UCLouvain Saint-Louis Brussels

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is a common liver disease that can progress to cirrhosis. Currently, there is no established treatment for this disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned 247 adults with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and without diabetes to receive pioglitazone at a dose of 30 mg daily (80 subjects), vitamin E at a dose of 800 IU daily (84 subjects), or placebo (83 subjects), for 96 weeks. The primary outcome was an improvement in histologic features of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, as assessed with the use of a composite of standardized scores for steatosis, lobular inflammation, hepatocellular ballooning, and fibrosis. Given the two planned primary comparisons, P values of less than 0.025 were considered to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: Vitamin E therapy, as compared with placebo, was associated with a significantly higher rate of improvement in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (43% vs. 19%, P=0.001), but the difference in the rate of improvement with pioglitazone as compared with placebo was not significant (34% and 19%, respectively; P=0.04). Serum alanine and aspartate aminotransferase levels were reduced with vitamin E and with pioglitazone, as compared with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons), and both agents were associated with reductions in hepatic steatosis (P=0.005 for vitamin E and P<0.001 for pioglitazone) and lobular inflammation (P=0.02 for vitamin E and P=0.004 for pioglitazone) but not with improvement in fibrosis scores (P=0.24 for vitamin E and P=0.12 for pioglitazone). Subjects who received pioglitazone gained more weight than did those who received vitamin E or placebo; the rates of other side effects were similar among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin E was superior to placebo for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in adults without diabetes. There was no benefit of pioglitazone over placebo for the primary outcome; however, significant benefits of pioglitazone were observed for some of the secondary outcomes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00063622.)

BACKGROUND: Peginterferon-ribavirin therapy is the current standard of care for chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV). The rate of sustained virologic response has been below 50% in cases of HCV genotype 1 infection. Boceprevir, a potent oral HCV-protease inhibitor, has been evaluated as an additional treatment in phase 1 and phase 2 studies. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind study in which previously untreated adults with HCV genotype 1 infection were randomly assigned to one of three groups. In all three groups, peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin were administered for 4 weeks (the lead-in period). Subsequently, group 1 (the control group) received placebo plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 44 weeks; group 2 received boceprevir plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 24 weeks, and those with a detectable HCV RNA level between weeks 8 and 24 received placebo plus peginterferon-ribavirin for an additional 20 weeks; and group 3 received boceprevir plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 44 weeks. Nonblack patients and black patients were enrolled and analyzed separately. RESULTS: A total of 938 nonblack and 159 black patients were treated. In the nonblack cohort, a sustained virologic response was achieved in 125 of the 311 patients (40%) in group 1, in 211 of the 316 patients (67%) in group 2 (P<0.001), and in 213 of the 311 patients (68%) in group 3 (P<0.001). In the black cohort, a sustained virologic response was achieved in 12 of the 52 patients (23%) in group 1, in 22 of the 52 patients (42%) in group 2 (P=0.04), and in 29 of the 55 patients (53%) in group 3 (P=0.004). In group 2, a total of 44% of patients received peginterferon-ribavirin for 28 weeks. Anemia led to dose reductions in 13% of controls and 21% of boceprevir recipients, with discontinuations in 1% and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of boceprevir to standard therapy with peginterferon-ribavirin, as compared with standard therapy alone, significantly increased the rates of sustained virologic response in previously untreated adults with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. The rates were similar with 24 weeks and 44 weeks of boceprevir. (Funded by Schering-Plough [now Merck]; SPRINT-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00705432.).

