Assessing the effect of interventions for axial spondyloarthritis according to the endorsed ASAS/OMERACT core outcome set: a meta-research study of trials included in Cochrane reviews.

The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) has defined core sets for (i) symptom-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SM-ARD), (ii) clinical record keeping, and (iii) disease-controlling anti-rheumatic therapy (DC-ART). These include the following domains for all three core sets: physical function, pain, spinal mobility, spinal stiffness, and patient\u27s global assessment (PGA). The core set for clinical record keeping further includes the domains peripheral joints/entheses and acute phase reactants, and the core set for DC-ART further includes the domains fatigue and spine radiographs/hip radiographs. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) endorsed the core sets in 1998.Using empirical evidence from axSpA trials, we investigated the efficacy (i.e., net benefit) according to the ASAS/OMERACT core outcome set for axSpA across all interventions tested in trials included in subsequent Cochrane reviews. For all continuous scales, we combined data using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to meta-analyze outcomes involving the same domains. Also, through meta-regression analysis, we examined the effect of the separate SMD measures (independent variables) on the primary endpoint (log [OR], dependent variable) across all trials.Based on 11 eligible Cochrane reviews, from these, 85 articles were screened; we included 43 trials with 63 randomized comparisons. Mean (SD) number of ASAS/OMERACT core outcome domains measured for SM-ARD/physical therapy trials was 4.2 (1.7). Six trials assessed all proposed domains. Mean (SD) for number of core outcome domains for DC-ART trials was 5.8 (1.7). No trials assessed all nine domains. Eight trials (16%) were judged to have inadequate (i.e., high risk of) selective outcome reporting bias. The most responsible core domains for achieving success in meeting the primary objective per trial were pain, OR (95% CI) 5.19 (2.28, 11.77), and PGA, OR (95% CI) 1.87 (1.14, 3.07). In conclusion, selective outcome reporting (and missing data ) should be reduced by encouraging the use of the endorsed ASAS/OMERACT outcome domains in clinical trials. Overall outcome reporting was good for SM-ARD/physical therapy trials and poor for DC-ART trials. Our findings suggest that both PGA and pain provide a valuable holistic construct for the assessment of improvement beyond more objective measures of spinal inflammation

Polymorphisms in NFkB, PXR, LXR and risk of colorectal cancer in a prospective study of Danes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Transcription factors and nuclear receptors constitute a link between exposure to heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from meat and tobacco smoke and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. The aim of this study was to investigate if polymorphisms in nuclear factor kappa-B, pregnane X receptor, and liver X receptor were associated with risk of CRC, and to investigate possible interactions with lifestyle factors such as smoking, meat consumption, and NSAID use.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The polymorphisms nuclear factor kappa-B (<it>NFkB, NFKB1) </it>-94 insertion/deletion ATTG (rs28362491), pregnane X receptor (<it>PXR, NR1I2) </it>A-24381C (rs1523127), C8055T (rs2276707), A7635G (rs6785049), liver X receptor (<it>LXR-β, NR1H3) </it>C-rs1405655T, T-rs2695121C were assessed together with lifestyle factors in a nested case-cohort study of 378 CRC cases and 756 random participants from the Danish prospective Diet, Cancer and Health study of 57,053 persons.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Carriers of <it>NFkB </it>-94deletion were at 1.45-fold higher risk of CRC than homozygous carriers of the insertion allele (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.45, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.10-1.92). There was interaction between this polymorphism and intake of red and processed meat in relation to CRC risk. Carriers of <it>NFkB </it>-94deletion were at 3% increased risk pr 25 gram meat per day (95% CI: 0.98-1.09) whereas homozygous carriers of the insertion were not at increased risk (p for interaction = 0.03). <it>PXR </it>and <it>LXR </it>polymorphisms were not associated with CRC risk. There was no interaction between use of nonsteroid antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) or smoking status and <it>NFkB</it>, <it>PXR </it>or <it>LXR </it>polymorphisms.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A polymorphism in <it>NFkB </it>was associated with CRC risk and there was interaction between this polymorphism and meat intake in relation to CRC risk. This study suggests a role for NFkB in CRC aetiology.</p

OMERACT consensus-based operational definition of contextual factors in rheumatology clinical trials: A mixed methods study

Objectives: To develop an operational definition of contextual factors (CF) [1]. Methods: Based on previously conducted interviews, we presented three CF types in a Delphi survey; Effect Modifying -, Outcome Influencing - and Measurement Affecting CFs. Subsequently, a virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) session was held for in depth discussion of Effect Modifying CFs. Results: Of 161 Delphi participants, 129 (80%) completed both rounds. After two rounds, we reached consensus (≥70% agreeing) for all but two statements. The 45 SIG participants were broadly supportive. Conclusion: Through consensus we developed an operational definition of CFs, which was well received by OMERACT members

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe