Process Study 24-Month Results October 1, 2008 (abridged)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TWO STEP EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 2. DO THE ADDITION STEP FIRST
Advertisements

Numbers Treasure Hunt Following each question, click on the answer. If correct, the next page will load with a graphic first – these can be used to check.
Jack Jedwab Association for Canadian Studies September 27 th, 2008 Canadian Post Olympic Survey.
Scenario: EOT/EOT-R/COT Resident admitted March 10th Admitted for PT and OT following knee replacement for patient with CHF, COPD, shortness of breath.
Interesting Case(s) -Cartilage-
Fill in missing numbers or operations
AP STUDY SESSION 2.
High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients with Predominant Back Pain Adnan Al-Kaisy1, Jean-Pierre Van Buyten2,
1
Copyright © 2003 Pearson Education, Inc. Slide 1 Computer Systems Organization & Architecture Chapters 8-12 John D. Carpinelli.
Copyright © 2011, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 6 Author: Julia Richards and R. Scott Hawley.
1 Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Appendix 01.
Properties Use, share, or modify this drill on mathematic properties. There is too much material for a single class, so you’ll have to select for your.
Objectives: Generate and describe sequences. Vocabulary:
We need a common denominator to add these fractions.
1 RA I Sub-Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Casablanca, Morocco, 20 – 22 December 2005 Status of observing programmes in RA I.
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
CALENDAR.
1 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt BlendsDigraphsShort.
0 - 0.
27  9 =.
CHAPTER 18 The Ankle and Lower Leg
MULTIPLICATION EQUATIONS 1. SOLVE FOR X 3. WHAT EVER YOU DO TO ONE SIDE YOU HAVE TO DO TO THE OTHER 2. DIVIDE BY THE NUMBER IN FRONT OF THE VARIABLE.
FACTORING ax2 + bx + c Think “unfoil” Work down, Show all steps.
Addition Facts
Year 6 mental test 5 second questions
1 Click here to End Presentation Software: Installation and Updates Internet Download CD release NACIS Updates.
REVIEW: Arthropod ID. 1. Name the subphylum. 2. Name the subphylum. 3. Name the order.
Break Time Remaining 10:00.
Turing Machines.
© Richard A. Medeiros 2004 x y Function Machine Function Machine next.
Table 12.1: Cash Flows to a Cash and Carry Trading Strategy.
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
Bright Futures Guidelines Priorities and Screening Tables
London Bridge Hospital Orientation
Bellwork Do the following problem on a ½ sheet of paper and turn in.
Exarte Bezoek aan de Mediacampus Bachelor in de grafische en digitale media April 2014.
Sample Service Screenshots Enterprise Cloud Service 11.3.
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
1 RA III - Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25 – 27 October 2006 Status of observing programmes in RA.
1..
Adding Up In Chunks.
MaK_Full ahead loaded 1 Alarm Page Directory (F11)
Understanding Generalist Practice, 5e, Kirst-Ashman/Hull
1 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt 10 pt 15 pt 20 pt 25 pt 5 pt Synthetic.
Artificial Intelligence
PROCESS vs. WA State SCS Study A Comparison of Study Design, Patient Population, and Outcomes August 29,2007.
Addition 1’s to 20.
Model and Relationships 6 M 1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
25 seconds left…...
Subtraction: Adding UP
: 3 00.
5 minutes.
1 hi at no doifpi me be go we of at be do go hi if me no of pi we Inorder Traversal Inorder traversal. n Visit the left subtree. n Visit the node. n Visit.
Week 1.
Speak Up for Safety Dr. Susan Strauss Harassment & Bullying Consultant November 9, 2012.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
©Brooks/Cole, 2001 Chapter 12 Derived Types-- Enumerated, Structure and Union.
Essential Cell Biology
Converting a Fraction to %
Clock will move after 1 minute
PSSA Preparation.
Essential Cell Biology
Physics for Scientists & Engineers, 3rd Edition
Energy Generation in Mitochondria and Chlorplasts
Select a time to count down from the clock above
Successful Treatment of Low Back Pain with a Novel Neuromodulation Device Iris Smet, MD 1 Jean-Pierre Van Buyten, MD 1 Adnan Al-Kaisy MB ChB FRCA 2 1 AZ.
Presentation transcript:

Process Study 24-Month Results October 1, 2008 (abridged)

2 | MDT Confidential Study Design for Primary Endpoint (≥ 50% Reduction in Leg Pain (VAS) at 6 Months)