BACKGROUND: In phase 2 trials, telaprevir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 protease inhibitor, in combination with peginterferon-ribavirin, as compared with peginterferon-ribavirin alone, has shown improved efficacy, with potential for shortening the duration of treatment in a majority of patients.&#13;\nMETHODS: In this international, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 1088 patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had not received previous treatment for the infection to one of three groups: a group receiving telaprevir combined with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin for 12 weeks (T12PR group), followed by peginterferon-ribavirin alone for 12 weeks if HCV RNA was undetectable at weeks 4 and 12 or for 36 weeks if HCV RNA was detectable at either time point; a group receiving telaprevir with peginterferon-ribavirin for 8 weeks and placebo with peginterferon-ribavirin for 4 weeks (T8PR group), followed by 12 or 36 weeks of peginterferon-ribavirin on the basis of the same HCV RNA criteria; or a group receiving placebo with peginterferon-ribavirin for 12 weeks, followed by 36 weeks of peginterferon-ribavirin (PR group). The primary end point was the proportion of patients who had undetectable plasma HCV RNA 24 weeks after the last planned dose of study treatment (sustained virologic response).&#13;\nRESULTS: Significantly more patients in the T12PR or T8PR group than in the PR group had a sustained virologic response (75% and 69%, respectively, vs. 44%; P&lt;0.001 for the comparison of the T12PR or T8PR group with the PR group). A total of 58% of the patients treated with telaprevir were eligible to receive 24 weeks of total treatment. Anemia, gastrointestinal side effects, and skin rashes occurred at a higher incidence among patients receiving telaprevir than among those receiving peginterferon-ribavirin alone. The overall rate of discontinuation of the treatment regimen owing to adverse events was 10% in the T12PR and T8PR groups and 7% in the PR group.&#13;\nCONCLUSIONS: Telaprevir with peginterferon-ribavirin, as compared with peginterferon-ribavirin alone, was associated with significantly improved rates of sustained virologic response in patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had not received previous treatment, with only 24 weeks of therapy administered in the majority of patients

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

Welch and Goyal (2008) find that numerous economic variables with in-sample predictive ability for the equity premium fail to deliver consistent out-of-sample forecasting gains relative to the historical average. Arguing that model uncertainty and instability seriously impair the forecasting ability of individual predictive regression models, we recommend combining individual forecasts. Combining delivers statistically and economically significant out-of-sample gains relative to the historical average consistently over time. We provide two empirical explanations for the benefits of forecast combination: (i) combining forecasts incorporates information from numerous economic variables while substantially reducing forecast volatility; (ii) combination forecasts are linked to the real economy. The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 who do not have a sustained response to therapy with peginterferon-ribavirin, outcomes after retreatment are suboptimal. Boceprevir, a protease inhibitor that binds to the HCV nonstructural 3 (NS3) active site, has been suggested as an additional treatment. METHODS: To assess the effect of the combination of boceprevir and peginterferon-ribavirin for retreatment of patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, we randomly assigned patients (in a 1:2:2 ratio) to one of three groups. In all three groups, peginterferon alfa-2b and ribavirin were administered for 4 weeks (the lead-in period). Subsequently, group 1 (control group) received placebo plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 44 weeks; group 2 received boceprevir plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 32 weeks, and patients with a detectable HCV RNA level at week 8 received placebo plus peginterferon-ribavirin for an additional 12 weeks; and group 3 received boceprevir plus peginterferon-ribavirin for 44 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 403 patients were treated. The rate of sustained virologic response was significantly higher in the two boceprevir groups (group 2, 59%; group 3, 66%) than in the control group (21%, P<0.001). Among patients with an undetectable HCV RNA level at week 8, the rate of sustained virologic response was 86% after 32 weeks of triple therapy and 88% after 44 weeks of triple therapy. Among the 102 patients with a decrease in the HCV RNA level of less than 1 log(10) IU per milliliter at treatment week 4, the rates of sustained virologic response were 0%, 33%, and 34% in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Anemia was significantly more common in the boceprevir groups than in the control group, and erythropoietin was administered in 41 to 46% of boceprevir-treated patients and 21% of controls. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of boceprevir to peginterferon-ribavirin resulted in significantly higher rates of sustained virologic response in previously treated patients with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, as compared with peginterferon-ribavirin alone. (Funded by Schering-Plough [now Merck]; HCV RESPOND-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00708500.).

