BackgroundMalignant pleural effusion (MPE) causes debilitating breathlessness and predicting survival is challenging. This study aimed to obtain contemporary data on survival by underlying tumour type in patients with MPE, identify prognostic indicators of overall survival and develop and validate a prognostic scoring system.MethodsThree large international cohorts of patients with MPE were used to calculate survival by cell type (univariable Cox model). The prognostic value of 14 predefined variables was evaluated in the most complete data set (multivariable Cox model). A clinical prognostic scoring system was then developed and validated.ResultsBased on the results of the international data and the multivariable survival analysis, the LENT prognostic score (pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and tumour type) was developed and subsequently validated using an independent data set. Risk stratifying patients into low-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk groups gave median (IQR) survivals of 319 days (228–549; n=43), 130 days (47–467; n=129) and 44 days (22–77; n=31), respectively. Only 65% (20/31) of patients with a high-risk LENT score survived 1 month from diagnosis and just 3% (1/31) survived 6 months. Analysis of the area under the receiver operating curve revealed the LENT score to be superior at predicting survival compared with ECOG PS at 1 month (0.77 vs 0.66, p<0.01), 3 months (0.84 vs 0.75, p<0.01) and 6 months (0.85 vs 0.76, p<0.01).ConclusionsThe LENT scoring system is the first validated prognostic score in MPE, which predicts survival with significantly better accuracy than ECOG PS alone. This may aid clinical decision making in this diverse patient population.
Objective: To investigate morbidity related to misuse of over‐the‐counter (OTC) codeine–ibuprofen analgesics.
Design and setting: Prospective case series collected from Victorian hospital‐based addiction medicine specialists between May 2005 and December 2008.
Main outcome measures: Morbidity associated with codeine–ibuprofen misuse.
Results: Twenty‐seven patients with serious morbidity were included, mainly with gastrointestinal haemorrhage and opioid dependence. The patients were taking mean daily doses of 435–602 mg of codeine phosphate and 6800–9400 mg ibuprofen. Most patients had no previous history of substance use disorder. The main treatment was opioid substitution treatment with buprenorphine–naloxone or methadone.
Conclusions: Although codeine can be considered a relatively weak opioid analgesic, it is nevertheless addictive, and the significant morbidity and specific patient characteristics associated with overuse of codeine–ibuprofen analgesics support further awareness, investigation and monitoring of OTC codeine–ibuprofen analgesic use.
BackgroundIncreasing concern about the negative impact of alcohol on the Australian community has renewed calls for tighter regulatory controls. This paper reviews levels of and trends in public support for liquor control regulations, regulation of alcohol promotions, and alcohol pricing and taxation reforms in Australia between 1998 and 2009.MethodsSix electronic databases and twenty public health and alcohol organisation websites were searched for research literature, reports and media releases describing levels of public support for alcohol controls. Only studies which randomly selected participants were included.ResultsTwenty-one studies were included in the review. The majority of the Australian public support most proposed alcohol controls. Levels of support are divided between targeted and universal controls.ConclusionsImplementation of targeted alcohol policies is likely to be strongly supported by the Australian public, but universal controls are liable to be unpopular. Policy makers are provided with insights into factors likely to be associated with higher public support.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.