Parent-led cognitive behaviour therapy for child anxiety problems: overcoming challenges to increase access to effective treatment

Background: Anxiety problems have a particularly early age of onset and are common among children. As we celebrate the anniversary of the BABCP, it is important to recognise the huge contribution that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has made to the treatment of anxiety problems in children. CBT remains the only psychological intervention for child anxiety problems with a robust evidence base, but despite this, very few children with anxiety problems access CBT. Creative solutions are urgently needed to ensure that effective treatments can be delivered at scale. Here we focus on parent-led CBT as this offers a potential solution that is brief and can be delivered by clinicians without highly specialised training. Over the last decade there has been a substantial increase in randomised controlled trials evaluating this approach with consistent evidence of effectiveness. Nonetheless clinicians, and parents, often have concerns about trying the approach and can face challenges in its delivery. Method: We draw on empirical evidence and our clinical experience to address some of these common concerns and challenges, with particular emphasis on the key principles of empowering parents and working with them to provide opportunities for new learning for their children. Conclusions: We conclude by highlighting some important directions for future research and practice, including further evaluation of who does and does not currently benefit from the approach, determining how it should be adapted to optimise outcomes among groups that may not currently get maximum benefits and across cultures, and capitalising on recent technological developments to increase engagement and widen access

A MIQE-Compliant Real-Time PCR Assay for Aspergillus Detection

PMCID: PMC3393739This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools-identification to intervention (iCATS-i2i):protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to compare screening, feedback and intervention for child anxiety problems to usual school practice

Background: Systematically screening for child anxiety problems, and offering and delivering a brief, evidence-based intervention for children who are identified as likely to benefit would minimise common barriers that families experience in accessing treatment. We have developed a short parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire, and procedures for administering screening questionnaires, sharing screening outcomes with families, and offering and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention (OSI: Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety) through schools. This trial aims to evaluate clinical and health economic outcomes for (1) children (aged 8–9) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) and (2) the wider population of all children in participating classes (total population) in schools randomly allocated to receive identification-to-intervention procedures and usual school practice (‘screening and intervention’), compared to assessment and usual school practice only (‘usual school practice’). Methods: The trial design is a parallel-group, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial, with schools (clusters) randomised to ‘screening and intervention’ or ‘usual school practice’ arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified according to the level of deprivation within the school. We will recruit schools and participants in two phases (a pilot phase (Phase 1) and Phase 2), with progression criteria assessed prior to progressing to Phase 2. In total, the trial will recruit 80 primary/junior schools in England, and 398 children (199 per arm) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population). In schools allocated to ‘screening and intervention’: (1) parents/carers will complete a brief parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire (at baseline) and receive feedback on their child’s screening outcomes (after randomisation), (2) classes will receive a lesson on managing fears and worries and staff will be provided with information about the intervention and (3) parents/carers of children who screen positive for anxiety problems (target population) will be offered OSI. OSI will also be available for any other parents/carers of children in participating classes (total population) who request it. We will collect child-, parent- and teacher-report measures for the target population and total population at baseline (before randomisation), 4 months, 12 months and 24 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be the proportion of children who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) who screen negative for anxiety problems 12 months post-randomisation. Discussion: This trial will establish if systematic screening for child anxiety problems, sharing screening outcomes with families and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention through schools is effective and cost-effective. Trial registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN76119074. Prospectively registered on 4.1.2022.</p

Increasing access to evidence‐based treatment for child anxiety problems: online parent‐led CBT for children identified via schools

