Birthweight and other perinatal outcomes of singletons conceived after assisted reproduction compared to natural conceived singletons in couples with unexplained subfertility : follow-up of two randomized clinical trials

Acknowledgments We thank all the couples, the hospitals and their staff that participated in the trials. For detailed information of participating hospitals see literature of the INeS trial and SUPER study. Funding Both initial trials were supported by a grant from ZonMW, the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (INeS 120620027, SUPER 80-83600-98-10192). The INeS also had a grant from Zorgverzekeraars Nederland, the Dutch association of healthcare insurers (09-003)Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Interventions for unexplained infertility : a systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Acknowledgements We would like to thank Marian Showell from the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group for conducting the database searches.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Effectiveness of temozolomide for primary glioblastoma multiforme in routine clinical practice

Temozolomide has been used as a standard therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme since 2005. To assess the effectiveness of temozolomide in routine clinical practice, we conducted an observational study at Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC). Data of patients receiving radiotherapy and temozolomide between January 2005 and January 2008 were retrieved from a clinical database (radiochemotherapy group), as were data of patients in a historical control group from the period before 2005 treated with radiotherapy only (radiotherapy group). The primary endpoint was overall survival. A total of 125 patients with GBM were selected to form the study cohort. Median survival benefit was 4 months: the median overall survival was 12 months (95% CI, 9.7–14.3) in the group with radiochemotherapy with temozolomide, versus 8 months (95% CI, 5.3–10.7) in the group with only radiotherapy. Progression-free survival was 7 months (95% CI, 5.5–8.5) in the radiochemotherapy group and 4 months (95% CI, 2.9-5.1) in the group with only radiotherapy. The two-year survival rate was 18% with radiochemotherapy with temozolomide against 4% with radiotherapy alone. Concomitant treatment with radiotherapy and temozolomide followed by adjuvant temozolomide resulted in grade III or IV haematological toxic effects in 9% of patients. The addition of temozolomide to radiotherapy in routine clinical practice for newly diagnosed glioblastoma resulted in a clinically meaningful survival benefit with minimal haematological toxicity, which confirms the experience of previous trials and justifies the continued use of temozolomide in routine clinical practice

Конференции

STUDY QUESTION: What is the cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization(IVF) with conventional ovarian stimulation, single embryotransfer (SET) and subsequent cryocycles or IVF in a modified natural cycle (MNC) compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (IUI-COH) as a first-line treatment in couples with unexplained subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis on natural conception?. SUMMARY ANSWER: Both IVF strategies are significantly more expensive when compared with IUI-COH, without being significantly more effective. In the comparison between IVF-MNC and IUI-COH, the latter is the dominant strategy. Whether IVF-SET is cost-effective depends on society's willingness to pay for an additional healthy child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IUI-COH and IVF, either after conventional ovarian stimulation or in a MNC, are used as first-line treatments for couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility. As IUI-COH is less invasive, this treatment is usually offered before proceeding to IVF. Yet, as conventional IVF with SET may lead to higher pregnancy rates in fewer cycles for a lower multiple pregnancy rate, some have argued to start with IVF instead of IUI-COH. In addition, IVF in the MNC is considered to be a more patient friendly and less costly form of IVF. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized noninferiority trial. Between January 2009 and February 2012, 602 couples with unexplained infertility and a poor prognosis on natural conception were allocated to three cycles of IVF-SET including frozen embryo transfers, six cycles of IVF-MNC or six cycles of IUI-COH. These couples were followed until 12 months after randomization. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We collected data on resource use related to treatment, medication and pregnancy from the case report forms. We calculated unit costs from various sources. For each of the three strategies, we calculated the mean costs and effectiveness. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated for IVF-SET compared with IUI-COH and for IVF-MNC compared with IUI-COH. Nonparametric bootstrap resampling was used to investigate the effect of uncertainty in our estimates. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: There were 104 healthy children (52%) born in the IVF-SET group, 83 (43%) the IVF-MNC group and 97 (47%) in the IUI-COH group. The mean costs per couple were (sic)7187 for IVF-SET, (sic)8206 for IVF-MNC and (sic)5070 for IUI-COH. Compared with IUI-COH, the costs for IVF-SET and IVF-MNC were significantly higher (mean differences (sic)2117; 95% CI: (sic)1544-(sic)2657 and (sic)3136, 95% CI: (sic)2519-(sic)3754, respectively). The ICER for IVF-SET compared with IUI-COH was (sic)43 375 for the birth of an additional healthy child. In the comparison of IVF-MNC to IUI-COH, the latter was the dominant strategy, i.e. more effective at lower costs. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We only report on direct health care costs. The present analysis is limited to 12 months. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since we found no evidence in support of offering IVF as a first-line strategy in couples with unexplained and mild subfertility, IUI-COH should remain the treatment of first choice

