Chromatic periodic activity down to 120 megahertz in a fast radio burst.

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are extragalactic astrophysical transients1 whose brightness requires emitters that are highly energetic yet compact enough to produce the short, millisecond-duration bursts. FRBs have thus far been detected at frequencies from 8 gigahertz (ref. 2) down to 300 megahertz (ref. 3), but lower-frequency emission has remained elusive. Some FRBs repeat4-6, and one of the most frequently detected, FRB 20180916B7, has a periodicity cycle of 16.35 days (ref. 8). Using simultaneous radio data spanning a wide range of wavelengths (a factor of more than 10), here we show that FRB 20180916B emits down to 120 megahertz, and that its activity window is frequency dependent (that is, chromatic). The window is both narrower and earlier at higher frequencies. Binary wind interaction models predict a wider window at higher frequencies, the opposite of our observations. Our full-cycle coverage shows that the 16.3-day periodicity is not aliased. We establish that low-frequency FRB emission can escape the local medium. For bursts of the same fluence, FRB 20180916B is more active below 200 megahertz than at 1.4 gigahertz. Combining our results with previous upper limits on the all-sky FRB rate at 150 megahertz, we find there are 3-450 FRBs in the sky per day above 50 Jy ms. Our chromatic results strongly disfavour scenarios in which absorption from strong stellar winds causes FRB periodicity. We demonstrate that some FRBs are found in 'clean' environments that do not absorb or scatter low-frequency radiation.

What Do Men with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Expect from a Urologist in Secondary Care?

PURPOSE: To identify the expectations of men with LUTS referred to a urologist and to study the association between those expectations and satisfaction with the care provided. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, adult men with LUTS completed a questionnaire before their first outpatient appointment, and again at 6 and 12 weeks. The questionnaires included IPSS and OABq-SF, and self-constructed questions on patient expectations, outcome of expectations and satisfaction. RESULTS: Data from 182 participants showed positive expectations about the urologist performing examinations, providing explanations and finding the underlying cause, but mostly neutral expectations for treatment plans and outcomes. Positive treatment expectations were associated with positive expectations about outcomes after physiotherapy, drug treatment and surgery. Higher symptom scores and age were associated with higher expectations about drug treatment. Expectations were subjectively and objectively fulfilled for 66.4% and 27.3%, respectively. Symptom improvement (decrease in IPSS scores) was significantly more in men with objectively fulfilled expectations than in men with no unfulfilled expectations. No significant difference was present between men with subjectively fulfilled expectations and men with unfulfilled expectations. However, satisfaction was significantly higher for patients with subjectively fulfilled expectations at 6 and 12 weeks compared with those who had unfulfilled expectations. CONCLUSION: Most men referred to a urologist with LUTS do express clear expectations about treatment in secondary care. Patients with higher expectations for treatment outcomes are more likely to expect to receive that treatment. Satisfaction with the care of a urologist is also higher when patients self-report that they receive the treatment they expected.

Effectiveness of a newly developed online self-management program for male patients with uncomplicated lower urinary tract symptoms.

AIMS: To explore the effect of an online self-management program in secondary care for men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). METHODS: We performed a prospective nonrandomized double-cohort pilot study of consecutive adult men referred with uncomplicated LUTS to three urology outpatient departments. Men in both cohorts received care as usual from a urologist, but men in the intervention cohort also had access to an online self-management program. Outcomes were assessed after 6 and 12 weeks: LUTS severity was assessed with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire (OABq), and the Perceived Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). The main outcome of interest was a clear improvement in the PGI-I scores ("much better" or "very much better"). RESULTS: Age, symptom severity, and quality of life scores were comparable between the intervention (n = 113) and standard care (n = 54) cohorts. Clear improvement in the PGI-I scores was reported after 12 weeks in 19.4% and 26.1% of men in the intervention and standard care cohorts, respectively. However, logistic regression analysis indicated that the difference between cohorts was not significant. Multivariable linear regression analysis also indicated no significant differences between cohorts for the IPSS or the OABq score at either assessment point. Notably, the uptake of the intervention was low (53%). CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant benefit from adding an online self-management program to standard care for men with LUTS, probably due to the low uptake of the intervention that may have resulted from the timing in the care pathway.

