Background: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In patients with a long... Show moreBackground: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In patients with a long-term or permanent contraindication for OAC ran-domized controlled trial (RCT) data is lacking. Study objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of LAAO in AF patients who are ineligible to use OAC. The co-primary efficacy endpoint is (1) time to first occurrence of stroke (ischemic, hemorrhagic, or undetermined) and (2) time to first occurrence of the composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and systemic embolism (SE). The primary safety endpoint is the 30-day rate of peri-procedural complications. Study design: This is a multicenter, investigator-initiated, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE), superiority-driven RCT. Patients with AF, a CHA 2DS 2 -VASc score >= 2 for men and >= 3 for women and a long-term or permanent contraindica-tion for OAC will be randomized in a 2:1 fashion to the device- or control arm. Patients in the device arm will undergo percutaneous LAAO and will receive post-procedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) per protocol, while those in the control arm will continue their current treatment consisting of no antithrombotic therapy or (D)APT as deemed appropriate by the primary responsible physician. In this endpoint-driven trial design, assuming a 50% lower stroke risk of LAAO compared to conservative treatment, 609 patients will be followed for a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 5 years. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses will be performed to allow decision-making on reimbursement of LAAO for the target population in the Netherlands. Summary: The COMPARE LAAO trial will investigate the clinical superiority in preventing thromboembolic events and cost-effectiveness of LAAO in AF patients with a high thromboembolic risk and a contraindication for OAC use. Show less
Proton therapy offers an attractive alternative to conventional photon-based radiotherapy in low grade glioma patients, delivering radiotherapy with equivalent efficacy to the tumour with less... Show moreProton therapy offers an attractive alternative to conventional photon-based radiotherapy in low grade glioma patients, delivering radiotherapy with equivalent efficacy to the tumour with less radiation exposure to the brain. In the Netherlands, patients with favourable prognosis based on tumour and patient characteristics can be offered proton therapy. Radiation-induced neurocognitive function decline is a major concern in these long surviving patients. Although level 1 evidence of superior clinical outcome with proton therapy is lacking, the Dutch National Health Care Institute concluded that there is scientific evidence to assume that proton therapy can have clinical benefit by reducing radiation-induced brain damage. Based on this decision, proton therapy is standard insured care for selected low grade glioma patients. Patients with other intracranial tumours can also qualify for proton therapy, based on the same criteria. In this paper, the evidence and considerations that led to this decision are summarised. Additionally, the eligibility criteria for proton therapy and the steps taken to obtain high-quality data on treatment outcome are discussed. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. Show less
Neuzil, P.; Reddy, V.Y.; Riahi, S.; Soegaard, P.; Butter, C.; Seifert, M.; ... ; Boersma, L. 2016