Prevention of multiple pregnancies in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility: randomised controlled trial of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle with that of intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of a healthy child. DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, three arm, parallel group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: 17 centres in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Couples seeking fertility treatment after at least 12 months of unprotected intercourse, with the female partner aged between 18 and 38 years, an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception, and a diagnosis of unexplained or mild male subfertility. INTERVENTIONS: Three cycles of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer (plus subsequent cryocycles), six cycles of in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, or six cycles of intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation within 12 months after randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was birth of a healthy child resulting from a singleton pregnancy conceived within 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were live birth, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, time to pregnancy, complications of pregnancy, and neonatal morbidity and mortality RESULTS: 602 couples were randomly assigned between January 2009 and February 2012; 201 were allocated to in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 194 to in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 207 to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Birth of a healthy child occurred in 104 (52%) couples in the in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer group, 83 (43%) in the in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle group, and 97 (47%) in the intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation group. This corresponds to a risk, relative to intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation, of 1.10 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.34) for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and 0.91 (0.73 to 1.14) for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle. These 95% confidence intervals do not extend below the predefined threshold of 0.69 for inferiority. Multiple pregnancy rates per ongoing pregnancy were 6% (7/121) after in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 5% (5/102) after in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 7% (8/119) after intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation (one sided P=0.52 for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer compared with intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation; one sided P=0.33 for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation). CONCLUSIONS: In vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle were non-inferior to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of the birth of a healthy child and showed comparable, low multiple pregnancy rates.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52843371; Nederlands Trial Register NTR939.A J Bensdorp ... B W J Mol ... et al

The potential risks and impact of the start of the 2015–2016 influenza season in the WHO European Region: a rapid risk assessment

Background: Countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region are reporting more severe influenza activity in the 2015–2016 season compared to previous seasons. Objectives: To conduct a rapid risk assessment to provide interim information on the severity of the current influenza season. Methods: Using the WHO manual for rapid risk assessment of acute public health events and surveillance data available from Flu News Europe, an assessment of the current influenza season from 28 September 2015 (week 40/2015) up to 31 January 2016 (week 04/2016) was made compared with the four previous seasons. Results: The current influenza season started around week 51/2015 with higher influenza activity reported in Eastern Europe compared to Western Europe. There is a strong predominance of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 compared to previous seasons, but the virus is antigenically similar to the strain included in the seasonal influenza vaccine. Compared to the 2014/2015 season, there was a rapid increase in the number of severe cases in Eastern European countries with the majority of such cases occurring among adults aged < 65 years. Conclusions: The current influenza season is characterized by an early start in Eastern European countries, with indications of a more severe season. Currently circulating influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses are antigenically similar to those included in the seasonal influenza vaccine, and the vaccine is expected to be effective. Authorities should provide information to the public and health providers about the current influenza season, recommendations for the treatment of severe disease and effective public health measures to prevent influenza transmission

Concurrent evaluation of cytokines improves the accuracy of antibodies against Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens in the diagnosis of active tuberculosis

Data availability statement: All the important data relevant to this study was reported in the manuscript. Any additional data will be made available upon request from the corresponding author.Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Background: Antibodies against mycobacterial proteins are highly specific, but lack sensitivity, whereas cytokines have been shown to be sensitive but not very specific in the diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB). We assessed combinations between antibodies and cytokines for diagnosing TB. Methods: Immuoglubulin (Ig) A and IgM antibody titres against selected mycobacterial antigens including Apa, NarL, Rv3019c, PstS1, LAM, “Kit 1” (MTP64 and Tpx)”, and “Kit 2” (MPT64, Tpx and 19 kDa) were evaluated by ELISA in plasma samples obtained from individuals under clinical suspicion for TB. Combinations between the antibody titres and previously published cytokine responses in the same participants were assessed for diagnosing active TB. Results: Antibody responses were more promising when used in combination (AUC of 0.80), when all seven antibodies were combined. When anti-“Kit 1”-IgA levels were combined with five host cytokine biomarkers, the AUC increased to 97% (92–100%) with a sensitivity of 95% (95% CI, 73–100%), and specificity of 88.5% (95% CI, 68.7–97%) achieved after leave-one-out cross validation. Conclusion: When used in combination, IgA titres measured with ELISA against multiple Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens may be useful in the diagnosis of TB. However, diagnostic accuracy may be improved if the antibodies are used in combination with cytokines.This work was part of the EDCTP1 programme supported by the European Union (grant number IP_2009_32040, AE-TBC; awarded to GW). The project was also supported by the South African Government through the National Research Foundation (NRF, awarded to NC) and the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC, postgraduate scholarship to RJ)

