A 24-h helpline for access to expert management advice for food allergy-related anaphylaxis in children: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: Anaphylaxis is an important, potentially life-threatening paediatric emergency. It is responsible for considerable morbidity and, in some cases, death. Poor outcomes may be associated with an inability to differentiate between milder and potentially more severe reactions and an associated reluctance to administer self-injectable adrenaline. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a 24-h telephone access to specialist paediatric allergy expert advice in improving the quality of life of children and their families with potentially life-threatening food allergy (ie, anaphylaxis) compared with usual clinical care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Children aged less than 16 years with food allergy and who carry an adrenaline autoinjector will be recruited from the Paediatric Allergy Clinic at Cork University Hospital, Ireland and baseline disease-specific quality of life will be ascertained using the validated Food Allergy Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAQLQ). Participants will be randomised for a period of 6 months to the 24-h telephone specialist support line or usual care. The primary outcome measure of interest is a change in FAQLQ scores, which will be assessed at 0, 1 and 6 months postrandomisation. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis using a 2×3 repeated measures within-between analysis of variance. Although lacking power, we will in addition assess the impact of the intervention on a range of relevant process and clinical endpoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial protocol has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Cork Teaching Hospitals. The findings will be presented at international scientific conferences and will be reported on in the peer-reviewed literature in early 2013

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients

Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

The effect of intraocular pressure lowering medications on the pressure spike associated with intravitreal injection

Purpose.  This study investigates whether the post intravitreal injection intraocular pressure (IOP) spike is modifiable with the use of prophylactic apraclonidine and dorzolomide.Methods.  The study design is a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial. 80 eyes undergoing intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agent were studied.  A control group (n = 42) received no IOP lowering drops, and a study group (n = 38) received topical apraclonidine and dorzolamide 30 to 40 minutes before the intravitreal injection.  IOP measurements were taken in both groups using the Perkins tonometer at baseline, immediately before and after the injection, 5 minutes post-injection, and 15 minutes post-injection.Results.  Mean IOP immediately post injection in the study group compared to the control group was lower:  26.71 mmHg versus 32.73 mmHg (p=0.026).  The main outcome measure was the area under the curve (AUC), reflecting the trend of IOP post injection.  The AUC was lower in the study group compared to the control group (Mann-Whitney U test, p=0.046).Conclusions.  The use of prophylactic apraclonidine and dorzolamide is effective in modifying the post-injection IOP spike.  IOP lowering prophylaxis may be considered in patients with a high baseline IOP

Highly accurate prediction of food challenge outcome using routinely available clinical data

Background: Serum specific IgE or skin prick tests are less useful at levels below accepted decision points.Objectives: We sought to develop and validate a model to predict food challenge outcome by using routinely collected data in a diverse sample of children considered suitable for food challenge.Methods: The proto-algorithm was generated by using a limited data set from 1 service (phase 1). We retrospectively applied, evaluated, and modified the initial model by using an extended data set in another center (phase 2). Finally, we prospectively validated the model in a blind study in a further group of children undergoing food challenge for peanut, milk, or egg in the second center (phase 3). Allergen-specific models were developed for peanut, egg, and milk.Results: Phase 1 (N = 429) identified 5 clinical factors associated with diagnosis of food allergy by food challenge. In phase 2 (N = 289), we examined the predictive ability of 6 clinical factors: skin prick test, serum specific IgE, total IgE minus serum specific IgE, symptoms, sex, and age. In phase 3 (N = 70), 97% of cases were accurately predicted as positive and 94% as negative. Our model showed an advantage in clinical prediction compared with serum specific IgE only, skin prick test only, and serum specific IgE and skin prick test (92% accuracy vs 57%, and 81%, respectively).Conclusion: Our findings have implications for the improved delivery of food allergy–related health care, enhanced food allergy–related quality of life, and economized use of health service resources by decreasing the number of food challenges performed.<br/

Palbociclib synergizes with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in treatment naïve melanoma but not after the development of BRAF inhibitor resistance

Increased CDK4 activity occurs in the majority of melanomas and CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with BRAF and MEK inhibitors are currently in clinical trials for the treatment of melanoma. We hypothesize that the timing of the addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to the current BRAF and MEK inhibitor regime will impact on the efficacy of this triplet drug combination. The efficacy of BRAF, MEK and CDK4/6 inhibitors as single agents and in combination was assessed in human BRAF mutant cell lines that were treatment naïve, BRAF inhibitor tolerant or had acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors. Xenograft studies were then performed to test the in vivo efficacy of the BRAF and CDK4/6 inhibitor combination. Melanoma cells that had developed early reversible tolerance or acquired resistance to BRAF inhibition remained sensitive to palbociclib. In drug-tolerant cells, the efficacy of the combination of palbociclib with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors was equivalent to single agent palbociclib. Similarly, acquired BRAF inhibitor resistance cells lost efficacy to the palbociclib and BRAF combination. In contrast, upfront treatment of melanoma cells with palbociclib in combination with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors induced either cell death or senescence and was superior to a BRAF plus MEK inhibitor combination. In vivo palbociclib plus BRAF inhibitor induced rapid and sustained tumor regression without the development of therapy resistance. In summary, upfront dual targeting of CDK4/6 and mutant BRAF signaling enables tumor cells to evade resistance to monotherapy and is required for robust and sustained tumor regression. Melanoma patients whose tumors have acquired resistance to BRAF inhibition are less likely to have favorable responses to subsequent treatment with the triplet combination of BRAF, MEK and CDK4/6 inhibitors

A novel immunogenic mouse model of melanoma for the preclinical assessment of combination targeted and immune-based therapy

Both targeted therapy and immunotherapy have been used successfully to treat melanoma, but the development of resistance and poor response rates to the individual therapies has limited their success. Designing rational combinations of targeted therapy and immunotherapy may overcome these obstacles, but requires assessment in preclinical models with the capacity to respond to both therapeutic classes. Herein, we describe the development and characterization of a novel, immunogenic variant of the BrafCdkn2aPten YUMM1.1 tumor model that expresses the immunogen, ovalbumin (YOVAL1.1). We demonstrate that, unlike parental tumors, YOVAL1.1 tumors are immunogenic in vivo and can be controlled by immunotherapy. Importantly, YOVAL1.1 tumors are sensitive to targeted inhibitors of BRAF and MEK, responding in a manner consistent with human BRAF melanoma. The YOVAL1.1 melanoma model is transplantable, immunogenic and sensitive to clinical therapies, making it a valuable platform to guide strategic development of combined targeted therapy and immunotherapy approaches in BRAF melanoma