Exceeding the recruitment target in a primary care paediatric trial:an evaluation of the Choice of Moisturiser for Eczema Treatment (COMET) feasibility randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Recruiting to target in randomised controlled trials of investigational medicinal products (CTIMPs) in primary care and paediatric populations is notoriously difficult. More evidence is needed for effective recruitment strategies in these settings. We report on the impact of different recruitment strategies used in the Choice of Moisturiser in Eczema Treatment (COMET) study – a feasibility trial comparing the effectiveness of four emollients for the treatment of childhood eczema – recruiting via general practitioner (GP) surgeries. METHODS: Initially, 16 GP practices invited potentially eligible children to take part in the trial by sending an invitation letter (self-referral pathway) or by consenting and randomising them into the study during a visit to the practice (in-consultation referral). Measures implemented during the study to maximise accrual included signing up six additional GP practices, increasing the upper age limit eligibility criterion from 3 to 5 years, and permitting healthcare professionals other than doctors to confirm participant eligibility. We used descriptive statistics and univariate linear regression models to explore associations with practice recruitment rates. RESULTS: A total of 197 participants were recruited, exceeding the target of 160. Of these, 107 children entered via self-referral and 90 by in-consultation pathways. Of the recruited population, 12.6 % were aged between 3 and 5 years (the raised upper age limit). The six additional practices contributed 37.4 % (40 of 107) of participants recruited by self-referral. Only almost one-third (18 of 56 [32.1 %]) of potential recruiting clinicians recruited one or more participants in-consultation, which was a more problematic pathway because of data verification issues. Three research nurses and a pharmacist from four practices recruited 48.9 % (44 of 90) of participants via this pathway. Univariate linear regression models showed no evidence of association between the number of children recruited via the self-referral pathway by practice and practice list size (p = 0.092) or practice deprivation decile (p = 0.270), but practice deprivation was associated with a higher number of children recruited in-consultation (p = 0.020) by practice. CONCLUSIONS: Self-referral and in-consultation recruitment yielded similar numbers, but the in-consultation pathway was more problematic. Future trials of this type should consider the condition, normal care pathway and number of potentially eligible children and be prepared to use multiple recruitment strategies to achieve recruitment targets. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21828118. Registered on 1 May 2014. EudraCT2013-003001-26. Registered on 23 Dec 2013

Cost-effectiveness of a patient-centred approach to managing multimorbidity in primary care:a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

Objective Patients with multiple chronic health conditions are often managed in a disjointed fashion in primary care, with annual review clinic appointments offered separately for each condition. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of the 3D intervention, which was developed to improve the system of care. Design Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial. Setting General practices in three centres in England and Scotland. Participants 797 adults with three or more chronic conditions were randomised to the 3D intervention, while 749 participants were randomised to receive usual care. Intervention The 3D approach: comprehensive 6-monthly general practitioner consultations, supported by medication reviews and nurse appointments. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary economic evaluation assessed the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS). Costs were related to changes in a range of secondary outcomes (QALYs accrued by both participants and carers, and deaths) in a cost-consequences analysis from the perspectives of the NHS/PSS, patients/carers and productivity losses. Results Very small increases were found in both QALYs (adjusted mean difference 0.007 (-0.009 to 0.023)) and costs (adjusted mean difference 126 pound (-739 pound to 991)) pound in the intervention arm compared with usual care after 15 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 18 pound 499, with a 50.8% chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20 pound 000 per QALY (55.8% at 30 pound 000 per QALY). Conclusions The small differences in costs and outcomes were consistent with chance, and the uncertainty was substantial; therefore, the evidence for the cost-effectiveness of the 3D approach from the NHS/PSS perspective should be considered equivocal

