167 research outputs found
The use of the X rays in the diagnosis of aneurisms of the thoracic aorta, dilatations of the aorta and mediastinal new growths
The material on which this thesis is based
has all been got from the Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh. The cases have all been under the charge
of Dr. Bramwell, and a large number of them have
personally come under my own observation.The examination by means of the X rays has
been made in the electrical department of the
above institution by the medical staff in that
department.The aim of this thesis is to show, by the illustration of the cases which have come under observation during the last 5 or 6 years, what results are obtained on X ray examination and what
is its bearing upon the diagnosis of cases.First of all then we will describe briefly
the technique of the operation entailed in making
an examination
Molecular selection of therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: the FOCUS4 molecularly stratified RCT
Complex trials with innovative designs are becoming increasingly common and offer the potential to improve patient outcomes in a shorter time frame. There is evidence that patients with colorectal cancer fall into different subgroups with varying responsiveness to therapy, and that this variation is linked to genetic biomarkers. To the best of our knowledge, FOCUS4 was the first molecularly stratified trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and remains one of the first umbrella trial designs to be launched globally.
Objectives
To identify novel therapies that improve disease control within the molecular subgroup of metastatic colorectal cancer in which the novel therapies were expected to be most effective.
Design
This was a Phase II/III molecularly stratified umbrella trial that used adaptive statistical methodology to decide which subtrial should close early; new subtrials were added as protocol amendments.
Setting
The maintenance setting following 16 weeks of first-line combination chemotherapy.
Participants
Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer were registered, and central laboratory testing was used to stratify their tumour into molecular subtypes. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding disease were eligible for randomisation into either a molecularly stratified subtrial or the non-stratified FOCUS4-N trial.
Interventions
Of the 20 drug combinations that were explored for inclusion in the platform trial, three molecularly targeted subtrials were activated: FOCUS4-B (PIK3CA mutation or
PTEN
overexpression) – aspirin versus placebo; FOCUS4-C (TP53 and RAS mutation) – adavosertib (AstraZeneca Ltd, Cambridge, UK) versus active monitoring; and FOCUS4-D (BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild type) – AZD8931 versus placebo. A non-stratified subtrial was also carried out: FOCUS4-N – capecitabine versus active monitoring.
Main outcome measures
The main outcome measure was progression-free survival from the time of randomisation to progression, comparing the intervention with active monitoring/placebo. Toxicity and overall survival data were collected in all randomised patients, and quality of life (using EuroQol-5 Dimensions) data were collected in FOCUS4-N only.
Results
Between January 2014 and October 2020, 1434 patients were registered from 88 hospitals in the UK. Successful biomarker testing was completed in 1291 out of 1382 samples (93%), and 908 out of 1315 patients (69%) completing 16 weeks of first-line therapy were eligible for randomisation, with 361 randomly allocated to a subtrial. FOCUS4-B evaluated aspirin versus placebo in the PIK3CA-mutant/
PTEN
-loss subgroup, but recruited only six patients, so was closed for futility. FOCUS4-C evaluated adavosertib versus active monitoring in 67 patients in the RAS + TP53 double-mutant subgroup and met its primary end point, showing an improvement in progression-free survival (median 3.61 vs. 1.87 months; hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.68; p = 0022). FOCUS4-D evaluated AZD8931 in 32 patients in the BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild-type subgroup and showed no benefit, so was discontinued after the first interim analysis. FOCUS4-N evaluated capecitabine monotherapy versus active monitoring in 254 patients and met its primary end point, showing improvement in progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.75; p < 0.0001).
Limitations
FOCUS4-C and FOCUS4-N were closed early owing to COVID-19, so did not accrue their planned recruitment numbers.
Conclusions
Adaptive stratified medicine studies are feasible in common cancers but present challenges. Capecitabine monotherapy is an effective maintenance therapy. Wee1 inhibition using adavosertib shows significant clinical activity, notably in left-sided colorectal cancer.
Trial registration
This trial was registered as ISRCTN90061546.