Social scientists frequently study complex constructs. Despite plethora of measures for these constructs, researchers may need to create their own measure for a particular study. When a measure is created, psychometric testing is required, and first step is to study content validity of measure. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how to conduct a content validity study, including how to elicit most from a panel of experts by collecting specific data. Instructions how to calculate a content validity index, factorial validity index, and an interrater reliability index and guide for interpreting these indices are included. Implications regarding value of conducting a content validity study for practitioners and researchers are discussed. Key words: constructs; content validity; measure; psychometric testing ********** Researchers in social sciences study complex constructs for which valid and reliable measures are needed. The measures should be brief, clear, and easy to administer. Measures that are too long or difficult to read may result in a lowered response rate or inaccurate responses. In addition, measure must be appropriate for use in targeted population. For example, measures designed for use with heterogeneous populations may not be appropriate for a specific population with certain characteristics. A plethora of measures exist with known psychometric properties, but researchers may need to develop a new measure for a particular construct because no measure exists that operationalizes construct as researcher conceptualized it. In these circumstances, a content validity study should be conducted. VALIDITY Traditionally, three types of validity may be demonstrated: content, criterion, and construct validity. Content Validity Content validity refers to extent to which items a measure assess same content or how well content material was sampled in measure. Content validity can be characterized as face validity or logical validity. Face validity indicates that measure appears to be valid, on its face. Logical validity indicates a more rigorous process, such as using a panel of experts to evaluate content validity of a measure. Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) did not distinguish among different types of content validity; but presented alternative ways of assessing content validity. They suggested evaluating content validity by demonstrating internal consistency through correlating scores from measure with another measure of same construct and by showing change in posttest scores over pretest scores. Criterion Validity Criterion validity is demonstrated by finding a statistically significant relationship between a measure and a criterion (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). Criterion validity is considered gold standard, and usually a correlation is used to assess statistical relationship. For example, Graduate Record Examination (GRE) has been found to predict graduate school success (as measured by first-year grade-point average) for certain disciplines (Rubio, Rubin, & Brennan, 2003). Three types of criterion validity are postdictive, concurrent, and predictive. If criterion has occurred, validity is postdictive. The validity is concurrent if criterion exists at same time as construct measured. The GRE example demonstrates predictive validity, because graduate school success (criterion) occurs after taking GRE (measure). According to Nunnally and Bernstein, a correlation of .30 indicates adequate criterion validity. Construct Validity Anastasi and Urbina (1997) described construct validity as the extent to which test may be said to measure a theoretical construct or trait (p. 126). Three kinds of construct validity are factorial, known groups; and convergent and discriminant (or divergent) validity. …

ABSTRACT: Sleep is essential for optimal health. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) and Sleep Research Society (SRS) developed a consensus recommendation for the amount of sleep needed to promote optimal health in adults, using a modified RAND Appropriateness Method process. The recommendation is summarized here. A manuscript detailing the conference proceedings and evidence supporting the final recommendation statement will be published in SLEEP and the Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine.

CONTEXT: Memantine is a low- to moderate-affinity, uncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist. Controlled trials have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of memantine monotherapy for patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease (AD) but no controlled trials of memantine in patients receiving a cholinesterase inhibitor have been performed. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of memantine vs placebo in patients with moderate to severe AD already receiving stable treatment with donepezil. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of 404 patients with moderate to severe AD and Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 5 to 14, who received stable doses of donepezil, conducted at 37 US sites between June 11, 2001, and June 3, 2002. A total of 322 patients (80%) completed the trial. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive memantine (starting dose 5 mg/d, increased to 20 mg/d, n = 203) or placebo (n = 201) for 24 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change from baseline on the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB), a measure of cognition, and on a modified 19-item AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL19). Secondary outcomes included a Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-Plus), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and the Behavioral Rating Scale for Geriatric Patients (BGP Care Dependency Subscale). RESULTS: The change in total mean (SE) scores favored memantine vs placebo treatment for SIB (possible score range, 0-100), 0.9 (0.67) vs -2.5 (0.69), respectively (P<.001); ADCS-ADL19 (possible score range, 0-54), -2.0 (0.50) vs -3.4 (0.51), respectively (P =.03); and the CIBIC-Plus (possible score range, 1-7), 4.41 (0.074) vs 4.66 (0.075), respectively (P =.03). All other secondary measures showed significant benefits of memantine treatment. Treatment discontinuations because of adverse events for memantine vs placebo were 15 (7.4%) vs 25 (12.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate to severe AD receiving stable doses of donepezil, memantine resulted in significantly better outcomes than placebo on measures of cognition, activities of daily living, global outcome, and behavior and was well tolerated. These results, together with previous studies, suggest that memantine represents a new approach for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe AD.

