PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “statement”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,261 records · Page 70Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

Mayo clinic consensus statement for the use of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma.

Bisphosphonates are effective in the prevention and treatment of bone disease in multiple myeloma (MM). Osteonecrosis of the jaw is Increasingly recognized as a serious complication of long-term bisphosphonate therapy. Issues such as the choice of bisphosphonate and duration of therapy have become the subject of intense debate given patient safety concerns. We reviewed available data concerning the use of bisphosphonates in MM. Guidelines for the use of bisphosphonates in MM were developed by a multidisciplinary panel consisting of hematologists, dental specialists, and nurses specializing in the treatment of MM. We conclude that intravenous pamidronate and intravenous zoledronic acid are equally effective and superior to placebo in reducing skeletal complications. Pamidronate is favored over zoledronic acid until more data are available on the risk of complications (osteonecrosis of the jaw). We recommend discontinuing bisphosphonates after 2 years of therapy for patients who achieve complete response and/or plateau phase. For patients whose disease is active, who have not achieved a response, or who have threatening bone disease beyond 2 years, therapy can be decreased to every 3 months. These guidelines were developed in the Interest of patient safety and will be reexamined as new data emerge regarding risks and benefits.

Bone Density Conservation Agents↗
PubMed2004

Diabetes, psychotic disorders and antipsychotic therapy: a consensus statement.

Psychotic illness and its treatment are associated with an increased rate of diabetes and worsening blood sugar control, Australia. The newer, second-generation antipsychotic agents are more likely to produce this effect than the first-generation agents, but both contribute to the problem. The effect is usually related to insulin resistance through weight gain, but other mechanisms may exist. Diabetic ketoacidosis is rare. Management of psychosis takes priority over concerns about the potential metabolic sequelae of treatment, but the prevalence of the latter requires that all patients taking antipsychotic agents be actively screened and treated. Patients treated with antipsychotic agents need baseline and regular checks, including weight, blood glucose and lipid levels and blood pressure. Management of psychosis with its attendant medical problems requires a multidisciplinary approach, with primary health practitioners playing a central role. Mortality and medical morbidity is higher in those with psychosis than expected; preventive measures, combined with early detection and treatment of hyperglycaemia and other metabolic problems, is a key public health issue.

Comorbidity↗
PubMed2006

Prevention and treatment of infant and childhood vitamin D deficiency in Australia and New Zealand: a consensus statement.

Vitamin D deficiency has re-emerged as a significant paediatric health issue, with complications including hypocalcaemic seizures, rickets, limb pain and fracture. A major risk factor for infants is maternal vitamin D deficiency. For older infants and children, risk factors include dark skin colour, cultural practices, prolonged breastfeeding, restricted sun exposure and certain medical conditions. To prevent vitamin D deficiency in infants, pregnant women, especially those who are dark-skinned or veiled, should be screened and treated for vitamin D deficiency, and breastfed infants of dark-skinned or veiled women should be supplemented with vitamin D for the first 12 months of life. Regular sunlight exposure can prevent vitamin D deficiency, but the safe exposure time for children is unknown. To prevent vitamin D deficiency, at-risk children should receive 400 IU vitamin D daily; if compliance is poor, an annual dose of 150,000 IU may be considered. Treatment of vitamin D deficiency involves giving ergocalciferol or cholecalciferol for 3 months (1000 IU/day if < 1 month of age; 3000 IU/day if 1-12 months of age; 5000 IU/day if > 12 months of age). High-dose bolus therapy (300,000-500,000 IU) should be considered for children over 12 months of age if compliance or absorption issues are suspected.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Prognostic factors in breast cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999.

