ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the predictive factors of no early improvement and their impact on outcomes after alteplase intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke.Methods Between March 2015 and March 2016,the clinical data of the patients with acute ischemic stroke admitted to the Department of Neurology,Fengcheng People's Hospital and treated with intravenous thrombolysis were analyzed retrospectively.The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score declined ＜4 within 24 h after admission was defined as no early improvement,and the modified Rankin Scale score ＞ 2 at 3 months was defined as poor outcome.Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine predictors of no early improvement and their impact on outcomes.Results A total of 85 patients were enrolled,aged 63.88 ± 11.12 years,63 (74.1％) were males;45 (52.9％) had no early improvement,40 (47.1％) had early improvement;48 (56.5％) had good outcome at 3 months,and 37 (43.5％) had poor outcome.The proportion of hypertension (73.3％ vs.45.0％;x2 =7.083,P =0.008) and diabetes mellitus (33.3％ vs.15.0％;x2 =3.826,P =0.051),as well as the baseline fasting blood glucose (8.74 ± 4.28 mmol/L vs.6.87 ±2.57 mmol/L;t=2.471,P=0.016) in the no early improvement group were significantly higher than those in the early improvement group.Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension alone was an independent risk factor for no early improvement after intravenous thrombolysis with ateplase (odds ratio 2.896,95％ confidence interval 1.108-7.570;P =0.030).The proportion of early improvement in the good outcome group was significantly higher than that in the poor outcome group (58.3％ vs.32.4％;x2=5.626,P=0.018).Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early improvement might be a independent predictor of good outcome (odds ratio 3.187,95％ confidence interval 1.099-9.242;P =0.033).Conclusion In patients treated with alteplase thrombolytic therapy,hypertension was an independent risk factor for no early improvement,and no early improvement was independently associated with poor outcome.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#To observe the efficacy and safety of CTD (cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, dexamethasone) and PCD (bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone) regimens in treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) .@*Methods@#A retrospective analysis was carried out on 88 cases of NDMM patients admitted to our hospital from July 2013 to January 2016, including 49 cases in CTD group and 39 cases in PCD group. The outcomes of two different regimens were analyzed, including response, prognosis, and adverse events.@*Results@#The total overall remission rates (ORR, better than PR) of CTD and PCD were 65.3% (32/49) and 84.6% (33/39) , while very good partial response (VGPR) were 30.6% (15/49) and 53.8% (21/39) , and differences were statistically significant (P=0.041, P=0.028) . The median follow-up was 11.5 (3-33) months. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was (23.0±4.5) months in CTD groups, but it was not achieved in PCD group, with statistically significant differences (P=0.050) . Medial overall survival was not achieved in both two groups, without statistically significant difference (P=0.257) . There were statistical differences between patients with minor response (MR) and patients without MR in medium OS in CTD group (P=0.005) , and there were statistical difference between patients with VGPR and without VGPR in medium OS in CTD group (P=0.042) . Infection was a common adverse event in two groups. The incidences of peripheral neuropathy and herpes zoster were markedly higher in PCD group than CTD group, and the incidences of thrombus, palpation and rash, etc., were higher in CTD group.@*Conclusion@#Both CTD and PCD regimens were effective first-line induction chemotherapy choice for NDMM. PCD regimen is better than CTD in treatment power and deep remission.