Urinary Tract, Sexual Organs, and Pregnancy Conditions

All Conditions

Neoplasms

Symptoms and General Pathology

Gland and Hormone Related Diseases

Rare Diseases

Kidney Diseases

Neoplasm Metastasis

Hyperparathyroidism

Hyperparathyroidism, Secondary

Renal Insufficiency, Chronic

Kidney Failure, Chronic

Renal Insufficiency

Parathyroid Diseases

Urologic Diseases

Urogenital Diseases

Female Urogenital Diseases

Pregnancy Complications

Female Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy Complications

Male Urogenital Diseases

Chronic Disease

Disease Attributes

Neoplastic Processes

Endocrine System Diseases

Chronic Graft Versus Host Disease

Oculocerebral Syndrome With Hypopigmentation

Bone Density Conservation Agents

Micronutrients

All Drugs and Chemicals

Vitamins

Vitamin D

Cholecalciferol

Parathyroid Hormone

1 alpha-hydroxyergocalciferol

Trace Elements

Vitamin D3

Calciferol

Comparison of different dose strengths of CTAP201 after single dose.

CTAP201 Injection

Comparison of different dose strengths of doxercalciferol after single dose.

Doxercalciferol

Joel Melnick, MD

This study will compare CTAP201 with Doxercalciferol in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT), undergoing regular hemodialysis, at different dose strengths. This study will also investigate the levels of CTAP201 in the body over time and determine the safety of CTAP201.

Comparison of I.V. CTAP201 and Doxercalciferol (Hectorol) in Subjects With Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and Secondary Hyperparathyroidism (SHPT)

Single-Dose, Two-Period, Open Label, Dose Determination, Randomized, Cross-Over Study of CTAP201 Injection and Doxercalciferol (Hectorol) Injection in Subjects With Stage 5 CKD and SHPT on Hemodialysis

OPKO IP Holdings II, Inc.

Heart and Blood Diseases

Respiratory Tract (Lung and Bronchial) Diseases

Digestive System Diseases

Heart Failure

Respiratory Insufficiency

Death

End Stage Liver Disease

Hepatic Insufficiency

Liver Failure

Liver Diseases

Respiration Disorders

Respiratory Tract Diseases

Gastrointestinal Diseases

Imidacloprid

The SIAARTI/NCCN (EST) screening tool is, in fact, an instrument validated by many scientific societies, but it is very articulated and its compilation is too much time-consuming.

The Simplified Screening Tool (SST) has been created through a statistical process in order to include all the critical variables, with the advantage of being shorter and therefore easier to administer in a routinely use.

Screening of chronically ill patients admitted to an Internal Medicine Unit from the Emergency Department, for palliative care need, using of both the SIAARTI/NCCN screening tool (EST), and the Simplified Screening Tool (SST), derived from the first instrument.

Screening for PC by means of two different screening tools

Paolo Cotogni, MD, MSc

Every day many patients affected by chronic life-limiting illnesses are admitted into Internal Medicine wards, coming from the Emergency Department. Many studies suggest that providing palliative care to these patients may improve their end-of-life care while reducing costs by minimizing futile treatments and unwanted intensive care unit admissions. Consequently, there is a strong need for acute care hospitals to more vigorously identify patients entering the final phase of their lives as well as their specific care needs.

In a previous study the investigators screened for need of palliative care patients affected by progressive chronic diseases by means of a tool, based on the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care - SIAARTI - position paper reporting criteria for patients with end-stage chronic organ failures, and on the specific clinical indicators elaborated by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) for patients with locally advanced/metastatic cancer. In a further pilot study, the investigators compared the outcomes of PC patients depending on whether the palliative care team evaluated such patients only if requested by the physician staff or routinely, irrespectively of a specific request, finding a significant increase of discharges after the activation of an appropriate PC service or scheduled PC ambulatory visit.

In the present study the investigators enroll chronically ill patients admitted to an Internal Medicine Unit from the Emergency Department, to be screened for palliative care need, using the previously cited SIAARTI/NCCN screening tool (Extended Screening Tool - EST), or using a Simplified Screening Tool (SST), derived from the first instrument, which preliminary showed a superimposable efficacy. This latter tool has advantages related to much more shortness and therefore simplicity in the administration to a seriously ill patient and is much less time consuming, allowing the physician to use it routinely.