BACKGROUND: The hemoglobin threshold at which postoperative red-cell transfusion is warranted is controversial. We conducted a randomized trial to determine whether a higher threshold for blood transfusion would improve recovery in patients who had undergone surgery for hip fracture. METHODS: We enrolled 2016 patients who were 50 years of age or older, who had either a history of or risk factors for cardiovascular disease, and whose hemoglobin level was below 10 g per deciliter after hip-fracture surgery. We randomly assigned patients to a liberal transfusion strategy (a hemoglobin threshold of 10 g per deciliter) or a restrictive transfusion strategy (symptoms of anemia or at physician discretion for a hemoglobin level of <8 g per deciliter). The primary outcome was death or an inability to walk across a room without human assistance on 60-day follow-up. RESULTS: A median of 2 units of red cells were transfused in the liberal-strategy group and none in the restrictive-strategy group. The rates of the primary outcome were 35.2% in the liberal-strategy group and 34.7% in the restrictive-strategy group (odds ratio in the liberal-strategy group, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.22), for an absolute risk difference of 0.5 percentage points (95% CI, -3.7 to 4.7). The rates of in-hospital acute coronary syndrome or death were 4.3% and 5.2%, respectively (absolute risk difference, -0.9%; 99% CI, -3.3 to 1.6), and rates of death on 60-day follow-up were 7.6% and 6.6%, respectively (absolute risk difference, 1.0%; 99% CI, -1.9 to 4.0). The rates of other complications were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A liberal transfusion strategy, as compared with a restrictive strategy, did not reduce rates of death or inability to walk independently on 60-day follow-up or reduce in-hospital morbidity in elderly patients at high cardiovascular risk. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; FOCUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00071032.).

