Institution
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Healthcare•Southampton, United Kingdom•
About: University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust is a healthcare organization based out in Southampton, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Medicine. The organization has 2406 authors who have published 3751 publications receiving 106569 citations. The organization is also known as: University Hospital Southampton.
Topics: Population, Medicine, Randomized controlled trial, Pregnancy, Cohort
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Harvard University1, Vanderbilt University2, Netherlands Cancer Institute3, University of Colorado Denver4, Institut Gustave Roussy5, University of Duisburg-Essen6, University of Mannheim7, University of Utah8, VU University Amsterdam9, Mount Sinai Hospital10, Washington University in St. Louis11, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust12, University of Paris13, Technische Universität München14, Loyola University Chicago15, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center16, University of South Florida17, Medarex18, Bristol-Myers Squibb19
TL;DR: Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma.
Abstract: Background An improvement in overall survival among patients with metastatic melanoma has been an elusive goal. In this phase 3 study, ipilimumab — which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response — administered with or without a glycoprotein 100 (gp100) peptide vaccine was compared with gp100 alone in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Methods A total of 676 HLA-A*0201–positive patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, whose disease had progressed while they were receiving therapy for metastatic disease, were randomly assigned, in a 3:1:1 ratio, to receive ipilimumab plus gp100 (403 patients), ipilimumab alone (137), or gp100 alone (136). Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight, was administered with or without gp100 every 3 weeks for up to four treatments (induction). Eligible patients could receive reinduction therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Results The median overall survival was 10.0 months among patients receiving ipilimumab plus gp100, as compared with 6.4 months among patients receiving gp100 alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P<0.001). The median overall survival with ipilimumab alone was 10.1 months (hazard ratio for death in the comparison with gp100 alone, 0.66; P = 0.003). No difference in overall survival was detected between the ipilimumab groups (hazard ratio with ipilimumab plus gp100, 1.04; P = 0.76). Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 to 15% of patients treated with ipilimumab and in 3% treated with gp100 alone. There were 14 deaths related to the study drugs (2.1%), and 7 were associated with immune-related adverse events. Conclusions Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Adverse events can be severe, long-lasting, or both, but most are reversible with appropriate treatment. (Funded by Medarex and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094653.)
13,081 citations
••
TL;DR: On a shelf in the sunny, open-plan office of Cochrane Australia in Melbourne, there's a large, white ring-binder that, it's fair to say, hasn't been opened in a while.
Abstract: On a shelf in the sunny, open-plan office of Cochrane Australia in Melbourne, there's a large, white ring-binder that, it's fair to say, hasn't been opened in a while. It's a printed copy of the original, 1994 edition of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook, edited by Dave Sackett,[1] and within it the original guidance on the methods to be used. The section on preparing and maintaining systematic reviews, edited by Andy Oxman, weighs in at a total of 76 pages.[2]
4,228 citations
••
University of Oxford1, Federal University of São Paulo2, University of the Witwatersrand3, Stellenbosch University4, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine5, University of Sheffield6, University of London7, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust8, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust9, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust10, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust11, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust12, St George's, University of London13, AstraZeneca14, North Bristol NHS Trust15, University College Hospital16, University of Hull17, Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública18, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte19, Northwest University (China)20, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria21, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School22, Boston Children's Hospital23, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul24, Western General Hospital25, University of Glasgow26, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust27, University of Cambridge28, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust29, Aneurin Bevan University Health Board30
TL;DR: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials.
3,741 citations
••
University of Pennsylvania1, University of New South Wales2, Mayo Clinic3, University of California, Los Angeles4, University of California, San Francisco5, Erasmus University Rotterdam6, Johns Hopkins University7, University of Western Ontario8, University of Southampton9, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust10, University College London11, University of California, San Diego12, University of Toronto13, Northwestern University14, Harvard University15, Technische Universität München16, Lille University of Science and Technology17, VU University Amsterdam18, Favaloro University19, Kessler Foundation20, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University21
TL;DR: The revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotmporal lobar degeneration and reflect the optimized diagnostic features, less restrictive exclusion features and a flexible structure that accommodates different initial clinical presentations.
Abstract: Based on the recent literature and collective experience, an international consortium developed revised guidelines for the diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. The validation process retrospectively reviewed clinical records and compared the sensitivity of proposed and earlier criteria in a multi-site sample of patients with pathologically verified frontotemporal lobar degeneration. According to the revised criteria, 'possible' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia requires three of six clinically discriminating features (disinhibition, apathy/inertia, loss of sympathy/empathy, perseverative/compulsive behaviours, hyperorality and dysexecutive neuropsychological profile). 'Probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia adds functional disability and characteristic neuroimaging, while behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia 'with definite frontotemporal lobar degeneration' requires histopathological confirmation or a pathogenic mutation. Sixteen brain banks contributed cases meeting histopathological criteria for frontotemporal lobar degeneration and a clinical diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies or vascular dementia at presentation. Cases with predominant primary progressive aphasia or extra-pyramidal syndromes were excluded. In these autopsy-confirmed cases, an experienced neurologist or psychiatrist ascertained clinical features necessary for making a diagnosis according to previous and proposed criteria at presentation. Of 137 cases where features were available for both proposed and previously established criteria, 118 (86%) met 'possible' criteria, and 104 (76%) met criteria for 'probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. In contrast, 72 cases (53%) met previously established criteria for the syndrome (P < 0.001 for comparison with 'possible' and 'probable' criteria). Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Greater sensitivity of the proposed criteria may reflect the optimized diagnostic features, less restrictive exclusion features and a flexible structure that accommodates different initial clinical presentations. Future studies will be needed to establish the reliability and specificity of these revised diagnostic guidelines.
3,706 citations
••
TL;DR: A phase 1/2, single-blind, randomized controlled trial in five trial sites in the UK of a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) expressing the SARS-CoV2 spike protein compared with a meningococcal conjugate vaccine (MenACWY) as control was conducted.
1,899 citations
Authors
Showing all 2432 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Cyrus Cooper | 204 | 1869 | 206782 |
Stephen T. Holgate | 142 | 870 | 82345 |
John A. Kanis | 133 | 625 | 96992 |
Peter Simmonds | 131 | 823 | 62953 |
Clive Osmond | 131 | 588 | 84694 |
David Smith | 129 | 2184 | 100917 |
Philip C. Calder | 125 | 747 | 59110 |
Thorkild I. A. Sørensen | 114 | 747 | 60060 |
Andrew Collins | 100 | 684 | 40634 |
Alan Jackson | 99 | 743 | 42969 |
Robert H. Anderson | 97 | 1237 | 41250 |
Nicholas C.P. Cross | 95 | 478 | 36465 |
Marie-Louise Newell | 93 | 530 | 34132 |
Mark A. Hanson | 93 | 545 | 38985 |
Diana Eccles | 90 | 354 | 36226 |