Effect of Topical Intranasal Therapy on Epistaxis Frequency in Patients With Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
IMPORTANCE: Epistaxis is a major factor negatively affecting quality of life in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT; also known as Osler-Weber-Rendu disease). Optimal treatment for HHT-related epistaxis is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether topical therapy with any of 3 drugs with differing mechanisms of action is effective in reducing HHT-related epistaxis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The North American Study of Epistaxis in HHT was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial performed at 6 HHT centers of excellence. From August 2011 through March 2014, there were 121 adult patients who met the clinical criteria for HHT and had experienced HHT-related epistaxis with an Epistaxis Severity Score of at least 3.0. Follow-up was completed in September 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received twice-daily nose sprays for 12 weeks with either bevacizumab 1% (4 mg/d), estriol 0.1% (0.4 mg/d), tranexamic acid 10% (40 mg/d), or placebo (0.9% saline). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was median weekly epistaxis frequency during weeks 5 through 12. Secondary outcomes included median duration of epistaxis during weeks 5 through 12, Epistaxis Severity Score, level of hemoglobin, level of ferritin, need for transfusion, emergency department visits, and treatment failure. RESULTS: Among the 121 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.8 years [SD, 12.9 years]; 44% women with a median of 7.0 weekly episodes of epistaxis [interquartile range {IQR}, 3.0-14.0]), 106 patients completed the study duration for the primary outcome measure (43 were women [41%]). Drug therapy did not significantly reduce epistaxis frequency (P = .97). After 12 weeks of treatment, the median weekly number of bleeding episodes was 7.0 (IQR, 4.5-10.5) for patients in the bevacizumab group, 8.0 (IQR, 4.0-12.0) for the estriol group, 7.5 (IQR, 3.0-11.0) for the tranexamic acid group, and 8.0 (IQR, 3.0-14.0) for the placebo group. No drug treatment was significantly different from placebo for epistaxis duration. All groups had a significant improvement in Epistaxis Severity Score at weeks 12 and 24. There were no significant differences between groups for hemoglobin level, ferritin level, treatment failure, need for transfusion, or emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with HHT, there were no significant between-group differences in the use of topical intranasal treatment with bevacizumab vs estriol vs tranexamic acid vs placebo and epistaxis frequency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01408030.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».