tbuckley/cabot-search huggingface dataset:
Who Speaks for the Patient?
Authors: E. J. H.
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (1967)

Editorials1 April 1967Who Speaks for the Patient?E. J. H.E. J. H.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-66-4-809 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptWho speaks and writes in public for the interests of any and all patients in medical care? The answer is simple— many people. The many are more than physicians; they include lawyers, drug manufacturers, bureaucrats, novelists, economists, magazine journalists, union officers, and newspaper reporters. Indeed it is probably only physicians who ever question the right of everyone and anyone to debate the best means of insuring the best care for present and future patients. This right of public voice is not itself debatable although some men in the profession have made out that it is. The state of medical care...References1. GROSS ML: The Doctors. A Penetrating Analysis of the American Physician and His Practice of Medicine. Random House, New York, 1966. Google Scholar2. LANGER E: Medicine for the poor: a new deal in Denver. Science 153: 508, 1966. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. LANGER E: The shame of American medicine. New York Rev. Books 6: 6, 1966. Google Scholar4. ALDERMAN M: Medical experiments on humans. The New Republic 155: 10, 1966. Google Scholar5. MELLINKOFF SM: Miracles in medicine and problems in pedagogy. JAMA 198: 629, 1966. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 1 April 1967Volume 66, Issue 4Page: 809-811KeywordsDrugsForecastingPatient advocacyPatients ePublished: 1 December 2008 Issue Published: 1 April 1967 PDF downloadLoading ...
Supporting Nursing’s Critical Role in Advancing Pediatric Health Equity
Authors: Ashley Darcy-Mahoney, Marshall H. Chin, Suzanne Le Menestrel
Journal: JAMA Pediatrics (2022)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA Pediatrics HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcast Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA Pediatrics journal
Second cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colon cancer.
Authors: Andreas Teufel, Moying Li, Michael Gerken, Matthias Philip Ebert, Hans J. Schlitt, Matthias Evert, Wolfgang Herr, Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2022)

86 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapeutic treatment of UICC-stage III/IV colon cancer with fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is widely accepted as the current standard after R0-resection. However, with continuous improvement of patients´ survival and life expectancy, long-term side effects of chemotherapy such as second cancer development are becoming increasingly important. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of clinical data derived from the population-based cancer registry at the Regensburg Tumor Center, Germany. Patients who were diagnosed with colon cancer UICC stage III and IV between 2002 and 2018 and underwent R0 surgical resection of primary tumor were included for the study. Second cancer was as defined new tumor occurrence at least 6 months after beginning of chemotherapy and in another localization compared to primary tumor. Second cancer rate was compared between patients with and patients without adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: Data of totally 2,856 Patients with UICC-stage III/IV colon cancer were analyzed, 1,520 (53.2%) of whom received adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, 223 (7.8%) patients developed a subsequent second cancer. Most frequent second cancers were prostate cancer (18.4%), colon cancer (16.1%), breast cancers (8.1%), lung cancer (8.1%), rectal cancer (4.9%) and uterine cancer (4.9%). However, patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy did not have a significantly increased risk for second cancer development compared to patients without adjuvant chemotherapy (Table). Interestingly, our data suggest a significantly decreased second cancer rate in patients treated with FOLFOX compared to FUFOL for adjuvant treatment. Conclusions: Second cancer development was not increased after adjuvant chemotherapy for UICC-stage III/IV colon cancer, which is a novel aspect in the ongoing discussions on reduction of adjuvant treatment to 3 months or treatment of lymph node negative patients. Primary tumor (N) Second tumor (N) Second tumor (%) Cumulative rate 60 months (%) Log-Rank p Chemotherapy Yes 1520 145 9.5% 8.8% No 1336 78 5.8% 9.0% 0.685 Total 2856 223 7.8% 8.9%
Principles and Practice of Physical Therapy
Journal: JAMA (1934)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
A real-world comparison of trifluridine/tipiracil and regorafenib in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer in the United States.
Authors: Christopher Duane Nevala-Plagemann, Jian Ying, Shashank Sama, Vaia Florou, Benjamin Haaland, Ignacio Garrido-Laguna
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2022)