3 | MDT Confidential PROCESS Study Summary of ITT Results Until 6 Months (Kumar K et al. Pain 2007) Patients in the SCS and CMM groups were: –Well matched –Representative of patients with FBSS, suffering from neuropathic pain predominantly in the legs Significantly better outcomes were observed in the SCS group in terms of: –Pain relief (leg and back VAS) – the primary outcome 48% patients reaching ≥ 50% leg pain relief vs. 9% in CMM group 64% patients reaching ≥ 30% leg pain relief vs. 18% in CMM group –Disability (Oswestry Disability Index) –Quality of life (SF-36 and EQ-5D) –Patient satisfaction –Occurrence rate of SCS-related events comparable to literature

4 | MDT Confidential 24-month Analysis SCS-continue Group The 24 month analysis focuses on the SCS+CMM-continue group –i.e. patients randomised to SCS who remained on SCS until 24 months The following analyses have been limited to the primary outcome only (vs. CMM): –Revised ITT (where all patients requesting crossover are considered as having < 50% pain relief at 24 months) –Per treatment analyses (based on the treatment the patient is receiving at the 24 months visit)

5 | MDT Confidential Rationale For Focusing on the SCS Continue Group High and uneven crossover after 6 months –4 / 46 (9%) SCS+CMM patients with a 24m visit had crossed to CMM –30 / 41 (73%) CMM patients with a 24m visit had crossed to SCS+CMM other analyses no longer relevant AnalysesReason for non relevance Per ITTthe treatments received were very different from those to which the group was randomized (especially for the CMM group) Per treatmentThis analysis would mix patients with 24-months of treatment (i.e. patients who continued on their treatment) with patients with 12–18 months of treatment (i.e. those who switched post 6 months) SCS vs. CMM continue groups The small number of CMM-continue patients (n=11) implies that: The CMM-continue group would no longer be representative of the initial group Even if statistical tests were performed to compare SCS vs. CMM or changes from baseline, it is very unlikely that these would show significance

6 | MDT Confidential Patient Flow Through 24 Months

7 | MDT Confidential Leg Pain Relief in SCS+CMM-continue Group Over 24 Months Significant Reduction in Leg Pain VAS Over 24 Months

8 | MDT Confidential Primary Outcome: ≥ 50% Leg Pain Relief at 24 Months Continued Greater Effect with SCS in the Per Treatment/ITT Analyses Over 24 Months

9 | MDT Confidential Leg Pain Relief in SCS+CMM-continue Group at 24 Months ≥ 30% Leg Pain Relief Maintained in the Majority of Patients Over 24 Months

10 | MDT Confidential QoL in SCS+CMM-continue Group at 24 Months Significant Improvement in 7/8 Domains of QoL (SF-36) Over 24 Months

11 | MDT Confidential Quality of Life in SCS+CMM-continue Group Over 24 Months Significant Increase in QoL (EQ-5D) Over 24 Months

12 | MDT Confidential Function in SCS+CMM-continue Group Over 24 Months Significant Improvement in Function (Oswestry Disability Index) Over 24 Months

13 | MDT Confidential Satisfaction in SCS+CMM-continue Group Over 24 Months High Patient Satisfaction Maintained Over 24 Months “Are you satisfied with the pain relief provided by your treatment?” “Based on your experience so far, would you have agreed to this treatment?”

14 | MDT Confidential SCS-related Complications in SCS-continue Patients: 24 Months 19 (45%) Patients Had Total 34 Complications, 13 (31%) Patients Required Surgery IPG: implantable pulse generator; * 1) Case of suboptimal connection of extension to IPG, leading to intermittent stimulation; 2) Lead implanted anteriorly, leading to patient receiving shocks; 3) lead cut during implant SCS-related adverse event at 24 months Number of events Patients with ≥1 event Patients requiring surgery Number (%) Hardware related1410 (24)8 (19) Lead migration96 (14) Lead/extension fracture/ torqued contacts43 (7)1 (2) IPG migration11 (2) Loss of therapeutic effect, lost or unpleasant paresthesia55 (12)2 (5) Technique*32 (5) Biological129 (21)3 (7) Infection / wound breakdown44 (10)2 (5) Pain at IPG incision site / Pocket inflammation55 (12)1 (2) IPG pocket fluid collection32 (5)0 (0)

15 | MDT Confidential PROCESS Study Summary of Results at 24 Months In ITT and per treatment analyses, significantly more SCS patients achieved the primary outcome of ≥ 50% leg pain relief. Significant difference from baseline achieved in the SCS-continue group in main outcomes: –Leg pain relief (p < ) –Quality of life (SF-36 and EQ-5D, p ≤ 0.01) –Disability (ODI, p = ) No significant change in drug and non drug treatments Complications in line with the literature –45% of patients had ≥ 1 complications, 31% of patients required surgery High patient satisfaction, increasing number of patients return to work Sustained effect of SCS over 24 months

16 | MDT Confidential Thank You to the Participating Centers! UC EN