Background Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) levels can be measured in both serum and whole blood. No cut-off point for non-adherence has been established in serum nor have these methods ever been compared. The aims of this study were to compare these two approaches and determine if serum HCQ cut-off points can be established to identify non-adherent patients. Methods HCQ levels were measured in serum and whole blood from 573 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The risk factors for active SLE (SLEDAI score > 4) were identified by multiple logistic regression. Serum HCQ levels were measured in 68 additional patients known to be non-adherent, i.e. with whole-blood HCQ < 200 ng/mL. Results The mean (± SD) HCQ levels were 469 ± 223 ng/mL in serum and 916 ± 449 ng/mL in whole blood. The mean ratio of serum/whole-blood HCQ levels was 0.53 ± 0.15. In the multivariate analysis, low whole-blood HCQ levels (P = 0.023), but not serum HCQ levels, were independently associated with active SLE. From the mean serum/whole-blood level ratio, a serum HCQ level of 106 ng/mL was extrapolated as the corresponding cut-off to identify non-adherent patients with a sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI 0.76–0.94) and specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.72–0.98). All serum HCQ levels of patients with whole-blood HCQ below the detectable level (< 20 ng/mL) were also undetectable (< 20 ng/mL). Conclusions These data suggest that whole blood is better than serum for assessing the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relation of HCQ. Our results support the use of serum HCQ levels to assess non-adherence when whole blood is unavailable.

Among cancers, pancreatic cancer is known to be associated with a higher incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of the study was to determine the implication of circulating tissue factor (TF) in VTE related to active pancreatic cancer. One hundred and sixty-four consecutive patients who participated to the Etude des Determinants et Interactions de la Thrombose veineuse (EDITH) study between January 2005 and August 2007 for symptomatic VTE related to active pancreatic cancer (n = 8), active cancer of other location (n = 42) or classified as unprovoked (n = 114) were included. TF activity (TFa) was measured in a one-stage kinetic chromogenic method. There were no differences of median TFa levels between patients with VTE related to cancer of other type than pancreas [2.01 pmol/l range (0.05-43.92)] and patients with unprovoked VTE [1.78 pmol/l (range 0.05-63.72), P = 0.21]. Median TFa levels were higher in patients with VTE related to pancreatic cancer [12.67 pmol/l (range 0.05-112.04)] than in patients with VTE related to cancer of other type [2.01 pmol/l (range 0.05-43.92), P = 0.02]. Higher levels of circulating TFa during the course of pancreatic cancer may explain the higher incidence of VTE associated with this type of cancer.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The aim of this paper is to share the methodological problems of an unsuccessful prospective single-arm feasibility trial conducted to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a 12-week progressive exercise intervention for adults undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer, as well as offer recommendations for future trials. Methods The initial plan was to recruit adults diagnosed with rectal cancer and scheduled for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over a 12-month period. The exercise intervention was to consist of supervised exercise sessions delivered three times per week by a trained exercise specialist. Feasibility (i.e., recruitment, adherence, and compliance rates) and safety (i.e., adverse events) were to be assessed throughout the trial, and patient-reported and physical health outcomes were to be assessed pre- and post-intervention. After 8 months of open recruitment, we had been unable to successfully enroll patients into our trial. We therefore modified our eligibility criteria to increase the number of patients that could be recruited into our trial, and in turn increase our recruitment rate. We also amended our recruitment procedures to ensure we could reach patients who were either awaiting treatment, receiving treatment, or had completed treatments in the past 5 years. In doing so, we added a research objective, namely to determine the optimal timing of conducting an exercise intervention with adults diagnosed with rectal cancer (i.e., during neoadjuvant treatment, after surgery, during adjuvant treatment, or post-treatment). Results Many problems continued to hinder the progress of our trial, particularly the low recruitment rate and the failure to enroll the required sample size that would make our results reliable. Conclusion This led us to conclude that our trial was not feasible and that it is advisable to consider some elements carefully (e.g., recruitment strategies, communication, and trial location) before designing and conducting future trials. If one or more of these elements still proves to be problematic, trial results risk being compromised and alternative approaches should be considered. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03049124. Registered on 02 September 2017