Background: Anxiety problems are extremely common and have an early age of onset. We previously found, in a study in England, that fewer than 3% of children with an anxiety disorder identified in the community had accessed an evidence‐based treatment (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy; CBT). Key ways to increase access to CBT for primary school‐aged children with anxiety problems include (a) proactive identification through screening in schools, (b) supporting parents and (c) the provision of brief, accessible interventions (and capitalising on technology to do this). Method: We provided a brief, therapist guided treatment called Online Support and Intervention (OSI) to parents/carers of children identified, through school‐based screening, as likely to have anxiety problems. Fifty out of 131 children from 17 Year 4 classes in schools in England screened positive for ‘possible anxiety problems’ and 42 (84%) of these (and 7 who did not) took up the offer of OSI. We applied quantitative and qualitative approaches to assess children's outcomes and families' experiences of this approach. Results: Inbuilt outcome monitoring indicated session on session improvements throughout the course of treatment, with substantial changes across measures by the final module (e.g. Child Outcome Rating Scale d = 0.84; Goal Based Outcomes d = 1.52). Parent engagement and satisfaction was high as indicated by quantitative and qualitative assessments, and intervention usage. Conclusions: We provide promising preliminary evidence for the use of OSI as an early intervention for children identified as having anxiety problems through school‐based screening

Minimising young children’s anxiety through schools (MY-CATS): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an online parent-led intervention compared with usual school practice for young children identified as at risk for anxiety disorders

Abstract: Background: Identifying and supporting young children who are at risk of developing anxiety disorders would benefit children, families, and wider society. Elevated anxiety symptoms, inhibited temperament, and high parental anxiety are established risk factors for later anxiety disorders, but it remains unclear who is most likely to benefit from prevention and early intervention programmes. Delivering an online intervention through schools to parents of young children who have one or more of these risks could maximise reach. The primary aim of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of delivering an online parent-led intervention, compared with usual school provision only, for children (aged 4–7) identified as at risk for anxiety disorders on the basis of at least one risk factor. We also aim to identify the characteristics of children who do and do not benefit from intervention and mechanisms of change from the intervention. Methods: The design will be a parallel group, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial, with schools (clusters) randomised to intervention or usual school practice arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified according to level of deprivation within the school. The study will recruit and randomise at least 60 primary/infant schools in England, and on the basis of recruiting 60 schools, we will recruit 1080 trial participants (540 per arm). Parents of all children (aged 4–7) in sampled Reception, Year 1, and Year 2 classes will be invited to complete screening questionnaires. Children who screen positive on the basis of anxiety symptoms, and/or behavioural inhibition, and/or parent anxiety symptoms will be eligible for the trial. Parents/carers of children in schools allocated to the intervention arm will be offered a brief online intervention; schools in both arms will continue to provide any usual support for children and parents throughout the trial. Assessments will be completed at screening, baseline (before randomisation), 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be the absence/presence of an anxiety disorder diagnosis at 12 months. Discussion: The trial will determine if delivering an online intervention for parents of young children at risk of anxiety disorders identified through screening in schools is effective and cost-effective. Trial registration: ISRCTN 82398107. Prospectively registered on Jan. 14, 2021

Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools-identification to intervention (iCATS-i2i): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to compare screening, feedback and intervention for child anxiety problems to usual school practice

Background: Systematically screening for child anxiety problems, and offering and delivering a brief, evidence-based intervention for children who are identified as likely to benefit would minimise common barriers that families experience in accessing treatment. We have developed a short parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire, and procedures for administering screening questionnaires, sharing screening outcomes with families, and offering and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention (OSI: Online Support and Intervention for child anxiety) through schools. This trial aims to evaluate clinical and health economic outcomes for (1) children (aged 8–9) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) and (2) the wider population of all children in participating classes (total population) in schools randomly allocated to receive identification-to-intervention procedures and usual school practice (‘screening and intervention’), compared to assessment and usual school practice only (‘usual school practice’). Methods: The trial design is a parallel-group, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial, with schools (clusters) randomised to ‘screening and intervention’ or ‘usual school practice’ arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified according to the level of deprivation within the school. We will recruit schools and participants in two phases (a pilot phase (Phase 1) and Phase 2), with progression criteria assessed prior to progressing to Phase 2. In total, the trial will recruit 80 primary/junior schools in England, and 398 children (199 per arm) who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population). In schools allocated to ‘screening and intervention’: (1) parents/carers will complete a brief parent-report child anxiety screening questionnaire (at baseline) and receive feedback on their child’s screening outcomes (after randomisation), (2) classes will receive a lesson on managing fears and worries and staff will be provided with information about the intervention and (3) parents/carers of children who screen positive for anxiety problems (target population) will be offered OSI. OSI will also be available for any other parents/carers of children in participating classes (total population) who request it. We will collect child-, parent- and teacher-report measures for the target population and total population at baseline (before randomisation), 4 months, 12 months and 24 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be the proportion of children who screen positive for anxiety problems at baseline (target population) who screen negative for anxiety problems 12 months post-randomisation. Discussion: This trial will establish if systematic screening for child anxiety problems, sharing screening outcomes with families and delivering a brief parent-led online intervention through schools is effective and cost-effective. Trial registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN76119074. Prospectively registered on 4.1.2022

