Arterial blood gas drawn prior to initiation of TH was utilized to measure pH in all patients. Shockable and non-shockable CA patients were divided into two sub-groups based on pH (pH < 7.2 and pH >= 7.2). The primary end-point was measured using the Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale prior to discharge from the hospital: good (CPC 1 and 2) and poor (CPC 3 to 5) neurologic outcome.

Results: Sixty-two percent of shockable

click here CA patients with pH >= 7.20 had good neurological outcome as compared to 34% patients with pH < 7.20. Shockable CA patients with pH >= 7.20 were 3.3 times more likely to have better neurological outcome when compared to those with pH < 7.20 [p = 0.013, OR 3.3, 95% CI (1.28-8.45)]. In comparison, non-shockable CA patients with p = 7.20 did not have a significantly different neurological outcome as compared to those with Histone Demethylase inhibitor pH < 7.20 [p = 0.97, OR 1.02, 95% CI (0.31-3.3)].

Conclusion: Presence of severe acidemia at initiation of TH in shockable CA survivors is significantly associated with poor neurological outcomes. This effect was not observed in the non-shockable CA survivors. (C) 2013 Elsevier

Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.”
“It has been almost 30 years since Doll and Peto suggested that most of the differences in cancer rates could be attributed to the environment and behavioral factors including diet. Since then epidemiological studies have reported that individuals consuming large amounts of fruits and vegetables have a reduced risk of cancer. From this evidence, large

randomized trials of long duration were designed to test the hypothesis that some micronutrients contained in plant foods decrease cancer risk. Despite the promising experimental and epidemiological data, most randomized controlled trials failed to confirm a protective role for single or combined elements in cancer prevention. The results from randomized trials of micronutrients for cancer prevention have been mixed. Some trials did not demonstrate chemopreventive efficacy for their primary endpoints but showed statistically significant reductions in secondary outcomes, whereas Ferroptosis activation others showed unexpected harmful effects. On the basis of these findings and reflections of what went wrong it is important to find alternative approaches to move forwards in cancer prevention. Clearly, the evidence is not encouraging for further preventive trials on cancer in healthy populations. However, if we identify high-risk individuals using models that include genetic polymorphisms, or in the future, MicroRNA profiles, prevention trials could be designed to target only these groups. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 20:518-525 (C) 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.