Detection and localization of early- and late-stage cancers using platelet RNA

Cancer patients benefit from early tumor detection since treatment outcomes are more favorable for less advanced cancers. Platelets are involved in cancer progression and are considered a promising biosource for cancer detection, as they alter their RNA content upon local and systemic cues. We show that tumor-educated platelet (TEP) RNA-based blood tests enable the detection of 18 cancer types. With 99% specificity in asymptomatic controls, thromboSeq correctly detected the presence of cancer in two-thirds of 1,096 blood samples from stage I–IV cancer patients and in half of 352 stage I–III tumors. Symptomatic controls, including inflammatory and cardiovascular diseases, and benign tumors had increased false-positive test results with an average specificity of 78%. Moreover, thromboSeq determined the tumor site of origin in five different tumor types correctly in over 80% of the cancer patients. These results highlight the potential properties of TEP-derived RNA panels to supplement current approaches for blood-based cancer screening

Interventions for unexplained infertility : a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Clinical management for unexplained infertility includes expectant management as well as active treatments, including ovarian stimulation (OS), intrauterine insemination (IUI), OS-IUI, and in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).Existing systematic reviews have conducted head-to-head comparisons of these interventions using pairwise meta-analyses. As this approach allows only the comparison of two interventions at a time and is contingent on the availability of appropriate primary evaluative studies, it is difficult to identify the best intervention in terms of effectiveness and safety. Network meta-analysis compares multiple treatments simultaneously by using both direct and indirect evidence and provides a hierarchy of these treatments, which can potentially better inform clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different approaches to clinical management (expectant management, OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI) in couples with unexplained infertility. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL, up to 6 September 2018, as well as reference lists, to identify eligible studies. We also searched trial registers for ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs comparing at least two of the following clinical management options in couples with unexplained infertility: expectant management, OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF (or combined with ICSI). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts identified by the search strategy. We obtained the full texts of potentially eligible studies to assess eligibility and extracted data using standardised forms. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of cumulative live birth or ongoing pregnancy, and the primary safety outcome was multiple pregnancy. We performed a network meta-analysis within a random-effects multi-variate meta-analysis model. We presented treatment effects by using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For the network meta-analysis, we used Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA) to evaluate the overall certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 27 RCTs (4349 couples) in this systematic review and 24 RCTs (3983 couples) in a subsequent network meta-analysis. Overall, the certainty of evidence was low to moderate: the main limitations were imprecision and/or heterogeneity.Ten RCTs including 2725 couples reported on live birth. Evidence of differences between OS, IUI, OS-IUI, or IVF/ICSI versus expectant management was insufficient (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.98; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.43; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.94; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.88, 95 CI 0.81 to 4.38; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following expectant management is assumed to be 17%, the chance following OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF would be 9% to 28%, 11% to 33%, 15% to 37%, and 14% to 47%, respectively. When only including couples with poor prognosis of natural conception (3 trials, 725 couples) we found OS-IUI and IVF/ICSI increased live birth rate compared to expectant management (OR 4.48, 95% CI 2.00 to 10.1; moderate-certainty evidence; OR 4.99, 95 CI 2.07 to 12.04; moderate-certainty evidence), while there was insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.60; low-certainty evidence).Eleven RCTs including 2564 couples reported on multiple pregnancy. Compared to expectant management/IUI, OS (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 9.41; low-certainty evidence) and OS-IUI (OR 3.34 95% CI 1.09 to 10.29; moderate-certainty evidence) increased the odds of multiple pregnancy, and there was insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and expectant management/IUI (OR 2.66, 95% CI 0.68 to 10.43; low-certainty evidence). These findings suggest that if the chance of multiple pregnancy following expectant management or IUI is assumed to be 0.6%, the chance following OS, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI would be 0.6% to 5.0%, 0.6% to 5.4%, and 0.4% to 5.5%, respectively.Trial results show insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI for moderate/severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 2.50, 95% CI 0.92 to 6.76; 5 studies; 985 women; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of moderate/severe OHSS following OS-IUI is assumed to be 1.1%, the chance following IVF/ICSI would be between 1.0% and 7.2%. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence of differences in live birth between expectant management and the other four interventions (OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI). Compared to expectant management/IUI, OS may increase the odds of multiple pregnancy, and OS-IUI probably increases the odds of multiple pregnancy. Evidence on differences between IVF/ICSI and expectant management for multiple pregnancy is insufficient, as is evidence of a difference for moderate or severe OHSS between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI