Institution
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
Healthcare•London, United Kingdom•
About: Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust is a healthcare organization based out in London, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Medicine. The organization has 7686 authors who have published 9631 publications receiving 399353 citations. The organization is also known as: Guy's and St Thomas' National Health Service Foundation Trust & Guy's and St Thomas' National Health Service Trust.
Topics: Population, Medicine, Randomized controlled trial, Cancer, Breast cancer
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University of Amsterdam1, Ghent University2, University of Chicago3, University of Pennsylvania4, Lund University5, Auckland City Hospital6, University of Antwerp7, University of New South Wales8, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven9, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust10, Queen's University11, University of Zagreb12, Northwestern University13, Medical University of Łódź14, University of Aberdeen15, Medical University of South Carolina16, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill17, University of Southampton18, University of São Paulo19, National University of Singapore20, Flinders University21
TL;DR: The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012 and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery.
Abstract: The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise . The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. The full document can be downloaded for free on the website of this journal: http://www.rhinologyjournal.com.
2,853 citations
••
University of Pittsburgh1, Kaiser Permanente2, University of Michigan3, University of Washington4, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre5, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust6, University College London7, The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research8, Monash University9, Veterans Health Administration10
TL;DR: To evaluate the validity of clinical criteria to identify patients with suspected infection who are at risk of sepsis, a new model derived using multivariable logistic regression in a split sample was derived.
Abstract: RESULTS In the primary cohort, 148 907 encounters had suspected infection (n = 74 453 derivation; n = 74 454 validation), of whom 6347 (4%) died. Among ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 7932 with suspected infection, of whom 1289 [16%] died), the predictive validity for in-hospital mortality was lower for SIRS (AUROC = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.62-0.66) and qSOFA (AUROC = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68) vs SOFA (AUROC = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both) or LODS (AUROC = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73-0.76; P < .001 for both). Among non-ICU encounters in the validation cohort (n = 66 522 with suspected infection, of whom 1886 [3%] died), qSOFA had predictive validity (AUROC = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82) that was greater than SOFA (AUROC = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.78-0.80; P < .001) and SIRS (AUROC = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.75-0.77; P < .001). Relative to qSOFA scores lower than 2, encounters with qSOFA scores of 2 or higher had a 3- to 14-fold increase in hospital mortality across baseline risk deciles. Findings were similar in external data sets and for the secondary outcome.
2,639 citations
••
University of Kiel1, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center2, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute3, University of Pennsylvania4, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute5, Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry6, University of Edinburgh7, University of Cambridge8, University of Otago9, University of Washington10, University of Groningen11, University of Liège12, Harvard University13, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza14, King's College London15, University of Chicago16, Yale University17, Johns Hopkins University18, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich19, Charité20, McGill University21, Lille University of Science and Technology22, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center23, Ghent University24, Torbay Hospital25, Mater Health Services26, Université libre de Bruxelles27, RWTH Aachen University28, University of Utah29, Örebro University30, Leiden University31, University of Paris32, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology33, University of Western Australia34, Tel Aviv University35, University of Dundee36, University of Manchester37, University of Pittsburgh38, Royal Hospital for Sick Children39, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven40, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust41, University of Bern42, University of Toronto43, University of Amsterdam44, Karolinska Institutet45, University of Zurich46, Université de Montréal47, Emory University48, Newcastle University49
TL;DR: A meta-analysis of six Crohn's disease genome-wide association studies and a series of in silico analyses highlighted particular genes within these loci implicated functionally interesting candidate genes including SMAD3, ERAP2, IL10, IL2RA, TYK2, FUT2, DNMT3A, DENND1B, BACH2 and TAGAP.
Abstract: We undertook a meta-analysis of six Crohn's disease genome-wide association studies (GWAS) comprising 6,333 affected individuals (cases) and 15,056 controls and followed up the top association signals in 15,694 cases, 14,026 controls and 414 parent-offspring trios. We identified 30 new susceptibility loci meeting genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10⁻⁸). A series of in silico analyses highlighted particular genes within these loci and, together with manual curation, implicated functionally interesting candidate genes including SMAD3, ERAP2, IL10, IL2RA, TYK2, FUT2, DNMT3A, DENND1B, BACH2 and TAGAP. Combined with previously confirmed loci, these results identify 71 distinct loci with genome-wide significant evidence for association with Crohn's disease.
2,482 citations
••
Oregon Health & Science University1, Duke University2, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center3, University of Paris-Sud4, University of Washington5, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust6, Institute of Cancer Research7, University of California, Berkeley8, University Health Network9, Nippon Medical School10, Charité11, Astellas Pharma12, Université de Montréal13, Harvard University14, University of Alberta15, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc16
TL;DR: Enzalutamide significantly decreased the risk of radiographic progression and death and delayed the initiation of chemotherapy in men with metastatic prostate cancer.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide is an oral androgen-receptor inhibitor that prolongs survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in whom the disease has progressed after chemotherapy. New treatment options are needed for patients with metastatic prostate cancer who have not received chemotherapy, in whom the disease has progressed despite androgen-deprivation therapy. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 1717 patients to receive either enzalutamide (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo once daily. The coprimary end points were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: The study was stopped after a planned interim analysis, conducted when 540 deaths had been reported, showed a benefit of the active treatment. The rate of radiographic progression-free survival at 12 months was 65% among patients treated with enzalutamide, as compared with 14% among patients receiving placebo (81% risk reduction; hazard ratio in the enzalutamide group, 0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.23; P<0.001). A total of 626 patients (72%) in the enzalutamide group, as compared with 532 patients (63%) in the placebo group, were alive at the data-cutoff date (29% reduction in the risk of death; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.84; P<0.001). The benefit of enzalutamide was shown with respect to all secondary end points, including the time until the initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.35), the time until the first skeletal-related event (hazard ratio, 0.72), a complete or partial soft-tissue response (59% vs. 5%), the time until prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression (hazard ratio, 0.17), and a rate of decline of at least 50% in PSA (78% vs. 3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Fatigue and hypertension were the most common clinically relevant adverse events associated with enzalutamide treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide significantly decreased the risk of radiographic progression and death and delayed the initiation of chemotherapy in men with metastatic prostate cancer. (Funded by Medivation and Astellas Pharma; PREVAIL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01212991.).
2,426 citations
••
TL;DR: Anti-TNF strategies have three variants: a humanized chimeric anti–TNF- α monoclonal antibody, a fully human monocolonal anti-T NF- α antibody, and a human p75 TNF-receptor Fc fusion protein.
2,084 citations
Authors
Showing all 7765 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Christopher J L Murray | 209 | 754 | 310329 |
Bruce M. Psaty | 181 | 1205 | 138244 |
Giuseppe Remuzzi | 172 | 1226 | 160440 |
Mika Kivimäki | 166 | 1515 | 141468 |
Simon I. Hay | 165 | 557 | 153307 |
Theo Vos | 156 | 502 | 186409 |
Ali H. Mokdad | 156 | 634 | 160599 |
Steven Williams | 144 | 1375 | 86712 |
Igor Rudan | 142 | 658 | 103659 |
Mohsen Naghavi | 139 | 381 | 169048 |
Christopher D.M. Fletcher | 138 | 674 | 82484 |
Martin McKee | 138 | 1732 | 125972 |
David A. Jackson | 136 | 1095 | 68352 |
Graham G. Giles | 136 | 1249 | 80038 |
Yang Liu | 129 | 2506 | 122380 |