Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Nej M 200202073460618
Nej M 200202073460618
Nej M 200202073460618
Correspondence
Our address: Letters to the Editor New England Journal of Medicine 10 Shattuck St. Boston, MA 02115
Our fax numbers: 617-739-9864 and 617-734-4457
Our e-mail address: letters@nejm.org
We cannot acknowledge receipt of your letter, but we will notify you when we have made a decision about publication. We are unable to
provide prepublication proofs. Financial associations or other possible conflicts of interest must be disclosed. Submission of a letter constitutes
permission for the Massachusetts Medical Society, its licensees, and its assignees to use it in the Journal s various print and electronic
publications and in collections, revisions, and any other form or medium.
CHARACTERISTIC
Age yr
Median
Range
Race no. (%)
Non-Hispanic white
Asian
Male sex no. (%)
Marital status no. (%)
Married
Widowed
Divorced
Never married
Level of education no. (%)
Less than high-school graduation
High-school graduation or some college
College graduation
Underlying illness no. (%)
Cancer
Other disease
Process of physician-assisted suicide
Referred for psychiatric evaluation no. (%)
Died at home (own, familys, or friends)
no. (%)
Medication prescribed no. (%)
Secobarbital
Pentobarbital
Other
Physician present when medication ingested
no. (%)
Vomiting or seizures after medication ingested
no. (%)
Vomiting or medication regurgitated
Seizures
Neither
Unknown
Days between initial request for medication
and death
Median
Range
Interval between ingestion of medication
and unconsciousness
Median min
Range min
Unknown no.
Interval between ingestion of medication
and death
Median min
Range
5
Unknown no.
2001
(N=21)
19982000
(N=70)
68
5187
70
2594
75
24105
20 (95)
1 (5)
8 (38)
68 (97)
2 (3)
36 (51)
6138 (96)
65 (1)
3325 (52)
32
17
16
5
3249
1965
905
238
8
5
7
1
(38)
(24)
(33)
(5)
(46)
(24)
(23)
(7)
(51)
(31)
(14)
(4)
3 (14)
10 (48)
8 (38)
7 (10)
32 (46)
30 (43)
1541 (24)
3905 (62)
850 (13)
18 (86)
3 (14)
52 (74)
18 (26)
4949 (78)
1416 (22)
3 (14)
19 (95)
20 (29)
63 (90)
16 (76)
5 (24)
0
9 (43)
67
2
1
38
1 (5)
0
20 (95)
0
1 (2)
0
65 (98)
4
54
15466
40
15377
3
130
0
5
138
16
(96)
(3)
(1)
(54)
25
30
min37 hr 4 min26 hr
0
11
*Data were obtained from death certificates and interviews with physicians. Patients for whom data
were missing were not included in the calculations of the percentages shown.
This category includes cancers of the liver, pancreas, bronchus or lung, skin, peritoneum, breast,
ovary, prostate, tonsil, and bladder, as well as non-Hodgkins lymphoma and myelodysplastic syndrome.
The Ne w E n g l a nd Jo u r n a l o f Me d ic i ne
ulation. Preliminary results of the same study were presented at the Movement Disorder Society meeting in New
York in October 1998. Obeso reported on the adverse
events associated with deep-brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in 36 patients, 33 of whom had bilateral
implants, and concluded that the risk cannot be minimized
but that the benefit is substantial.1 Lang presented the adverse events associated with deep-brain stimulation of the
pallidum in 36 patients, 25 of whom had bilateral implants, and concluded that complications were not uncommon but that the riskbenefit ratio was quite acceptable.2
We are concerned about apparent major inconsistencies in
the reported number of side effects in the 1998 report and
the current report. In 1998 eight centers were involved in the
study of deep-brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus,
and six centers were involved in the pallidal deep-brain stimulation study.1,2 The current report lists 18 centers. Nonetheless, the number of some of the listed complications decreased between 1998 and 2001. To cite but one example,
4 of 36 patients who received deep-brain stimulation of the
subthalamic nucleus had dysarthria in 1998, whereas none
of 102 such patients had dysarthria as reported in 2001.
Hypophonia is not even mentioned. Deep-brain stimulation of the basal ganglia is an efficient treatment for Parkinsons disease, but this method may lose credibility if its side
effects are not properly accounted for.
MARWAN I. HARIZ, M.D., PH.D.
