1 / 30

HDR PLANNING & HOT TOPICS

HDR PLANNING & HOT TOPICS. Nov 3 rd 2010. This Afternoon. HDR Planning 14.00 – 15.15 Tea break 15.15 Hot topics 15.30 – 17.00. Planning. Hot Topics. Pub quiz style Split into 3 groups Question and answers Discussion Top team each round will win a prize. Aims.

bin
Download Presentation

HDR PLANNING & HOT TOPICS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. HDR PLANNING & HOT TOPICS Nov 3rd 2010

  2. This Afternoon • HDR Planning 14.00 – 15.15 • Tea break 15.15 • Hot topics 15.30 – 17.00

  3. Planning

  4. Hot Topics • Pub quiz style • Split into 3 groups • Question and answers • Discussion • Top team each round will win a prize

  5. Aims • To consider the latest studies and how they influence our prescribing in relation to: - Aspirin - Glucosamine • To review the latest research into the use of PSA in screening for prostate cancer

  6. 1) Aspirin • Who do you think needs to be prescribed aspirin? (as currently under debate....ignore diabetic patients, focus on those with cardiovascular risk)

  7. Aspirin – the study • Lancet 2009: 373: 1849 • Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration (ATTC) meta analysis looked as use of aspirin in primary and secondary prevention. • A large study • All compared aspirin to placebo • The outcomes were CV events and the rate of harm

  8. Primary prevention • Aspirin DOES NOT reduce the CV MORTALITY • Aspirin DOES reduce CV EVENTS – but the risk reduction v small (NNT 1666) • HARMS for every 3333 treated over 12m there would be one additional GI/extra cranial bleed (NNH 3333) • DTB agree, current practice is recommended that: • Aspirin shouldn’t be started for primary prevention • In those already taking it – explain current evidence to patient.

  9. Secondary Prevention • Aspirin prevents 1 CV event per year for every 66 people treated (NNT 66) • Aspirin prevents 1 vascular death for every 344 people treated • There was insufficient data to report on GI/extra-cranial bleeds or haemorrhagic CVAs • DTB • Secondary prevention 75mg aspirin/day • (no evidence of improved protection with increase dose – but increased dose does increase GI haemorrhage risks)

  10. Aspirin – Questions and Answers • Who do you think needs to be prescribed aspirin? • Not for primary prevention • Secondary prevention require 75mg OD • Secondary prevention would include those with TIA/stroke, previous MI, angina.

  11. 2) Glucosamine • Who should be prescribed glucosamine? • What advice should you give a patient when commencing treatment? • In which patients is the use of glucosamine contraindicated?

  12. Glucosamine • Glucosamine is only indicated in patients with knee OA (DTB 2008; 46:81-4) • NICE does not support the use of glucosamine in OA (NICE, 2008)

  13. Derbyshire Medicines Management May 2010 Advice • A trial of glucosamine sulphate 1500mg once daily is recommended as a treatment option in patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the knee, after trying, or in conjunction with paracetamol. • Use may mean that potentially toxic NSAIDs or coxibs need not be used. • It may take several weeks for the full effect to be seen. • If prescribed generically – the community pharmacy chooses the brand to supply. Expensive brands cost up to £90 for a thirty day supply • Medicines Management recommends that glucosamine sulphate is prescribed as the brand Valupak. Thirty days supply of the 1500mg strength costs only £2.83.