Role of carotid duplex imaging in carotid screening programmes - an overview.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is the third most common cause of death in the UK and the largest single cause of severe disability. Each year more than 110,000 people in England suffer from a stroke which costs the National Health Service (NHS) over GBP2.8 billion. Thus, it is imperative that patients at risk be screened for underlying carotid artery atherosclerosis. AIM: To assess the role of carotid ultrasound in different carotid screening programmes. METHODS: A literature overview was carried out by using PubMed search engine, to identify different carotid screening programmes that had used ultrasound scan as a screening tool. RESULTS: It appears that the carotid ultrasound is an effective method for screening carotid artery disease in community as it effectively predicts the presence of stenosis with high accuracy. There is a need for primary care to recommend high risk patients for regular screening, to reduce stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) related morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSION: Screening programmes using carotid ultrasonography contribute to public health awareness and promotion which in long term could potentially benefit in disease prevention and essentially promote better standards of healthcare.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Using species A rotavirus reverse genetics to engineer chimeric viruses expressing SARS-CoV-2 spike epitopes:Heterologous viral peptide expression by rotavirus A

Species A rotavirus (RVA) vaccines based on live attenuated viruses are used worldwide in humans. The recent establishment of a reverse genetics system for rotoviruses (RVs) has opened the possibility of engineering chimeric viruses expressing heterologous peptides from other viral or microbial species in order to develop polyvalent vaccines. We tested the feasibility of this concept by two approaches. First, we inserted short SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides into the hypervariable region of the simian RV SA11 strain viral protein (VP) 4. Second, we fused the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, or the shorter receptor binding motif (RBM) nested within the RBD, to the C terminus of nonstructural protein (NSP) 3 of the bovine RV RF strain, with or without an intervening Thosea asigna virus 2A (T2A) peptide. Mutating the hypervariable region of SA11 VP4 impeded viral replication, and for these mutants, no cross-reactivity with spike antibodies was detected. To rescue NSP3 mutants, we established a plasmid-based reverse genetics system for the bovine RV RF strain. Except for the RBD mutant that demonstrated a rescue defect, all NSP3 mutants delivered endpoint infectivity titers and exhibited replication kinetics comparable to that of the wild-type virus. In ELISAs, cell lysates of an NSP3 mutant expressing the RBD peptide showed cross-reactivity with a SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody. 3D bovine gut enteroids were susceptible to infection by all NSP3 mutants, but cross-reactivity with SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody was only detected for the RBM mutant. The tolerance of large SARS-CoV-2 peptide insertions at the C terminus of NSP3 in the presence of T2A element highlights the potential of this approach for the development of vaccine vectors targeting multiple enteric pathogens simultaneously. IMPORTANCE We explored the use of rotaviruses (RVs) to express heterologous peptides, using SARS-CoV-2 as an example. Small SARS-CoV-2 peptide insertions (<34 amino acids) into the hypervariable region of the viral protein 4 (VP4) of RV SA11 strain resulted in reduced viral titer and replication, demonstrating a limited tolerance for peptide insertions at this site. To test the RV RF strain for its tolerance for peptide insertions, we constructed a reverse genetics system. NSP3 was C-terminally tagged with SARS-CoV-2 spike peptides of up to 193 amino acids in length. With a T2A-separated 193 amino acid tag on NSP3, there was no significant effect on the viral rescue efficiency, endpoint titer, and replication kinetics. Tagged NSP3 elicited cross-reactivity with SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies in ELISA. We highlight the potential for development of RV vaccine vectors targeting multiple enteric pathogens simultaneously

Choice of Moisturiser for Eczema Treatment (COMET):feasibility study of a randomised controlled parallel group trial in children recruited from primary care

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of ‘leave on’ emollients for children with eczema. DESIGN: Single-centre, pragmatic, 4-arm, observer-blinded, parallel, randomised feasibility trial. SETTING: General practices in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Children with eczema aged 1 month to <5 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome—proportion of parents who reported use of the allocated study emollient every day for the duration of follow-up (12 weeks). Other feasibility outcomes—participant recruitment and retention, data collection and completeness and blinding of observers to allocation. INTERVENTIONS: Aveeno lotion, Diprobase cream, Doublebase gel, Hydromol ointment. RESULTS: 197 children were recruited—107 by self-referral (mainly via practice mail-outs) and 90 by inconsultation (clinician consenting and randomising) pathways. Participants recruited inconsultation were younger, had more severe Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores and were more likely to withdraw than self-referrals. Parents of 20 (10%) of all the randomised participants reported using the allocated emollient daily for 84 days. The use of other non-study emollients was common. Completeness of data collected by parent-held daily diaries and at monthly study visits was good. Daily diaries were liked (81%) but mainly completed on paper rather than via electronic (‘app’) form. Major costs drivers were general practitioner consultations and eczema-related prescriptions. Observer unblinding was infrequent, and occurred at the baseline or first follow-up visit through accidental disclosure. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible in a primary care setting to recruit and randomise young children with eczema to emollients, follow them up and collect relevant trial data, while keeping observers blinded to their allocation. However, reported use of emollients (study and others) has design implications for future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN21828118/EudraCT2013-003001-26