Activation of a cGAS-STING-mediated immune response predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The DNA-damage immune-response (DDIR) signature is an immune-driven gene expression signature retrospectively validated as predicting response to anthracycline-based therapy. This feasibility study prospectively evaluates the use of this assay to predict neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in early breast cancer. METHODS: This feasibility study assessed the integration of a novel biomarker into clinical workflows. Tumour samples were collected from patients receiving standard of care neoadjuvant chemotherapy (FEC + /-taxane and anti-HER2 therapy as appropriate) at baseline, mid- and post-chemotherapy. Baseline DDIR signature scores were correlated with pathological treatment response. RNA sequencing was used to assess chemotherapy/response-related changes in biologically linked gene signatures. RESULTS: DDIR signature reports were available within 14 days for 97.8% of 46 patients (13 TNBC, 16 HER2 + ve, 27 ER + HER2-ve). Positive scores predicted response to treatment (odds ratio 4.67 for RCB 0-1 disease (95% CI 1.13-15.09, P = 0.032)). DDIR positivity correlated with immune infiltration and upregulated immune-checkpoint gene expression. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the DDIR signature as predictive of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy which can be integrated into clinical workflows, potentially identifying a subgroup with high sensitivity to anthracycline chemotherapy. Transcriptomic data suggest induction with anthracycline-containing regimens in immune restricted, "cold" tumours may be effective for immune priming. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable (non-interventional study). CRUK Internal Database Number 14232

Dapagliflozin versus metolazone in heart failure resistant to loop diuretics

Background and Aims: To examine the decongestive effect of the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin compared to the thiazide-like diuretic metolazone in patients hospitalized for heart failure and resistant to treatment with intravenous furosemide. Methods: A multi-centre, open-label, randomized, active-comparator trial. Patients were randomized to dapagliflozin 10 mg once daily or metolazone 5-10 mg once daily for a 3-day treatment period, with follow-up for primary and secondary endpoints until day 5 (96 hours). The primary endpoint was diuretic effect, assessed by change in weight (kg). Secondary endpoints included change in pulmonary congestion (lung ultrasound), loop diuretic efficiency (weight change per 40 mg of furosemide), and a volume assessment score. Results: 61 patients were randomized. The mean (±standard deviation) cumulative dose of furosemide at 96 hours was 976 (±492) mg in the dapagliflozin group and 704 (±428) mg in patients assigned to metolazone. The mean (±standard deviation) decrease in weight at 96 hours was 3.0 (2.5) kg with dapagliflozin compared to 3.6 (2.0) kg with metolazone [mean difference 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.12,1.41 kg; p=0.11]. Loop diuretic efficiency was less with dapagliflozin than with metolazone [mean 0.15 (0.12) versus 0.25 (0.19); difference -0.08, 95% CI -0.17,0.01 kg; p=0.10]. Changes in pulmonary congestion and volume assessment score were similar between treatments. Decreases in plasma sodium and potassium and increases in urea and creatinine were smaller with dapagliflozin than with metolazone. Serious adverse events were similar between treatments. Conclusion: In patients with heart failure and loop diuretic resistance, dapagliflozin was not more effective at relieving congestion than metolazone. Patients assigned to dapagliflozin received a larger cumulative dose of furosemide but experienced less biochemical upset than those assigned to metolazone. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04860011