Effects of risedronate 5 mg/d on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in late-postmenopausal women with osteopenia: a multinational, 24-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials have shown that risedronate reduces the risk for both ver- tebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (bone mineral density [BMD] T-score, <-2.5). If left untreated, osteopenia (T-score, between -1 and -2.5) may progress to osteo- porosis. Risedronate sodium, a pyridinyl bisphospho- nate, is an antiresorptive drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Although the effects of risedronate in preventing frac- tures has been established, its effects in maintaining or increasing BMD in osteopenia have not. OBJECTIVE: In this clinical trial, the efficacy and tol- erability of risedronate in improving and maintaining BMD levels in late-postmenopausal women with os- teopenia were assessed. METHODS: This 24-month, randomized, double- blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, Phase III trial was conducted at 14 study centers across Finland, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden. Late- postmenopausal (> or =5 years from menopause) women with lumbar spine (LS) BMD T-score between -1 and -2.5 and the presence of > or =1 additional risk factor for osteo- porosis or proximal femur (Fern) BMD T-score < or = -1 were randomized to receive risedronate 5 mg (n = 114) or placebo (n = 57) PO QD for 24 months. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage change from baseline in LS BMD at study end point (24 months or last observation carried forward). Secondary efficacy end points were the percentage changes from base- line in total proximal Fern BMD and 2 bone turnover markers-urinary type I collagen cross-linked N-telopeptide (uNTx) and serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (sBAP)-at 12 months and study end point. Tolerability was assessed using reported adverse events (AEs), laboratory analysis, and physical exami- nation including vital-sign measurements. RESULTS: A total of 171 women were included (mean [SD] age, 65.9 [6.8] years; mean [SD] LS BMD T-score,-1.82 [0.42]; risedronate group, 114 patients; placebo group, 57). At study end point, LS BMD had significantly increased from baseline in the risedronate group (P < 0.05) but remained unchanged in the placebo group (mean [SE] %Delta, +4.49% [0.38%] and +0.05% [0.54%], respectively; P < 0.001). Between- treatment differences in mean (SE) percentage changes from baseline in LS BMD and Fem BMD were signif- icant at 12 months and study end point (LS BMD, both P < 0.001; Fem BMD, P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively). At 12 months and study end point, ris- edronate use was associated with significantly reduced concentrations of uNTx and sBAP compared with placebo (both, P < 0.001). Risedronate treatment was well tolerated with regard to gastrointestinal AEs; the most frequent AEs in the risedronate group were hy- pertension (n = 13), constipation (n = 8), and hyper- cholesterolemia (n = 8). CONCLUSIONS: In these late-postmenopausal women with LS osteopenia and > or=1 additional risk factor or hip osteopenia, 24-month treatment with risedronate 5 mg/d was associated with the prevention of bone loss at the spine and hip (based on significant increases in BMD in the LS and total proximal Fem) and reduced bone resorption (based on significantly reduced concen- trations of uNTx and sBAP) and was well tolerated.

Right atrial overdrive pacing for prevention of symptomatic refractory atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Our aim was to investigate whether right atrial overdrive pacing is effective for the prevention of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients without bradyarrhythmias. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF refractory to at least two Class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs and without bradyarrhythmias were included. Successful therapy was defined as the combination of (a) a reduction of AF burden with or without AAD use >75%, (b) total AF burden < or =5% per year, and (c) less than one electrical cardioversion per year. Lower rate was set at 70 b.p.m. Additional AF prevention and termination features were used in case of no success. After a median follow-up of 18 (10-55) months, therapy was effective in 19 of the 36 included patients (53%). In 74% of the successfully treated patients, additional antiarrhythmic drugs were used. In successfully treated patients, the AF burden was reduced from 15% (5-100%) to 0% (0-4%). Multivariate analysis showed that the concomitant use of a Class I or III antiarrhythmic drug, a lower AF burden before implantation and the use of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor were predictors of successful therapy. CONCLUSION: Right atrial overdrive pacing in combination with antiarrhythmic drugs seems an attractive treatment option in drug refractory symptomatic AF patients.

Upper gastrointestinal tract safety of risedronate: a pooled analysis of 9 clinical trials.

Risedronate sodium is a pyridinyl bisphosphonate effective for treatment and prevention of postmenopausal and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Some bisphosphonates have been associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract adverse effects. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of upper GI tract adverse events associated with risedronate, especially among high-risk patients. The GI tract adverse events reported during 9 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of risedronate conducted from November 1993 to April 1998 were pooled and evaluated. The evaluation included 10,068 men and women who received placebo (n=5048) or 5 mg of risedronate sodium (n=5020) for up to 3 years (intent-to-treat population). Studies incorporated a comprehensive, prospective evaluation of GI tract adverse events. Adverse event information was collected every 3 months. The treatment groups were similar with respect to baseline GI tract disease and use of concomitant treatments during the studies. At study entry, 61.0% of patients had a history of GI tract disease and 38.7% had active GI tract disease; 20.5% used antisecretory drugs during the studies. Sixty-three percent used aspirin and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) during the studies. Upper GI tract adverse events were reported by 29.6% of patients in the placebo group compared with 29.8% in the risedronate group. The risk of experiencing such an event in the risedronate group was 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.09) relative to the placebo group (P=.77). The rate of upper GI tract adverse events per 100 patient-years was 19.2 in the placebo group compared with 20.0 in the risedronate group (P=.30). Risedronate-treated patients with active heartburn, esophagitis, other esophageal disorders, or peptic ulcer disease at study entry did not experience worsening of their underlying conditions or an increased frequency of upper GI tract adverse events overall. Concomitant use of NSAIDs, requirement for gastric antisecretory drugs, or the presence of active GI tract disease did not result in a higher frequency of upper GI tract adverse events in the risedronate-treated patients compared with controls. Endoscopy, performed in 349 patients, demonstrated no statistically significant differences across treatment groups. The results of this extensive evaluation indicate that daily treatment with 5 mg of risedronate sodium is not associated with an increased frequency of adverse GI tract effects, even among patients at high risk for these events.