University Hospital
901 85 Ume, Sweden
marwan.hariz@neuro.umu.se
To the Editor: Although the study of deep-brain stimulation for Parkinsons disease was described as a doubleblind, crossover, randomized study, this design pertains only
to the three-month evaluation. Blinding patient and investigator to stimulation status is difficult, however, especially if
the patient has tremor or if the evaluations are performed
by the same investigator who programs the patients stimulator settings. The key indications for deep-brain stimulation in current practice are motor fluctuations and dyskinesias (off periods), variables not measured with the
use of a blinded evaluation.
Will deep-brain stimulation help the average patient
with Parkinsons disease, and if so, for how long? The 143
patients in the study were in their early 40s at the onset of
disease considerably younger than most patients with
Parkinsons disease. The analysis should have included all patients who underwent surgery, even those who had complications, reflecting the intention-to-treat principle inherent
in actual practice. To be able to generalize the results, readers need to know whether the study group included all el-
Columbia University
New York, NY 10032-3784
The Ne w E n g l a nd Jo u r n a l o f Me d ic i ne
To the Editor: Although the study by de Lemos and colleagues has important clinical implications, several points
are worth highlighting. The authors state that patients with
higher B-type natriuretic peptide levels had a greater number of stenosed coronary arteries than did patients with
lower levels of the peptide, but they do not present data on
the affected vessels. These data are relevant, since a previous
study of B-type natriuretic peptide showed that patients
with right coronary artery disease have both a lower plasma
level at rest and a smaller increase in the level after exercise
than do patients with left coronary artery disease.1 Higher
levels of B-type natriuretic peptide may identify patients
with left coronary artery disease in particular, left anterior descending coronary artery disease and this may explain the link between the peptide level and the prognosis.
The authors propose that a threshold of 80 pg per milliliter
is an appropriate predictor of survival for patients with acute
coronary syndromes. However, this level is derived from studies of heart failure. The optimal cutoff point may be lower
in patients with acute coronary syndromes than in those with
heart failure, since in the latter group, B-type natriuretic peptide levels are higher. Formal evaluation with the use of receiver-operating-characteristic curves to determine the optimal
threshold for prognosis would have been more informative.
The investigators chose to evaluate a group of patients
who went on to receive active treatment rather than placebo. A study of the placebo group might have been more
valid, since the trial was terminated prematurely because
of increased mortality in the active-treatment group.2
PAUL R. KALRA, M.R.C.P.
RAKESH SHARMA, M.R.C.P.
National Heart and Lung Institute
London SW3 6LY, United Kingdom
p.kalra@ic.ac.uk
1. Davidson NC, Pringle SD, Pringle TH, McNeill GP, Struthers AD.
Right coronary artery stenosis is associated with impaired cardiac endocrine function during exercise. Eur Heart J 1997;18:1749-54.
2. Cannon CP, McCabe CH, Wilcox RG, et al. Oral glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
inhibition with orbofiban in patients with unstable coronary syndromes
(OPUS-TIMI 16) trial. Circulation 2000;102:149-56.
DE
humans. However, methylnaltrexone reduces both the undesirable subjective effects and the pruritus associated with
opiate use.7
LEMOS, M.D.
University of Chicago
Chicago, IL 60637
jm47@airway2.uchicago.edu
The Ne w E n g l a nd Jo u r n a l o f Me d ic i ne
withholding proven treatment in clinical research. Unfortunately, the editorialists, citing the transcript of a television report in which plaintiffs in a pending lawsuit described
their allegations, do not accurately describe the clinical research on schizophrenia that was conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). In the UCLA
study,2 which was conducted between 1982 and 1993, patients consented to discontinue medication only after clinical stabilization had been achieved, and they were monitored closely. Offering patients with stabilized illness a
trial period without medication in the initial course of illness was within the standard of care and did not constitute
a withholding of proven treatment. In response to complaints in 1991 by two families that filed lawsuits, the Office
for Protection from Research Risks found that the clinical
treatment of the patients adhered to currently accepted
clinical standards.3 Moreover, the unfortunate suicide of
one patient with schizophrenia occurred nearly three years
after his participation in the study had concluded.
1. Chrysostomou A, Becker G. Spironolactone in addition to ACE inhibition to reduce proteinuria in patients with chronic renal disease. N Engl J
Med 2001;345:925-6.
Health Canada
Ottawa, ON K1A 1B9, Canada
1. Superior Court of the State of California, for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. SC015698 (Aller) consolidated with Case No. SC016260
(Lamadrid).