Pregabalin did not differ on most assessments from placebo, producing only minor, transient impairment on some objective cognitive and psychomotor measures, suggesting a relatively benign CNS side-effect profile.

BackgroundGuidelines remain unclear over whether patients with early stage oral cancer without overt neck disease benefit from upfront elective neck dissection (END), particularly those with the smallest tumours.MethodsWe conducted a randomised trial of patients with stage T1/T2 N0 disease, who had their mouth tumour resected either with or without END. Data were also collected from a concurrent cohort of patients who had their preferred surgery. Endpoints included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). We conducted a meta-analysis of all six randomised trials.ResultsTwo hundred fifty randomised and 346 observational cohort patients were studied (27 hospitals). Occult neck disease was found in 19.1% (T1) and 34.7% (T2) patients respectively. Five-year intention-to-treat hazard ratios (HR) were: OS HR = 0.71 (p = 0.18), and DFS HR = 0.66 (p = 0.04). Corresponding per-protocol results were: OS HR = 0.59 (p = 0.054), and DFS HR = 0.56 (p = 0.007). END was effective for small tumours. END patients experienced more facial/neck nerve damage; QoL was largely unaffected. The observational cohort supported the randomised findings. The meta-analysis produced HR OS 0.64 and DFS 0.54 (p < 0.001).ConclusionSEND and the cumulative evidence show that within a generalisable setting oral cancer patients who have an upfront END have a lower risk of death/recurrence, even with small tumours.Clinical Trial RegistrationNIHR UK Clinical Research Network database ID number: UKCRN 2069 (registered on 17/02/2006), ISCRTN number: 65018995, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00571883.

No abstract

Paroxetine 20 mg/day has no psychomotor or behavioural toxicity and has no negative impact on BRT. Further research into the chronic and sub-chronic effects of mirtazapine is needed to establish the clinical significance of these results.

Antihistamines are a mainstay treatment for allergic rhinitis; however, many older agents cause adverse events, including sedation and central nervous system (CNS) impairment. Research has shown sedating effects of antihistamines on driving; currently, no known study has examined whether cellular phone usage while driving further compounds impairment in individuals administered antihistamines. The aim of this study was to examine this endpoint. In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study, healthy volunteers received fexofenadine HCl 120 mg, hydroxyzine HCl 30 mg and placebo. Brake reaction time (BRT) was used to examine driving performance across four conditions: driving only; driving while completing simple calculations; complex calculations; and conversing on a cellular phone. Subjective sedation assessments were also conducted. Brake reaction time with and without cellular phone usage in fexofenadine-treated subjects did not differ significantly from placebo in any condition. In contrast, hydroxyzine-treated subjects were significantly more sedated and had slower BRTs, suggesting slower hazard recognition and brake application, compared with the fexofenadine and placebo groups in all conditions. Importantly, cellular phone operation was an additive factor, increasing BRTs in hydroxyzine-treated volunteers. Fexofenadine did not impair CNS function in subjects involved in a divided attention task of driving and cellular phone operation.