Funding
This project was jointly funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a MRC and National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) partnership, and Cancer Research UK. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 9, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information
Mediation in the Law Curriculum
Cited by Lord Neuberger in ‘Educating Future Mediators’ at the 4th Civil Mediation Council National Conference, May 201
Experiences of running a stratified medicine adaptive platform trial: Challenges and lessons learned from 10 years of the FOCUS4 trial in metastatic colorectal cancer
BACKGROUND: Complex innovative design trials are becoming increasingly common and offer potential for improving patient outcomes in a faster time frame. FOCUS4 was the first molecularly stratified trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and it remains one of the first umbrella trial designs to be launched globally. Here, we aim to describe lessons learned from delivery of the trial over the last 10 years. METHODS: FOCUS4 was a Phase II/III molecularly stratified umbrella trial testing the safety and efficacy of targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer. It used adaptive statistical methodology to decide which sub-trial should close early, and new therapies were added as protocol amendments. Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer were registered, and central laboratory testing was used to stratify their tumour into molecular subtypes. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding disease were eligible for randomisation into either a molecularly stratified sub-trial (FOCUS4-B, C or D) or non-stratified FOCUS4-N. The primary outcome for all studies was progression-free survival comparing the intervention with active monitoring/placebo. At the close of the trial, feedback was elicited from all investigators through surveys and interviews and consolidated into a series of recommendations and lessons learned for the delivery of similar future trials. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and October 2020, 1434 patients were registered from 88 UK hospitals. Of the 20 drug combinations that were explored for inclusion in the platform trial, three molecularly targeted sub-trials were activated: FOCUS4-D (February 2014-March 2016) evaluated AZD8931 in the BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wildtype subgroup; FOCUS4-B (February 2016-July 2018) evaluated aspirin in the PIK3CA mutant subgroup and FOCUS4-C (June 2017-October 2020) evaluated adavosertib in the RAS+TP53 double mutant subgroup. FOCUS4-N was active throughout and evaluated capecitabine monotherapy versus a treatment break. A total of 361 (25%) registered patients were randomised into a sub-trial. Feedback on the experiences of delivery of FOCUS4 could be grouped into three main areas of challenge: funding/infrastructure, biomarker testing procedures and trial design efficiencies within which 20 recommendations are summarised. CONCLUSION: Adaptive stratified medicine platform studies are feasible in common cancers but present challenges. Our stakeholder feedback has helped to inform how these trial designs can succeed and answer multiple questions efficiently, providing resource is adequate
Scaling Relations and Overabundance of Massive Clusters at z>~1 from Weak-Lensing Studies with HST
We present weak gravitational lensing analysis of 22 high-redshift (z >~1)
clusters based on Hubble Space Telescope images. Most clusters in our sample
provide significant lensing signals and are well detected in their
reconstructed two-dimensional mass maps. Combining the current results and our
previous weak-lensing studies of five other high-z clusters, we compare
gravitational lensing masses of these clusters with other observables. We
revisit the question whether the presence of the most massive clusters in our
sample is in tension with the current LambdaCDM structure formation paradigm.
We find that the lensing masses are tightly correlated with the gas
temperatures and establish, for the first time, the lensing mass-temperature
relation at z >~ 1. For the power law slope of the M-TX relation (M propto
T^{\alpha}), we obtain \alpha=1.54 +/- 0.23. This is consistent with the
theoretical self-similar prediction \alpha=3/2 and with the results previously
reported in the literature for much lower redshift samples. However, our
normalization is lower than the previous results by 20-30%, indicating that the
normalization in the M-TX relation might evolve. After correcting for Eddington
bias and updating the discovery area with a more conservative choice, we find
that the existence of the most massive clusters in our sample still provides a
tension with the current Lambda CDM model. The combined probability of finding
the four most massive clusters in this sample after marginalization over
current cosmological parameters is less than 1%.Comment: ApJ in press. See http://www.supernova.lbl.gov for additional
information pertaining to the HST Cluster SN Surve
Ultra-low DNA input into whole genome methylation assays and detection of oncogenic methylation and copy number variants in circulating tumour DNA