  14. What should we tell patients? • None of the clinical trails have shown glucosamine is particularly effective • It may reduced pain in some people • It probably won’t improve function • It’s unclear whether it has any long term effects (slowing disease progression) • Glucosamine in safe in most people – but there are CIs • Glucosamine may take several weeks to work – trial for 3 months, if pain is no better, consider stopping

  15. Glucosamine - Questions and Answers • Who should be prescribed glucosamine? • Only those with knee OA • What advice should you give a patient when commencing treatment? • May improve pain, probably won’t improve function, long term effects unclear, if no improvement at 3 months – consider stopping • In which patients is the use of glucosamine contraindicated? • Pregnant, breast feeding, allergic to shellfish and those on warfarin

  16. PSA Testing Questions 1) What percentage of men with a normal PSA have clinically significant prostatic cancer? 2) What percentage of men with raised PSA will not have prostate cancer? 3) List 3 advantages and 3 disadvantages of the PSA test

  17. PSA • PSA is a glycoprotein produced by the prostate • The amount produced can increase due to malignant and benign processes

  18. PSA • PSA has long been used in general practice. • There is currently lots of debate over whom should have a PSA test, there is no agreed criteria for testing. • But, questions to consider; • Could the PSA be a useful screening tool? • Would screening reduce mortality?

  19. BMJ 2009;339:b3537 • Looked specifically at how well PSA performs as a screening test depending on cut off values chosen. • The authors concluded that additional biomarkers would be needed before population screening should be introduced.

  20. Systemic review of PSA screening – BMJ 2010; 34:c4543 • Systemic review of PSA screening – BMJ 2010; 34:c4543 • Pooled results from 6 major PSA screening studies (inc. PLCO and ERSPC) • Meta-analysis of 387,286 men showed: • Screening increased your risk of being given a diagnosis of prostate cancer • Screening had no impact on death from prostate cancer or overall mortality

  21. PLCO Screening Trial (NEJM 2009; 360: 1310-0) • 76,000 men (aged 55-74) were randomised to usual care or annual screening for prostate cancer • 40-52% of the men in the control group had screening each year • Screening picked up more cancers than usual care • Mortality from prostate cancer was not reduced in those who had been screened • Screening did not appear to pick up earlier tumours (similar rates of all stages in control and screening group)

  22. ERSPC (NEJM 2009; 360:1320-8) • RCT 180,000 men aged 50-74 in 7 European countries. • Randomised to “no screening” or to “PSA once every 4 years” • Twice as many cancers were diagnosed in the screening group compared to the control group • Those who had undergone screening were 20% less likely to die of prostate cancer • Benefit of screening only seen in those aged 55 or more, not in those 50-54 • There was a significant rate of over diagnosis (detecting tumours that would never become clinically significant)

  23. ERSPC (continued) • 1410 men would need to be screened to prevent one death from prostate cancer • 48 additional cases of prostate cancer would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer.

  24. Comparing ERSPC and PCLO • Different cut-off values for action (3ng/ml v 4ng/ml) • Study population selection • Improved prostate cancer treatment over the course of the PCLO trial • Follow up of PCLO may not have been long enough.

  25. What do these trials mean to our practice? • National Screening Committee have recommended that a prostate cancer screening programme should not be introduced in the UK • Men who ask for a PSA should continue to be offered the full range of information to allow them to make an informed decision

  26. PSA Summary • PSA test has significant failings • Screening MIGHT save lives, but we don’t know whether it actually does any good...which is a far more important question. • Treating men with clinically unimportant cancers exposed them to harm with no benefits • PSA should not be done routinely without discussing risks and benefits with the patient • A single PSA <1ng/ml in a man’s 60s largely rules out the risk of clinically significant prostate cancer.

  27. PSA Answers (1) 1) What percentage of men with a normal PSA have clinically significant prostatic cancer? • 20% 2) What percentage of men with raised PSA will not have prostate cancer? • 66%

  28. PSA Answers (2) 3) List 3 advantages and 3 disadvantages of the PSA test • Advantages • Reassurance if result is normal • May indicate cancer before symptoms present • May find cancer at an early stage • If treated may avoid worse outcomes, e.g. death • Even if aggressive/advance cancer, treatment may prolong survival • Disadvantages • False negatives • May have unnecessary tests and anxiety • Cannot differentiate slowly growing ‘v’ aggressive cancers • May cause unnecessary anxiety if it’s a slow, clinically insignificant ca • 48 men will undergo treatment to save one life

  29. The End • Questions?

More Related