Immune activation by DNA damage predicts response to chemotherapy and survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Current strategies to guide selection of neoadjuvant therapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) are inadequate. We assessed the ability of a DNA damage immune response (DDIR) assay to predict response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in OAC. DESIGN: Transcriptional profiling of 273 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded prechemotherapy endoscopic OAC biopsies was performed. All patients were treated with platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection between 2003 and 2014 at four centres in the Oesophageal Cancer Clinical and Molecular Stratification consortium. CD8 and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemical staining was assessed in matched resection specimens from 126 cases. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were applied according to DDIR status for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 66 OAC samples (24%) were DDIR positive with the remaining 207 samples (76%) being DDIR negative. DDIR assay positivity was associated with improved RFS (HR: 0.61; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.98; p=0.042) and OS (HR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88; p=0.015) following multivariate analysis. DDIR-positive patients had a higher pathological response rate (p=0.033), lower nodal burden (p=0.026) and reduced circumferential margin involvement (p=0.007). No difference in OS was observed according to DDIR status in an independent surgery-alone dataset.DDIR-positive OAC tumours were also associated with the presence of CD8+ lymphocytes (intratumoural: p<0.001; stromal: p=0.026) as well as PD-L1 expression (intratumoural: p=0.047; stromal: p=0.025). CONCLUSION: The DDIR assay is strongly predictive of benefit from DNA-damaging neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection and is associated with a proinflammatory microenvironment in OAC.This work was supported by the Gastrointestinal Cancer Research Charitable Fund administered by the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, the Cancer Research UK Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre Initiative, Invest Northern Ireland and Almac Diagnostics. Oesophageal Cancer Clinical and Molecular Stratification (OCCAMS) was funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK (RG66287). We would like to thank the Human Research Tissue Bank, which is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre from Addenbrooke’s Hospital. Additional infrastructure support was provided from the CRUK funded Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre. RF has programmatic funding from the Medical Research Council and infrastructure support from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and the Cambridge Experimental Medicine Centre. Tissue samples used in this research were received from the Northern Ireland Biobank, which is funded by HSC Research and Development Division of the Public Health Agency in Northern Ireland and Cancer Research UK through the Belfast Cancer Research UK Centre and the Northern Ireland Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre; additional support was received from the Friends of the Cancer Centre. The Northern Ireland Molecular Pathology Laboratory has received funding from Cancer Research UK, the Friends of the Cancer Centre and the Sean Crummey Foundation. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement no 721906. The OCCAMS Study Group is a multicentre UK collaboration

Identification of a BRCA2-Specific modifier locus at 6p24 related to breast cancer risk

Common genetic variants contribute to the observed variation in breast cancer risk for BRCA2 mutation carriers; those known to date have all been found through population-based genome-wide association studies (GWAS). To comprehensively identify breast cancer risk modifying loci for BRCA2 mutation carriers, we conducted a deep replication of an ongoing GWAS discovery study. Using the ranked P-values of the breast cancer associations with the imputed genotype of 1.4 M SNPs, 19,029 SNPs were selected and designed for inclusion on a custom Illumina array that included a total of 211,155 SNPs as part of a multi-consortial project. DNA samples from 3,881 breast cancer affected and 4,330 unaffected BRCA2 mutation carriers from 47 studies belonging to the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 were genotyped and available for analysis. We replicated previously reported breast cancer susceptibility alleles in these BRCA2 mutation carriers and for several regions (including FGFR2, MAP3K1, CDKN2A/B, and PTHLH) identified SNPs that have stronger evidence of association than those previously published. We also identified a novel susceptibility allele at 6p24 that was inversely associated with risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers (rs9348512; per allele HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90, P = 3.9×10−8). This SNP was not associated with breast cancer risk either in the general population or in BRCA1 mutation carriers. The locus lies within a region containing TFAP2A, which encodes a transcriptional activation protein that interacts with several tumor suppressor genes. This report identifies the first breast cancer risk locus specific to a BRCA2 mutation background. This comprehensive update of novel and previously reported breast cancer susceptibility loci contributes to the establishment of a panel of SNPs that modify breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. This panel may have clinical utility for women with BRCA2 mutations weighing options for medical prevention of breast cancer