01-0.001). For the HAMA somatic factor score, the mean improvement in the duloxetine 60-120 mg and venlafaxine XR groups was significantly greater than placebo (p <= 0.05 and p <= 0.01 respectively), whose mean improvement did not differ from the duloxetine 20 mg group (p=0.07). Groups did not differ in study discontinuation rate due to adverse events.\n\nConclusions.
Duloxetine and venlafaxine treatment were each efficacious for improvement of core psychic anxiety symptoms and associated somatic symptoms for adults with GAD.”
“Background: The best therapeutic approach for primary plasma cell leukemia (PPCL) remains unknown so far. In very limited studies, the poor clinical outcome of this aggressive variant of multiple this website myeloma seemed to be ameliorated by the use of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. Aiming to provide more consolidated data, this multicenter retrospective survey focused on unselected and previously untreated PPCL patients who had VX-770 order received bortezomib as frontline therapy.\n\nPatients
and methods: Twenty-nine patients with PPCL were collected. Bortezomib was given at standard doses and schedules, in various combinations with dexamethasone, thalidomide, doxorubicin, melphalan, prednisone, vincristine, and cyclophosphamide.\n\nResults: An overall response rate of 79% was observed, with 38% of at least very good partial remission. Grade 3-4 hematological, neurological, infectious, and renal
toxic effects occurred in 20%, 21%, 16%, and 4% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 24 months, 16 patients were alive (55%), 12 of whom were in remission phase and 4 relapsed. The best long-term results were achieved in patients who received stem-cell PP2 price transplantation after bortezomib induction.\n\nConclusion: Bortezomib, used as initial therapy, is able to increase the percentage and the quality of responses in PPCL patients, producing a significant improvement of survival.”
“Background. Access-related problems are one of the major causes of morbidity in elderly patients with chronic kidney disease. The aim of this study was to assess potential risks and benefits in elderly patients comparing forearm arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and perforating vein AVF below the elbow for primary vascular access.\n\nMethods. A retrospective comparison of elderly patients (65.7 +/- 9.3 years, 70.4% male patients, 36.2% late referral) undergoing primary vascular access surgery using forearm AVF (n = 50) and perforating vein AVF (n = 55) was performed over a 2-year period, including a multivariate analysis of potential risk factors and benefits of primary patency (PP = intervention-free access survival) and secondary patency (SP = access survival until abandonment).\n\nResults. Patency rates after 24 months were significantly higher in patients with perforating vein AVF (PP + SP: 78.2%) compared to forearm AVF (PP: 62%, SP: 56%, P = 0.04).