CONTEXT: Despite evidence of efficacy of antihypertensive agents in treating hypertensive patients, safety and efficacy of antihypertensive agents for coronary artery disease (CAD) have been discerned only from subgroup analyses in large trials. OBJECTIVE: To compare mortality and morbidity outcomes in patients with hypertension and CAD treated with a calcium antagonist strategy (CAS) or a non-calcium antagonist strategy (NCAS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open label, blinded end point study of 22 576 hypertensive CAD patients aged 50 years or older, which was conducted September 1997 to February 2003 at 862 sites in 14 countries. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to either CAS (verapamil sustained release) or NCAS (atenolol). Strategies specified dose and additional drug regimens. Trandolapril and/or hydrochlorothiazide was administered to achieve blood pressure goals according to guidelines from the sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI) of less than 140 mm Hg (systolic) and less than 90 mm Hg (diastolic); and less than 130 mm Hg (systolic) and less than 85 mm Hg (diastolic) if diabetes or renal impairment was present. Trandolapril was also recommended for patients with heart failure, diabetes, or renal impairment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: first occurrence of death (all cause), nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke; other: cardiovascular death, angina, adverse experiences, hospitalizations, and blood pressure control at 24 months. RESULTS: At 24 months, in the CAS group, 6391 patients (81.5%) were taking verapamil sustained release; 4934 (62.9%) were taking trandolapril; and 3430 (43.7%) were taking hydrochlorothiazide. In the NCAS group, 6083 patients (77.5%) were taking atenolol; 4733 (60.3%) were taking hydrochlorothiazide; and 4113 (52.4%) were taking trandolapril. After a follow-up of 61 835 patient-years (mean, 2.7 years per patient), 2269 patients had a primary outcome event with no statistically significant difference between treatment strategies (9.93% in CAS and 10.17% in NCAS; relative risk [RR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.06). Two-year blood pressure control was similar between groups. The JNC VI blood pressure goals were achieved by 65.0% (systolic) and 88.5% (diastolic) of CAS and 64.0% (systolic) and 88.1% (diastolic) of NCAS patients. A total of 71.7% of CAS and 70.7% of NCAS patients achieved a systolic blood pressure of less than 140 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg. CONCLUSION: The verapamil-trandolapril-based strategy was as clinically effective as the atenolol-hydrochlorothiazide-based strategy in hypertensive CAD patients.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines recommend the use of peginterferon alfa-2b or peginterferon alfa-2a in combination with ribavirin for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. However, these regimens have not been adequately compared. METHODS: At 118 sites, patients who had HCV genotype 1 infection and who had not previously been treated were randomly assigned to undergo 48 weeks of treatment with one of three regimens: peginterferon alfa-2b at a standard dose of 1.5 microg per kilogram of body weight per week or a low dose of 1.0 microg per kilogram per week, plus ribavirin at a dose of 800 to 1400 mg per day, or peginterferon alfa-2a at a dose of 180 microg per week plus ribavirin at a dose of 1000 to 1200 mg per day. We compared the rate of sustained virologic response and the safety and adverse-event profiles between the peginterferon alfa-2b regimens and between the standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b regimen and the peginterferon alfa-2a regimen. RESULTS: Among 3070 patients, rates of sustained virologic response were similar among the regimens: 39.8% with standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, 38.0% with low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, and 40.9% with peginterferon alfa-2a (P=0.20 for standard-dose vs. low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b; P=0.57 for standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b vs. peginterferon alfa-2a). Estimated differences in response rates were 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.3 to 6.0) between standard-dose and low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b and -1.1% (95% CI, -5.3 to 3.0) between standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b and peginterferon alfa-2a. Relapse rates were 23.5% (95% CI, 19.9 to 27.2) for standard-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, 20.0% (95% CI, 16.4 to 23.6) for low-dose peginterferon alfa-2b, and 31.5% (95% CI, 27.9 to 35.2) for peginterferon alfa-2a. The safety profile was similar among the three groups; serious adverse events were observed in 8.6 to 11.7% of patients. Among the patients with undetectable HCV RNA levels at treatment weeks 4 and 12, a sustained virologic response was achieved in 86.2% and 78.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients infected with HCV genotype 1, the rates of sustained virologic response and tolerability did not differ significantly between the two available peginterferon-ribavirin regimens or between the two doses of peginterferon alfa-2b. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081770.)

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) have been implicated in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of etanercept, a TNF antagonist, for the treatment of plaque psoriasis. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind study, 672 patients underwent randomization and 652 either received placebo or received etanercept subcutaneously at a low dose (25 mg once weekly), a medium dose (25 mg twice weekly), or a high dose (50 mg twice weekly). After 12 weeks, patients in the placebo group began twice-weekly treatment with 25 mg of etanercept. The primary measure of clinical response was the psoriasis area-and-severity index. RESULTS: At week 12, there was an improvement from base line of 75 percent or more in the psoriasis area-and-severity index in 4 percent of the patients in the placebo group, as compared with 14 percent of those in the low-dose--etanercept group, 34 percent in the medium-dose--etanercept group, and 49 percent in the high-dose-etanercept group (P<0.001 for all three comparisons with the placebo group). The clinical responses continued to improve with longer treatment. At week 24, there was at least a 75 percent improvement in the psoriasis area-and-severity index in 25 percent of the patients in the low-dose group, 44 percent of those in the medium-dose group, and 59 percent in the high-dose group. The responses as measured by improvements in the psoriasis area-and-severity index were paralleled by improvements in global assessments by physicians and the patients and in quality-of-life measures. Etanercept was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of psoriasis with etanercept led to a significant reduction in the severity of disease over a period of 24 weeks.