Background: Abnormal CpG methylation in cancer is ubiquitous and generally detected in tumour specimens using a variety of techniques at a resolution encompassing single CpG loci to genome wide coverage. Analysis of samples with very low DNA inputs, such as formalin fixed (FFPE) biopsy specimens from clinical trials or circulating tumour DNA is challenging at the genome-wide level because of lack of available input. We present the results of low input experiments into the Illumina Infinium HD methylation assay on FFPE specimens and ctDNA samples. Methods: For all experiments, the Infinium HD assay for methylation was used. In total, forty-eight FFPE specimens were used at varying concentrations (lowest input 50 ng); eighteen blood derived specimens (lowest input 10 ng) and six matched ctDNA input (lowest input 10 ng)/fresh tumour specimens (lowest input 250 ng) were processed. Downstream analysis was performed in R/Bioconductor for quality control metrics and differential methylation analysis as well as copy number calls. Results: Correlation coefficients for CpG methylation were high at the probe level averaged R2 = 0.99 for blood derived samples and R2 > 0.96 for the FFPE samples. When matched ctDNA/fresh tumour samples were compared, R2 > 0.91 between the two. Results of differential methylation analysis did not vary significantly by DNA input in either the blood or FFPE groups. There were differences seen in the ctDNA group as compared to their paired tumour sample, possibly because of enrichment for tumour material without contaminating normal. Copy number variants observed in the tumour were generally also seen in the paired ctDNA sample with good concordance via DQ plot. Conclusions: The Illumina Infinium HD methylation assay can robustly detect methylation across a range of sample types, including ctDNA, down to an input of 10 ng. It can also reliably detect oncogenic methylation changes and copy number variants in ctDNA. These findings demonstrate that these samples can now be accessed by methylation array technology, allowing analysis of these important sample types
Four models of HIV counseling and testing: utilization and test results in South Africa.
BACKGROUND: HIV Counseling and Testing (HCT) is the point-of-entry for pathways of HIV care and prevention. However, HCT is not reaching many who are HIV infected and this may be related to the HCT provision model. We describe HCT utilization and HIV diagnosis using four models of HCT delivery: clinic-based, urban mobile, rural mobile, and stand-alone. METHODS: Using cross-sectional data from routine HCT provided in South Africa, we described client characteristics and HIV test results from information collected during service delivery between January 2009 and June 2012. RESULTS: 118,358 clients received services at clinic-based units, 18,597; stand-alone, 28,937; urban mobile, 38,840; and rural mobile, 31,984. By unit, clients were similar in terms of median age (range 28-31), but differed in sex distribution, employment status, prior testing, and perceived HIV risk. Urban mobile units had the highest proportion of male clients (52%). Rural mobile units reached the highest proportion of clients with no prior HCT (61%) and reporting no perceived HIV risk (64%). Overall, 10,862 clients (9.3%) tested HIV-positive. CONCLUSIONS: Client characteristics varied by HCT model. Importantly, rural and urban mobile units reached more men, first-time testers, and clients who considered themselves to be at low risk for HIV
Molecular selection of therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: the FOCUS4 molecularly stratified RCT
Background
Complex trials with innovative designs are becoming increasingly common and offer the potential to improve patient outcomes in a shorter time frame. There is evidence that patients with colorectal cancer fall into different subgroups with varying responsiveness to therapy, and that this variation is linked to genetic biomarkers. To the best of our knowledge, FOCUS4 was the first molecularly stratified trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and remains one of the first umbrella trial designs to be launched globally.
Objectives
To identify novel therapies that improve disease control within the molecular subgroup of metastatic colorectal cancer in which the novel therapies were expected to be most effective.
Design
This was a Phase II/III molecularly stratified umbrella trial that used adaptive statistical methodology to decide which subtrial should close early; new subtrials were added as protocol amendments.
Setting
The maintenance setting following 16 weeks of first-line combination chemotherapy.
Participants
Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic colorectal cancer were registered, and central laboratory testing was used to stratify their tumour into molecular subtypes. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding disease were eligible for randomisation into either a molecularly stratified subtrial or the non-stratified FOCUS4-N trial.
Interventions
Of the 20 drug combinations that were explored for inclusion in the platform trial, three molecularly targeted subtrials were activated: FOCUS4-B (PIK3CA mutation or PTEN overexpression) – aspirin versus placebo; FOCUS4-C (TP53 and RAS mutation) – adavosertib (AstraZeneca Ltd, Cambridge, UK) versus active monitoring; and FOCUS4-D (BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild type) – AZD8931 versus placebo. A non-stratified subtrial was also carried out: FOCUS4-N – capecitabine versus active monitoring.
Main outcome measures
The main outcome measure was progression-free survival from the time of randomisation to progression, comparing the intervention with active monitoring/placebo. Toxicity and overall survival data were collected in all randomised patients, and quality of life (using EuroQol-5 Dimensions) data were collected in FOCUS4-N only.