The aim of the study is to verify the accuracy of the SST in identifying chronically ill patients in need of a PC approach, in comparison to the SIAARTI/NCCN tool (EST). If the SST would show good accuracy, an easily manageable tool for the assessment of PC needs in chronically ill patients would be available for the daily routine.

Due to population aging and advances in medicine and public health, the prevalence of people affected by progressive, chronic, life-limiting diseases is increasing. Many studies documented that patients with progressive chronic diseases received care that was more aimed at the prolongation of life than palliation of symptoms during their last 6-12 months of life, as well as frequent hospitalizations. These data suggested that providing palliative care (PC) to these patients may improve their end-of-life care while reducing costs by minimizing futile treatments and unwanted ICU care.

Consequently, there is a strong need for acute care hospitals to more vigorously identify patients entering the final phase of their lives as well as their specific care needs.

Historically, Hospice and PC services have focused on the needs of cancer patients. However, the majority of patients needing PC worldwide suffer from life-limiting non-cancer illnesses, like cardiovascular diseases, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), renal failure, cirrhosis of the liver, Alzheimer's and other dementias, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, HIV/AIDS, rheumatoid arthritis, and diabetes. The main illnesses requiring PC are cardiovascular diseases (38%), cancer (34%), and COPD (10%).

In order to correctly identify such patients, adequate screening tools are needed.

In a previous study, the investigators employed for this aim a screening tool derived from the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) position paper based on expert panel opinions reporting criteria to identify patients with end-stage chronic organ failures. For cancer patients, the screening was done according to specific clinical indicators elaborated by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). A Simplified Screening Tool was also created, in order to make available an easier instrument for the same aim.

The SIAARTI/NCCN screening tool (Extended Screening Tool - EST) is, in fact, an instrument validated by many scientific societies, but it is very articulated and its compilation is too much time-consuming. The Simplified Screening Tool (SST) has been created through a statistical process in order to include all the critical variables, with the advantage of being shorter and therefore easier to administer in a routinely use.

The aim of the current study is to demonstrate that the SST has accuracy comparable to that of the SIAARTI/NCCN tool in identifying chronically ill patients in need of a PC approach, thus making available an easily manageable tool for the assessment of PC needs in chronically ill patients.

In order to do this, every enrolled patient will be administered both the SST and the SIAARTI/NCCN tool, in a randomized sequence.

After completion of the enrollment and data collection, an appropriate statistical methodology will be employed for the comparison between the established SIAARTI/NCCN tool and the SST.

Eligible patients will be evaluated for the need of palliative care, randomly by means of the EST screening tool (ARM A) or by means of the Simplified Screening Tool (SST), (ARM B).

The Principal Investigator provided close envelops containing the SIAARTI/NCCN screening tool or the Simplified Screening Tool. The screening tool was inserted in the envelop according with a randomization list. The sub-investigator who wold examine the patient had to take the close envelope marked with the corresponding progressive number of patient enrolled, without possibility of choose the tool.

Identification of In-hospital Patients in Need of Palliative Care Using a New Simplified Screening Tool

Accuracy of a New Simplified Screening Tool in Identifying the In-hospital Patients in Need of Palliative Care

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of an Emergency Department (ED)-initiated screening to identify seriously ill patients in need of palliative care (PC) and to develop a simplified screening tool (SST).

METHODS: Eligible patients with a known diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, awaiting to be hospitalized after an ED visit, were assessed with both screening tools (ie, EST and SST).

The outcome of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of the SST in identifying chronically ill patients in need of a palliative care assessment in the hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: The surprise question (SQ), "Would the investigator be surprised if this patient died within the next year?" is effective in identifying the end-stage disease patients and therefore potentially unmet palliative care needs. The SG is one of the criteria assessed by screening tools to identify people in need of palliative care assessment.

METHODS: Eligible patients with a known diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, awaiting to be hospitalized after an ED visit, underwent an evaluation of life expectancy using the Surprise Question (SQ).

The outcome of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of SQ in identifying palliative care patients in their last year of life.