Using two longitudinal panel datasets of Chinese manufacturing firms, we assess whether state ownership benefits or impedes firms’ innovation. We show that state ownership in an emerging economy enables a firm to obtain crucial R&amp;D resources but makes the firm less efficient in using those resources to generate innovation, and we find that a minority state ownership is an optimal structure for innovation development in this context. Moreover, the inefficiency of state ownership in transforming R&amp;D input into innovation output decreases when industrial competition is high, as well as for start-up firms. Our findings integrate the efficiency logic (agency theory), which views state ownership as detrimental to innovation, and institutional logic, which notes that governments in emerging economies have critical influences on regulatory policies and control over scarce resources. We discuss the implications of these findings for research on state ownership and firm innovation in emerging economies.

'Deliberative democracy' is often dismissed as a set of small-scale, academic experiments. This volume seeks to demonstrate how the deliberative ideal can work as a theory of democracy on a larger scale. It provides a new way of thinking about democratic engagement across the spectrum of political action, from towns and villages to nation states, and from local networks to transnational, even global systems. Written by a team of the world's leading deliberative theorists, Deliberative Systems explains the principles of this new approach, which seeks ways of ensuring that a division of deliberative labour in a system nonetheless meets both deliberative and democratic norms. Rather than simply elaborating the theory, the contributors examine the problems of implementation in a real world of competing norms, competing institutions and competing powerful interests. This pioneering book will inspire an exciting new phase of deliberative research, both theoretical and empirical.

BACKGROUND: Type 17 helper T cells have been suggested to play a pathological role in psoriasis. They secrete several proinflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-17A (also known as interleukin-17). We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ixekizumab (LY2439821), a humanized anti-interleukin-17 monoclonal antibody, for psoriasis treatment. METHODS: In our phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 142 patients with chronic moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis to receive subcutaneous injections of 10, 25, 75, or 150 mg of ixekizumab or placebo at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with reduction in the psoriasis area-and-severity index (PASI) score by at least 75% at 12 weeks. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients with reduction in the PASI score by at least 90% or by 100%. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the percentage of patients with a reduction in the PASI score by at least 75% was significantly greater with ixekizumab (except with the lowest, 10-mg dose)--150 mg (82.1%), 75 mg (82.8%), and 25 mg (76.7%)--than with placebo (7.7%, P<0.001 for each comparison), as was the percentage of patients with a reduction in the PASI score by at least 90%: 150 mg (71.4%), 75 mg (58.6%), and 25 mg (50.0%) versus placebo (0%, P<0.001 for each comparison). Similarly, a 100% reduction in the PASI score was achieved in significantly more patients in the 150-mg group (39.3%) and the 75-mg group (37.9%) than in the placebo group (0%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Significant differences occurred at as early as 1 week and were sustained through 20 weeks. Adverse events occurred in 63% of patients in both the combined ixekizumab groups and in the placebo group. No serious adverse events or major cardiovascular events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a humanized anti-interleukin-17 monoclonal antibody, ixekizumab, improved the clinical symptoms of psoriasis. Further studies are needed to establish its long-term safety and efficacy in patients with psoriasis. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01107457.).

