases with length of follow-up. LIMITATIONS: Model specification and estimation is based on a set of simplifying assumptions regarding the progression of individual level UPDRS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Sample size calculations based on these estimates indicate a substantial reduction in sample size if patients are required to be on symptomatic treatment for a period of time before being randomized to a neuroprotective trial.

Antiparkinson Agents↗
PubMed2004

Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia.

CONTEXT: Conventional colonoscopy is the best available method for detection of colorectal cancer; however, it is invasive and not without risk. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC), also known as virtual colonoscopy, has been reported to be reasonably accurate in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia in studies performed at expert centers. OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of CTC in a large number of participants across multiple centers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A nonrandomized, evaluator-blinded, noninferiority study design of 615 participants aged 50 years or older who were referred for routine, clinically indicated colonoscopy in 9 major hospital centers between April 17, 2000, and October 3, 2001. The CTC was performed by using multislice scanners immediately before standard colonoscopy; findings at colonoscopy were reported before and after segmental unblinding to the CTC results. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The sensitivity and specificity of CTC and conventional colonoscopy in detecting participants with lesions sized at least 6 mm. Secondary outcomes included detection of all lesions, detection of advanced lesions, possible technical confounders, participant preferences, and evidence for increasing accuracy with experience. RESULTS: A total of 827 lesions were detected in 308 of 600 participants who underwent both procedures; 104 participants had lesions sized at least 6 mm. The sensitivity of CTC for detecting participants with 1 or more lesions sized at least 6 mm was 39.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29.6%-48.4%) and for lesions sized at least 10 mm, it was 55.0% (95% CI, 39.9%-70.0%). These results were significantly lower than those for conventional colonoscopy, with sensitivities of 99.0% (95% CI, 97.1%->99.9%) and 100%, respectively. A total of 496 participants were without any lesion sized at least 6 mm. The specificity of CTC and conventional colonoscopy for detecting participants without any lesion sized at least 6 mm was 90.5% (95% CI, 87.9%-93.1%) and 100%, respectively, and without lesions sized at least 10 mm, 96.0% (95% CI, 94.3%-97.6%) and 100%, respectively. Computed tomographic colonography missed 2 of 8 cancers. The accuracy of CTC varied considerably between centers and did not improve as the study progressed. Participants expressed no clear preference for either technique. CONCLUSIONS: Computed tomographic colonography by these methods is not yet ready for widespread clinical application. Techniques and training need to be improved.

Colonography, Computed Tomographic↗
PubMed2004

Alzheimer's Disease in the Family Practice Setting: Assessment of a Screening Tool.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is approximately 4.5 million people in the United States, and it is projected that by 2050, the prevalence could be as high as 16 million. As one step to minimize this health care burden, we investigated the practices of primary care physicians (PCPs) to determine barriers to and incentives in diagnosing AD and assessed the feasibility of utilizing a caregiver-based phone interview for dementia in the primary care setting. METHOD: This feasibility study was conducted in 2 phases. Phase I included PCP focus groups conducted to identify barriers and incentives to diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, knowledge of available screening instruments, and current diagnostic procedures and patterns. A survey of a random sample of PCPs was also conducted to reassess the data obtained via the focus groups. Phase II assessed the feasibility of implementing a brief, caregiver-based dementia screening tool in the primary care setting. A participant's score on the screening tool was compared with the PCP's clinical impression using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: A general willingness exists among PCPs to improve the level of care for patients with AD; however, time constraints are a sizeable barrier in the PCP setting. The incorporation of a telephone-based (or caregiver-based) assessment is feasible. The agreement between the caregiver ratings and the PCPs' clinical impressions was kappa = 0.64 (95% CI = 0.19 to 1.0). CONCLUSION: The caregiver-based telephone assessment has indications of good agreement with the PCP's general assessment of dementia or possible AD. The limited number of patients with positive screens hinders generalization of this phase of the study, but the results confirm the potential value of caregiver-based assessment and the desirability of a larger study to address the scientific properties of a telephone-based screening instrument.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2003

Analysis of clustered matched-pair data.

Evaluation of the performance of a new diagnostic procedure with respect to a standard procedure arises frequently in practice. The response of interest, often in a dichotomous form, is measured twice, once with each procedure. The two procedures are administered to either two matched individuals, or when practical, to the same individual. A large sample test for matched-pair data is the McNemar test. The main assumption of this test is independent paired responses; however, when more than one outcome from an individual is measured by each procedure, the data are clustered. Examples of such cases can be seen in dental and ophthalmology studies. Variance adjustment methods for the analysis of clustered matched-pair data have been proposed; however, because of unequal cluster sizes, variability of correlation structures within a cluster (within paired responses in a cluster as well as between paired responses in a cluster), and unequal success probabilities among the clusters, the performances of some available methods are not consistent. This research proposes a simple adjustment to the McNemar test for the analysis of clustered matched-pair data. Method of moments is used to calculate a consistent variance estimator. Using Monte Carlo simulation, the size and power of the proposed test are compared to those of two currently available methods. To illustrate practical application, clustered matched-pair data from two clinical studies are analysed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2003

Analysis of clustered matched-pair data for a non-inferiority study design.

Hypothesis testing of matched-pair data has been adapted for equivalence (one- and two-sided) study designs; however, a statistical problem arises when more than one measurement is recorded for each study subject. Ignoring the correlation between the repeated measurements per subject may underestimate the standard error of the parameter estimate. A method of testing for non-inferiority or equivalence of clustered matched-pair data is not yet available. This paper proposes a Wald-type test statistic for a non-inferiority hypothesis and applies it to the comparison of two diagnostic procedures.

Computer Simulation↗
PubMed2002

The virtual colonoscopy study: a large multicenter clinical trial designed to compare two diagnostic screening procedures.

This paper reviews the design of a large multicenter clinical trial currently being conducted to test the equivalence of two screening procedures for colorectal polyps. The primary outcome is the sensitivity and specificity of the new and standard procedures for detecting subjects with and without polyps of a size > or =6 mm, respectively. An important secondary outcome is the accuracy of these procedures in detecting individual polyps. A total of 619 participants underwent virtual colonoscopy, the new procedure, followed by conventional colonoscopy, the standard procedure. Strategies for the design and implementation of the study are shared as well as the challenges encountered.

Bias↗