39 Background: For patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), both trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) and regorafenib have received approval for use in the United States. The approvals of these agents were based on modest improvements in overall survival (OS) when compared to best supportive care plus a placebo in the RECOURSE and CORRECT trials, respectively. However, TAS-102 and regorafenib have never been directly compared in a prospective clinical trial. This study utilized a large real-world database to compare clinical outcomes with use of these agents. Methods: The nationwide de-identified Flatiron Health EHR-derived database was reviewed for patients diagnosed with mCRC between 2015 and 2020. Patients who received at least two lines of guideline recommended therapy for advanced disease followed by treatment with TAS-102 and/or regorafenib in the third line or greater were included for analysis. Patients who did not have a visit or medication order within 90 days of metastatic diagnosis were excluded to ensure patients were engaged with care at the data-providing institution. Kaplan-Meier and propensity score weighted models were used to compare survival outcomes between groups. Results: The records of 22,078 patients with mCRC were reviewed. Of the 4,407 patients that received at least two lines of standard therapy, 2,072 subsequently received regorafenib and/or TAS-102. Of these, 813 (39.2%) received TAS-102 alone, 275 (13.3%) TAS-102 followed by regorafenib, 736 (35.5%) regorafenib alone, and 248 (12.0%) regorafenib followed by TAS-102. Median OS for patients treated with TAS-102 alone or prior to receiving regorafenib was 6.66 months (95% CI 6.16-7.18) compared to 6.30 months (95% CI 5.80-6.79) for those treated with regorafenib alone or prior to receiving TAS-102 (p = 0.36). A propensity score weighted analysis controlling for age, race, stage at initial diagnosis, performance status at start of therapy, MSI/MMR status, RAS/RAF status, and line in which TAS-102 or regorafenib was received did not demonstrate a significant difference in survival between groups (HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.90 -1.09, p = 0.82). A subgroup analysis did not identify any significant differences in outcomes stratified by age, performance status, MSI status, or RAS/RAF status. Conclusions: This analysis of real-world data did not identify a significant difference in survival outcomes in mCRC patients who were treated with TAS-102 or regorafenib. Median OS with both agents in a real-world setting was similar to that shown in the clinical trials that led to their approvals. This data should be considered when discussing the risks and benefits of TAS-102 and regorafenib with mCRC patients who are eligible for third line or greater treatment.
Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery
Authors: Sam Atallah, Sergio W. Larach
Journal: JAMA Surgery (2020)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA Surgery HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcast Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA Surgery journal
Ventricular Fibrosis Making Waves in ST-segment Elevation—Reply
Authors: Hao-Yu Wu, Gong Cheng, Yi-Wei Cao
Journal: JAMA Internal Medicine (2022)

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA Internal Medicine HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcast Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA Internal Medicine journal
India's COVID-19 crisis: a call for international action
Authors: Krutika Kuppalli, Pooja Gala, Kartikeya Cherabuddi, S P Kalantri, Manoj Mohanan, Bhramar Mukherjee, Lancelot Pinto, Manu Prakash, C S Pramesh, Sahaj Rathi, Nitika Pant Pai, Gavin Yamey, Madhukar Pai
Journal: The Lancet (2021)

India's current COVID-19 surge is an unprecedented public health crisis.With exponential growth in the number of daily COVID-19 cases since March, 2021, India reported more than 400 000 new cases daily on May 1, 2021. 1 This number is likely to be an underestimate of the true burden of COVID-19 cases, given reports of backlogs of test results, poor access to testing, and many people not getting tested due to fear and stigma. 2,3Without mitigation, estimates suggest India could reach more than 1 million COVID-19 cases per day with over 1 million cumulative COVID-19 deaths by Aug 1, 2021. 4 The Indian Government and health authorities must act fast to flatten this second wave.We strongly endorse the national action plan laid out by The Lancet COVID-19 Commission India Task Force and we have summarised some of their recommendations in the panel. 5Early in the pandemic, India provided COVID-19 vaccines and medications to other countries.Now it is time for the global community to support India as it endures its own public health crisis. 6 As a group of clinicians, public health professionals, and scientists working in India or with research and clinical collaborators in India, we call for eight steps the international community must take to help address the crisis in India.First, the most urgent need is to save lives by expanding health-care capacity.India needs donations India's COVID-19 crisis: a call for international action than 700 000 men aged 35-49 years in sub-Saharan Africa unaware of their HIV status, 8 similar advocacy and political will are urgently needed to address the greatest gap in HIV services.
Book Review Anatomy as a Basis for Medical and Dental Practice. By Donald Mainland, M.B., Ch.B., D.Sc., F.R.S.E., F.R.S.C. 8°, cloth, 863 pp., with 61 illustrations and 11 tables. New York: Paul B. Hoeber, Incorporated, 1945. $7.50.
Journal: New England Journal of Medicine (1946)
The resurgence of convalescent plasma therapy
Authors: None The Lancet Haematology
Journal: The Lancet Haematology (2020)