Results
Between January 2014 and October 2020, 1434 patients were registered from 88 hospitals in the UK. Successful biomarker testing was completed in 1291 out of 1382 samples (93%), and 908 out of 1315 patients (69%) completing 16 weeks of first-line therapy were eligible for randomisation, with 361 randomly allocated to a subtrial. FOCUS4-B evaluated aspirin versus placebo in the PIK3CA-mutant/PTEN-loss subgroup, but recruited only six patients, so was closed for futility. FOCUS4-C evaluated adavosertib versus active monitoring in 67 patients in the RAS + TP53 double-mutant subgroup and met its primary end point, showing an improvement in progression-free survival (median 3.61 vs. 1.87 months; hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.68; p = 0022). FOCUS4-D evaluated AZD8931 in 32 patients in the BRAF-PIK3CA-RAS wild-type subgroup and showed no benefit, so was discontinued after the first interim analysis. FOCUS4-N evaluated capecitabine monotherapy versus active monitoring in 254 patients and met its primary end point, showing improvement in progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.75; p < 0.0001)
FOCUS4 biomarker laboratories: from the benefits to the practical and logistical issues faced during 6 years of centralised testing
Aims FOCUS4 was a phase II/III umbrella trial, recruiting patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, between 2014 and 2020. Molecular profiling of patients’ formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumour blocks was undertaken at two centralised biomarker laboratories (Leeds and Cardiff), and the results fed directly to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, and used for subsequent randomisation. Here the laboratories discuss their experiences.
Methods Following successful tumour content assessment, blocks were sectioned for DNA extraction and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Pyrosequencing was initially used to determine tumour mutation status (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA), then from 2018 onwards, next-generation sequencing was employed to allow the inclusion of TP53. Protein expression of MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 and pTEN was determined by IHC. An interlaboratory comparison programme was initiated, allowing sample exchanges, to ensure continued assay robustness.
Results 1291 tumour samples were successfully analysed. Assay failure rates were very low; 1.9%–3.3% for DNA sequencing and 0.9%–1.3% for IHC. Concordance rates of >98% were seen for the interlaboratory comparisons, where a result was obtained by both laboratories.
Conclusions Practical and logistical problems were identified, including poor sample quality and difficulties with sample anonymisation. The often last-minute receipt of a sample for testing and a lack of integration with National Health Service mutation analysis services were challenging. The laboratories benefitted from both pretrial validations and interlaboratory comparisons, resulting in robust assay development and provided confidence during the implementation of new sequencing technologies. We conclude that our centralised approach to biomarker testing in FOCUS4 was effective and successful
Psychometric Evaluation of the HIV Stigma Scale in a Swedish Context
Background
HIV-related stigma has negative consequences for infected people's lives and is a barrier to HIV prevention. Therefore valid and reliable instruments to measure stigma are needed to enable mapping of HIV stigma. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the HIV stigma scale in a Swedish context with regard to construct validity, data quality, and reliability.
Methods
The HIV stigma scale, developed by Berger, Ferrans, and Lashley (2001), was distributed to a cross-sectional sample of people living with HIV in Sweden (n = 194). The psychometric evaluation included exploratory factor analysis together with an analysis of the distribution of scores, convergent validity by correlations between the HIV stigma scale and measures of emotional well-being, and an analysis of missing items and floor and ceiling effects. Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's α.
Results
The exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution, similar to the original scale, with the dimensions personalised stigma, disclosure concerns, negative self-image, and concerns with public attitudes. One item had unacceptably low loadings and was excluded. Correlations between stigma dimensions and emotional well-being were all in the expected direction and ranged between −0.494 and −0.210. The instrument generated data of acceptable quality except for participants who had not disclosed their HIV status to anybody. In line with the original scale, all subscales demonstrated acceptable internal consistency with Cronbach's α 0.87–0.96.
Conclusion
A 39-item version of the HIV stigma scale used in a Swedish context showed satisfactory construct validity and reliability. Response alternatives are suggested to be slightly revised for items assuming the disclosure of diagnosis to another person. We recommend that people that have not disclosed should skip all questions belonging to the dimension personalised stigma. Our analysis confirmed construct validity of the instrument even without this dimension
- …