BACKGROUND: Under the auspices of the College of American Pathologists, a multidisciplinary group of clinicians, pathologists, and statisticians considered prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer and stratified them into categories reflecting the strength of published evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Factors were ranked according to previously established College of American Pathologists categorical rankings: category I, factors proven to be of prognostic import and useful in clinical patient management; category II, factors that had been extensively studied biologically and clinically, but whose import remains to be validated in statistically robust studies; and category III, all other factors not sufficiently studied to demonstrate their prognostic value. Factors in categories I and II were considered with respect to variations in methods of analysis, interpretation of findings, reporting of data, and statistical evaluation. For each factor, detailed recommendations for improvement were made. Recommendations were based on the following aims: (1) increasing uniformity and completeness of pathologic evaluation of tumor specimens, (2) enhancing the quality of data collected about existing prognostic factors, and (3) improving patient care. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Factors ranked in category I included TNM staging information, histologic grade, histologic type, mitotic figure counts, and hormone receptor status. Category II factors included c-erbB-2 (Her2-neu), proliferation markers, lymphatic and vascular channel invasion, and p53. Factors in category III included DNA ploidy analysis, microvessel density, epidermal growth factor receptor, transforming growth factor-alpha, bcl-2, pS2, and cathepsin D. This report constitutes a detailed outline of the findings and recommendations of the consensus conference group, organized according to structural guidelines as defined.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2000

Prognostic factors in colorectal cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999.

BACKGROUND: Under the auspices of the College of American Pathologists, the current state of knowledge regarding pathologic prognostic factors (factors linked to outcome) and predictive factors (factors predicting response to therapy) in colorectal carcinoma was evaluated. A multidisciplinary group of clinical (including the disciplines of medical oncology, surgical oncology, and radiation oncology), pathologic, and statistical experts in colorectal cancer reviewed all relevant medical literature and stratified the reported prognostic factors into categories that reflected the strength of the published evidence demonstrating their prognostic value. Accordingly, the following categories of prognostic factors were defined. Category I includes factors definitively proven to be of prognostic import based on evidence from multiple statistically robust published trials and generally used in patient management. Category IIA includes factors extensively studied biologically and/or clinically and repeatedly shown to have prognostic value for outcome and/or predictive value for therapy that is of sufficient import to be included in the pathology report but that remains to be validated in statistically robust studies. Category IIB includes factors shown to be promising in multiple studies but lacking sufficient data for inclusion in category I or IIA. Category III includes factors not yet sufficiently studied to determine their prognostic value. Category IV includes factors well studied and shown to have no prognostic significance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical literature was critically reviewed, and the analysis revealed specific points of variability in approach that prevented direct comparisons among published studies and compromised the quality of the collective data. Categories of variability recognized included the following: (1) methods of analysis, (2) interpretation of findings, (3) reporting of data, and (4) statistical evaluation. Additional points of variability within these categories were defined from the collective experience of the group. Reasons for the assignment of an individual prognostic factor to category I, II, III, or IV (categories defined by the level of scientific validation) were outlined with reference to the specific types of variability associated with the supportive data. For each factor and category of variability related to that factor, detailed recommendations for improvement were made. The recommendations were based on the following aims: (1) to increase the uniformity and completeness of pathologic evaluation of tumor specimens, (2) to enhance the quality of the data needed for definitive evaluation of the prognostic value of individual prognostic factors, and (3) ultimately, to improve patient care. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Factors that were determined to merit inclusion in category I were as follows: the local extent of tumor assessed pathologically (the pT category of the TNM staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer [AJCC/UICC]); regional lymph node metastasis (the pN category of the TNM staging system); blood or lymphatic vessel invasion; residual tumor following surgery with curative intent (the R classification of the AJCC/UICC staging system), especially as it relates to positive surgical margins; and preoperative elevation of carcinoembryonic antigen elevation (a factor established by laboratory medicine methods rather than anatomic pathology). Factors in category IIA included the following: tumor grade, radial margin status (for resection specimens with nonperitonealized surfaces), and residual tumor in the resection specimen following neoadjuvant therapy (the ypTNM category of the TNM staging system of the AJCC/UICC). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Biomarkers, Tumor↗