No abstract

AimsTo evaluate Compass, a new instrument for glaucoma screening and diagnosis that combines scanning ophthalmoscopy, automated perimetry, and eye tracking.Materials and MethodsA total of 320 human subjects (200 normal, 120 with glaucoma) underwent full ophthalmological evaluation and perimetric evaluation using the Humphrey SITA standard 24° test (HFA), and the Compass test that consisted of a full-threshold program on the central 24° with a photograph of the central 30° of the retina. A subgroup of normal subjects and glaucoma patients underwent a second Compass test during the same day in order to study test-retest variability. After exclusion of 30 patients due to protocol rules, a database was created to compare the Compass to the HFA, and to evaluate retinal image quality and fixation stability.ResultsThe difference in mean sensitivity between Compass and HFA was -1.02 ± 1.55 dB in normal subjects (p<0.001) and -1.01 ± 2.81 dB in glaucoma (p<0.001). Repeatability SD for the average sensitivity was 1.53 for normal subjects and 1.84 for glaucoma. Test time with the Compass was 634±96 s (607±78 for normals, 678±108 for glaucoma). Compass analysis showed the percentage of fixation within the central 1° was 86.6% in normal subjects, and 79.3% in glaucoma patients. Color image quality was sufficient for diagnostic use in >65% of cases; Image-based diagnosis was in accordance with the initial diagnosis in 85% of the subjects.ConclusionsBased on preliminary results, Compass showed useful diagnostic characteristics for the study of glaucoma, and combined morphological information with functional data.

No abstract

No abstract

Recommendations concerning the continuation of chemotherapy in nonresponding patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and stable disease after the first chemotherapy test are empirical and often conflicting. Between 1984 and 1987, 116 inoperable NSCLC patients were treated with methotrexate, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and lomustine (MACC regimen). After two or three cycles of therapy, 74 patients were judged to have stable disease and assigned at random either to chemotherapy maintenance with the same regimen (38 subjects) or to chemotherapy discontinuation (36 subjects). The two study groups were comparable for all the major prognostic factors. Median time to progression was 26 weeks for the chemotherapy group compared to 24 weeks for the nonchemotherapy group (P = NS). Median survival was prolonged in the treatment arm (47 weeks) compared to nontreatment arm (30 weeks), which was statistically nonsignificant. A patient self-assessment of the quality of life revealed a significantly worse tolerance to therapy and a better physical condition in the chemotherapy group. Objective MACC toxicity was significant with two treatment-related deaths. This study failed to demonstrate sufficient therapeutic benefits to justify the increased cost and toxicity of continuing treatment in nonresponding NSCLC patients.