Narrative forms of communication-including entertainment education, journalism, literature, testimonials, and storytelling-are emerging as important tools for cancer prevention and control. To stimulate critical thinking about the role of narrative in cancer communication and promote a more focused and systematic program of research to understand its effects, we propose a typology of narrative application in cancer control. We assert that narrative has four distinctive capabilities: overcoming resistance, facilitating information processing, providing surrogate social connections, and addressing emotional and existential issues. We further assert that different capabilities are applicable to different outcomes across the cancer control continuum (e.g., prevention, detection, diagnosis, treatment, survivorship). This article describes the empirical evidence and theoretical rationale supporting propositions in the typology, identifies variables likely to moderate narrative effects, raises ethical issues to be addressed when using narrative communication in cancer prevention and control efforts, and discusses potential limitations of using narrative in this way. Future research needs based on these propositions are outlined and encouraged.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of child maltreatment in the United States and examine its relationship to sociodemographic factors and major adolescent health risks. METHODS: The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health is a prospective cohort study following a national sample of adolescents into adulthood. The wave III interview, completed by 15 197 young adults in 2001-2002 (77.4% response rate), included retrospective measures of child maltreatment. We used these measures to estimate the prevalence of self-reported supervision neglect, physical neglect, physical assault, and contact sexual abuse during childhood. Next, we investigated the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and maltreatment. Finally, we examined the association between child maltreatment and adolescent self-rated health; overweight status; depression; cigarette, alcohol, marijuana, and inhalant use; and violent behavior. RESULTS: Having been left home alone as a child, indicating possible supervision neglect, was most prevalent (reported by 41.5% of respondents), followed by physical assault (28.4%), physical neglect (11.8%), and contact sexual abuse (4.5%). Each sociodemographic characteristic was associated with > or = 1 type of maltreatment, and race/ethnicity was associated with all 4. Each type of maltreatment was associated with no fewer than 8 of the 10 adolescent health risks examined. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported childhood maltreatment was common. The likelihood of maltreatment varied across many sociodemographic characteristics. Each type of maltreatment was associated with multiple adolescent health risks.

C. Wang, E. Nieschlag, R. Swerdloff, H. M. Behre, W. J. Hellstrom, L. J. Gooren, J. M. Kaufman, J.-J. Legros, B. Lunenfeld, A. Morales, J. E. Morley, C. Schulman, I. M. Thompson, W. Weidner, and F. C. W. Wu

BACKGROUND: Two phase 3 trials (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3) showed that at 12 weeks of treatment, ixekizumab, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17A, was superior to placebo and etanercept in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. We report the 60-week data from the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials, as well as 12-week and 60-week data from a third phase 3 trial, UNCOVER-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1296 patients in the UNCOVER-1 trial, 1224 patients in the UNCOVER-2 trial, and 1346 patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo (placebo group), 80 mg of ixekizumab every 2 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (2-wk dosing group), or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks after a starting dose of 160 mg (4-wk dosing group). Additional cohorts in the UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 trials were randomly assigned to receive 50 mg of etanercept twice weekly. At week 12 in the UNCOVER-3 trial, the patients entered a long-term extension period during which they received 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks through week 60; at week 12 in the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, the patients who had a response to ixekizumab (defined as a static Physicians Global Assessment [sPGA] score of 0 [clear] or 1 [minimal psoriasis]) were randomly reassigned to receive placebo, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, or 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks through week 60. Coprimary end points were the percentage of patients who had a score on the sPGA of 0 or 1 and a 75% or greater reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 12. RESULTS: In the UNCOVER-1 trial, at week 12, the patients had better responses to ixekizumab than to placebo; in the 2-wk dosing group, 81.8% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and 89.1% had a PASI 75 response; in the 4-wk dosing group, the respective rates were 76.4% and 82.6%; and in the placebo group, the rates were 3.2% and 3.9% (P<0.001 for all comparisons of ixekizumab with placebo). In the UNCOVER-1 and UNCOVER-2 trials, among the patients who were randomly reassigned at week 12 to receive 80 mg of ixekizumab every 4 weeks, 80 mg of ixekizumab every 12 weeks, or placebo, an sPGA score of 0 or 1 was maintained by 73.8%, 39.0%, and 7.0% of the patients, respectively. Patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial received continuous treatment of ixekizumab from weeks 0 through 60, and at week 60, at least 73% had an sPGA score of 0 or 1 and at least 80% had a PASI 75 response. Adverse events reported during ixekizumab use included neutropenia, candidal infections, and inflammatory bowel disease. CONCLUSIONS: In three phase 3 trials involving patients with psoriasis, ixekizumab was effective through 60 weeks of treatment. As with any treatment, the benefits need to be weighed against the risks of adverse events. The efficacy and safety of ixekizumab beyond 60 weeks of treatment are not yet known. (Funded by Eli Lilly; UNCOVER-1, UNCOVER-2, and UNCOVER-3 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT01474512, NCT01597245, and NCT01646177, respectively.).