BackgroundOver the past decades there has been a significant increase in the number of published clinical trials in palliative care. However, empirical evidence suggests that there are methodological problems in the design and conduct of studies, which raises questions about the validity and generalisability of the results and of the strength of the available evidence. We sought to evaluate the methodological characteristics and assess the quality of reporting of clinical trials in palliative care.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of published clinical trials assessing therapeutic interventions in palliative care. Trials were identified using MEDLINE (from its inception to February 2015). We assessed methodological characteristics and describe the quality of reporting using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.ResultsWe retrieved 107 studies. The most common medical field studied was oncology, and 43.9% of trials evaluated pharmacological interventions. Symptom control and physical dimensions (e.g. intervention on pain, breathlessness, nausea) were the palliative care-specific issues most studied. We found under-reporting of key information in particular on random sequence generation, allocation concealment, and blinding.ConclusionsWhile the number of clinical trials in palliative care has increased over time, methodological quality remains suboptimal. This compromises the quality of studies. Therefore, a greater effort is needed to enable the appropriate performance of future studies and increase the robustness of evidence-based medicine in this important field.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-016-0181-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

No abstract

Intracranial and extracranial large-artery atherosclerosis (LAA) are a main cause of ischemic stroke. Biomarkers may aid in the diagnosis of LAA and help to stratify patients’ risk of stroke. We performed a narrative review of the literature, mainly published in the last five years, with the aim of identifying biomarkers associated either with intracranial or extracranial LAA in humans. Several potential biomarkers of LAA, mainly related to lipidic pathways and inflammation, have been studied. Diagnostic biomarkers of LAA were evaluated by measuring biomarkers levels in patients with LAA stroke and other stroke etiologies. Some biomarkers were associated with the functional prognosis of LAA stroke patients. Increased levels of IL-6 and sLOX-1 were associated with a risk of progression of carotid atherosclerotic disease. Findings support the notion that the immune system plays a central role in the pathogenesis of LAA. Overall, in most studies, results were not externally validated. In the future, biomarkers could be useful for the selection of patients for clinical trials. To adopt these biomarkers in clinical practice, we will need robust multicentric studies proving their reproducibility and a clear practical applicability for their use.

No abstract