The global pandemic of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), continues to spread around the world, having infected more than 1·8 million people and causing over 100 000 deaths as of April 13, 2020. High-quality evidence showing the effectiveness of treatments for COVID-19 is scarce, but over 400 studies are now registered in ClinicalTrails.gov testing a range of therapies, including immunosuppressants and the anti-malarial drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.
Provocative Neutralization
Authors: Richard N. Podell
Journal: JAMA (1983)

<h3>To the Editor.—</h3> Dr Grieco is correct in arguing that the validity of the methods of provocative neutralization should not be accepted based on the single supportive double-blind study he reviewed (1982;248:2113). However, readers should know that there are several controlled scientific studies of provocative neutralization that have been published and are not cited by Grieco (1982;247:3106).<sup>1-5</sup>These are basically supportive of the validity of the methods and should be included in any assessment.
Indirect effects of the covid-19 pandemic on childhood infection in England: population based observational study
Authors: Seilesh Kadambari, Raphael Goldacre, Eva Morris, Michael J Goldacre, Andrew J Pollard
Journal: BMJ (2022)

Abstract Objective To assess the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on hospital admission rates and mortality outcomes for childhood respiratory infections, severe invasive infections, and vaccine preventable disease in England. Design Population based observational study of 19 common childhood respiratory, severe invasive, and vaccine preventable infections, comparing hospital admission rates and mortality outcomes before and after the onset of the pandemic in England. Setting Hospital admission data from every NHS hospital in England from 1 March 2017 to 30 June 2021 with record linkage to national mortality data. Population Children aged 0-14 years admitted to an NHS hospital with a selected childhood infection from 1 March 2017 to 30 June 2021. Main outcome measures For each infection, numbers of hospital admissions every month from 1 March 2017 to 30 June 2021, percentage changes in the number of hospital admissions before and after 1 March 2020, and adjusted odds ratios to compare 60 day case fatality outcomes before and after 1 March 2020. Results After 1 March 2020, substantial and sustained reductions in hospital admissions were found for all but one of the 19 infective conditions studied. Among the respiratory infections, the greatest percentage reductions were for influenza (mean annual number admitted between 1 March 2017 and 29 February 2020 was 5379 and number of children admitted from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 was 304, 94% reduction, 95% confidence interval 89% to 97%), and bronchiolitis (from 51 655 to 9423, 82% reduction, 95% confidence interval 79% to 84%). Among the severe invasive infections, the greatest reduction was for meningitis (50% reduction, 47% to 52%). For the vaccine preventable infections, reductions ranged from 53% (32% to 68%) for mumps to 90% (80% to 95%) for measles. Reductions were seen across all demographic subgroups and in children with underlying comorbidities. Corresponding decreases were also found for the absolute numbers of 60 day case fatalities, although the proportion of children admitted for pneumonia who died within 60 days increased (age-sex adjusted odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval 1.43 to 2.05). More recent data indicate that some respiratory infections increased to higher levels than usual after May 2021. Conclusions During the covid-19 pandemic, a range of behavioural changes (adoption of non-pharmacological interventions) and societal strategies (school closures, lockdowns, and restricted travel) were used to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, which also reduced admissions for common and severe childhood infections. Continued monitoring of these infections is required as social restrictions evolve.
Correction: Spontaneous pneumothorax: marker gas technique for predicting outcome of manual aspiration
Authors: Se5 8sj, Philip Mcguire, Tom Fahy
Journal: BMJ (1991)

Methylenedioxymetamphetamine (MDMA, "ecstasy") is a hallucinogenic amphetamine that combines the effects of amphetamines and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and has become increasingly popular in the United Kingdom.We report two cases of chronic paranoid psychoses after heavy misuse of this drug. Case reports CASE I
A pH-sensitive supramolecular nanosystem with chlorin e6 and triptolide co-delivery for chemo-photodynamic combination therapy
Authors: Yihan Wu, Jingjing Li, Xuemei Zhong, Jinfeng Shi, Yanfen Cheng, Chenglin He, Jiaxin Li, Liang Zou, Chaomei Fu, Meiwan Chen, Jinming Zhang, Huile Gao
Journal: Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (2022)