BACKGROUND: Good symptom control is important for delivering effective palliative care METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, hospitalized after an ED visit, fully according to the screening tool score, in an acute palliative care unit due to uncontrolled symptoms

OUTCOME MEASURE: Measurements will be aggregated to arrive at a comparison between admission and discharge times of:

* frequency (n,%) of following symptoms: pain, activity, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, sense of well-being and shortness of breath
* frequency (n,%) of use of pain killer, interventional procedures, palliative sedation

BACKGROUND: Good symptom control is important for delivering effective palliative care METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, hospitalized after an ED visit, fully according to the screening tool score, in an acute palliative care unit due to uncontrolled symptoms OUTCOME MEASURE: Measurements will be aggregated to arrive at a comparison between admission and discharge times of the intensity of symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, that consists of nine verbal numerical scales (0 as minimum value/better outcome; 10 as maximum value/ worse outcome)

BACKGROUND: Acute palliative care units (APCU) are new programs aimed at improving palliative care in hospitalized patients. Although most deaths in palliative care patients with end-stage diseases are expected, no data are available on survival.

METHODS: Eligible patients with a known diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, hospitalized after an ED visit, fully according to the screening tool score in an APCU, due to uncontrolled symptoms.

OUTCOME MEASURE DESCRIPTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the survival time (day, months, years) from APCU admission to death for any cause (overall survival).

BACKGROUND: Discharge planning represents one of the most important and complex decisions for patients admitted to an acute palliative care unit (APCU).

METHODS: Eligible patients with a known diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, hospitalized after an ED visit, fully according to the screening tool score, in an APCU.

OUTCOME MEASURE DESCRIPTION:

This study is to evaluate:

* the frequency of discharge at home and to hospice care
* the frequency of unplanned hospital readmissions of palliative care patients discharged from our APCU.

BACKGROUND: Acute palliative care units (APCU) admit patients for symptom control, the transition to palliative care programs (home or hospice care), or end-of-life care.

METHODS: Patients with a known diagnosis of chronic heart, lung, liver, and kidney failures, or advanced cancer, hospitalized after an ED visit, fully according to the screening tool score, in an APCU.

OUTCOME MEASURE: multiple measurements will be aggregated to arrive at one detailed description of:

* frequency (n,%) of following symptoms: pain, activity, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, sense of well-being and shortness of breath
* frequency (n,%) of discharge at home and to hospice care

Azienda Ospedaliera Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino

Head of Acute Palliative Care Unit and Palliative Care Team

Blood and Lymph Conditions

Anemia

Anti-Inflammatory Agents

Antirheumatic Agents

Analgesics

Hematinics

Chrysarobin

Epoetin Alfa

Single injection administered intravenously

Single peginesatide dose of 0.025 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) administered intravenously.

Single peginesatide dose of 0.05 mg/kg administered intravenously.

Single peginesatide dose of 0.10 mg/kg administered intravenously.

Placebo

peginesatide

Affymax

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and minimum pharmacologically active dose of peginesatide in Healthy Volunteers.

This was a Phase 1, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of peginesatide, an erythropoiesis stimulating agent, with approximately 7 treatment cohorts and 7 healthy volunteer participants per cohort. In each cohort of 7 participants, a ratio of 5:2 participants was randomly assigned to receive a single dose of peginesatide or placebo, respectively, administered as an intravenous infusion. Planned peginesatide dose levels were to escalate by cohort. The study was conducted at a single clinical center.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Single Intravenous Doses of Peginesatide in Healthy Volunteers

A Phase 1, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose Escalation Study of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Single Intravenous Doses of Peginesatide in Healthy Volunteers

Study title	NCT ID	Conditions	Interventions	Eligibility	Organization
Comparison of I.V. CTAP201 and Doxercalciferol (Hectorol) in Subjects With Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and Secondary Hyperparathyroidism (SHPT)	NCT00792857	Chronic Kidney ... Secondary Hyper... Chronic Renal I... Chronic Renal F...	CTAP201 Injecti... Doxercalciferol	18 Years - 80 Years	OPKO Health, Inc.
Identification of In-hospital Patients in Need of Palliative Care Using a New Simplified Screening Tool	NCT04143230	Locally Advance... Metastatic Canc... Chronic Respira... Chronic Heart F... Chronic Liver F... Chronic Renal F...	Screening for P...	18 Years -	Azienda Ospedaliera Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino
Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Single Intravenous Doses of Peginesatide in Healthy Volunteers	NCT00097747	Anemia Chronic Kidney ... Chronic Renal F... Cancer	Placebo peginesatide	18 Years - 40 Years	Affymax

Spots Global Cancer Trial Database for chronic renal failure