Management of multimorbidity using a patient-centred care model:a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of the 3D approach

Background: The management of people with multiple chronic conditions challenges health-care systems designed around single conditions. There is international consensus that care for multimorbidity should be patient-centred, focus on quality of life, and promote self-management towards agreed goals. However, there is little evidence about the effectiveness of this approach. Our hypothesis was that the patient-centred, so-called 3D approach (based on dimensions of health, depression, and drugs) for patients with multimorbidity would improve their health-related quality of life, which is the ultimate aim of the 3D intervention. Methods: We did this pragmatic cluster-randomised trial in general practices in England and Scotland. Practices were randomly allocated to continue usual care (17 practices) or to provide 6-monthly comprehensive 3D reviews, incorporating patient-centred strategies that reflected international consensus on best care (16 practices). Randomisation was computer-generated, stratified by area, and minimised by practice deprivation and list size. Adults with three or more chronic conditions were recruited. The primary outcome was quality of life (assessed with EQ-5D-5L) after 15 months' follow-up. Participants were not masked to group assignment, but analysis of outcomes was blinded. We analysed the primary outcome in the intention-to-treat population, with missing data being multiply imputed. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN06180958. Findings: Between May 20, 2015, and Dec 31, 2015, we recruited 1546 patients from 33 practices and randomly assigned them to receive the intervention (n=797) or usual care (n=749). In our intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference between trial groups in the primary outcome of quality of life (adjusted difference in mean EQ-5D-5L 0·00, 95% CI −0·02 to 0·02; p=0·93). 78 patients died, and the deaths were not considered as related to the intervention. Interpretation: To our knowledge, this trial is the largest investigation of the international consensus about optimal management of multimorbidity. The 3D intervention did not improve patients' quality of life. Funding: National Institute for Health Research

Early phase clinical trials extension to the guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans

This paper reports guidelines for the content of statistical analysis plans for early phase clinical trials, ensuring specification of the minimum reporting analysis requirements, by detailing extensions (11 new items) and modifications (25 items) to existing guidance after a review by various stakeholders

Breast-cancer adjuvant therapy with zoledronic acid

Background: Data suggest that the adjuvant use of bisphosphonates reduces rates of recurrence and death in patients with early-stage breast cancer. We conducted a study to determine whether treatment with zoledronic acid, in addition to standard adjuvant therapy, would improve disease outcomes in such patients. Methods: In this open-label phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 3360 patients to receive standard adjuvant systemic therapy either with or without zoledronic acid. The zoledronic acid was administered every 3 to 4 weeks for 6 doses and then every 3 to 6 months to complete 5 years of treatment. The primary end point of the study was disease-free survival. A second interim analysis revealed that a prespecified boundary for lack of benefit had been crossed. Results: At a median follow-up of 59 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the primary end point, with a rate of disease-free survival of 77% in each group (adjusted hazard ratio in the zoledronic acid group, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.13; P=0.79). Disease recurrence or death occurred in 377 patients in the zoledronic acid group and 375 of those in the control group. The numbers of deaths — 243 in the zoledronic acid group and 276 in the control group — were also similar, resulting in rates of overall survival of 85.4% in the zoledronic acid group and 83.1% in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.01; P=0.07). In the zoledronic acid group, there were 17 confirmed cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw (cumulative incidence, 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.7; P<0.001) and 9 suspected cases; there were no cases in the control group. Rates of other adverse effects were similar in the two study groups. Conclusions: These findings do not support the routine use of zoledronic acid in the adjuvant management of breast cancer. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and the National Cancer Research Network; AZURE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN79831382.