The combination of Ce6, an acknowledged photosensitizer, and TPL, a natural anticancer agent, has been demonstrated as a useful strategy to reinforce the tumor growth suppression, as well as decrease the systemic side effects compared with their monotherapy. However, in view of the optimal chemo-photodynamic combination efficiency, there is still short of the feasible nanovehicle to steadily co-deliver Ce6 and TPL, and stimuli-responsively burst release drugs in tumor site. Herein, we described the synergistic antitumor performance of a pH-sensitive supramolecular nanosystem, mediated by the host-guest complexing between β-CD and acid pH-responsive amphiphilic co-polymer mPEG-PBAE-mPEG, showing the shell-core structural micelles with the tight β-CD layer coating. Both Ce6 and TPL were facilely co-loaded into the spherical supramolecular NPs (TPL+Ce6/NPs) by one-step nanoprecipitation method, with an ideal particle size (156.0 nm), acid pH-responsive drug release profile, and enhanced cellular internalization capacity. In view of the combination benefit of photodynamic therapy and chemotherapy, as well as co-encapsulation in the fabricated pH-sensitive supramolecular NPs, TPL+Ce6/NPs exhibited significant efficacy to suppress cellular proliferation, boost ROS level, lower MMP, and promote cellular apoptosis in vitro. Particularly, fluorescence imaging revealed that TPL+Ce6/NPs preferentially accumulated in the tumor tissue area, with higher intensity than that of free Ce6. As expected, upon 650-nm laser irradiation, TPL+Ce6/NPs exhibited a cascade of amplified synergistic chemo-photodynamic therapeutic benefits to suppress tumor progression in both hepatoma H22 tumor-bearing mice and B16 tumor-bearing mice. More importantly, lower systemic toxicity was found in the tumor-bearing mice treated with TPL+Ce6/NPs. Overall, the designed supramolecular TPL+Ce6/NPs provided a promising alternative approach for chemo-photodynamic therapy in tumor treatment.
“In an ocean of ashes, islands of order”: WHO's SARS-CoV-2 origin report
Authors: None The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Journal: The Lancet Infectious Diseases (2021)

The highly anticipated WHO report on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 was released on March 30. 34 international and Chinese multidisciplinary experts reviewed hundreds of thousands of items of epidemiological, clinical, and genomic data, some dating back to 2015, and the corresponding plausibility of four origin hypotheses: direct zoonotic spillover, zoonotic transmission via an intermediate host, importation via food in the cold chain, and accidental laboratory release. Although, the report is preliminary overall, it concludes that the most likely route of SARS-CoV-2 emergence was from a bat lineage via an unidentified intermediate host with more frequent human contact, in which the progenitor virus might have been circulating undetected for decades.
Novel insights into the roles and therapeutic implications of MUC1 oncoprotein via regulating proteins and non-coding RNAs in cancer
Authors: Wei Li, Yineng Han, Chenmin Sun, Xue Li, Junhua Zheng, Jianping Che, Xudong Yao, Donald Kufe
Journal: Theranostics (2022)

Mucin 1 (MUC1) is a heterodimeric transmembrane glycoprotein that protects epithelial cells in mammals. The transmembrane C-terminal subunit (MUC1-C) plays a crucial role in oncogenesis. As an oncoprotein, MUC1-C regulates a number of proteins that are associated with tumorigenesis by interacting with oncoproteins, transcription factors, coactivators, etc., inducing proliferation, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), invasion, stemness, immune evasion, and drug resistance. Moreover, MUC1-C modulates the expression of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), which further regulate carcinogenesis by directly binding to specific proteins. ncRNAs can also affect MUC1 protein expression by targeting the MUC1 mRNA 3' untranslated region (UTR). A series of ncRNAs can modulate cancer development by regulating MUC1-C. This review focuses on the interaction of MUC1-C with proteins and ncRNAs in cancer progression. We also summarize the recent advances in immunotherapy with a focus on therapeutic approaches based on MUC1-C and nanocarrier complexes for cancer treatment.