Judgements Delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Communities in the Period 1 March – 1 July, 1997

The principle of non-discrimination embodied in Judgements delivered in the past few months have concerned a diverse range of topics. This article will review some of the more interesting judgements handed down by the Court of Justice in the aforementioned period

Evaluating Communication and Collaboration Among Healthcare Students

The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR): Communication and Collaboration Dimensions would demonstrate good inter-rater reliability and be a useful and efficient tool to evaluate professional communication and collaboration between occupational therapy (OT) and physician assistant (PA) students. An additional aim of this study was to assess students’ thoughts, perceptions, and perceived value regarding these types of interprofessional opportunities. A sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used. An interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) examined the inter-rater reliability of the instrument for both faculty raters (n = 7) and standardized patient (SP) raters (n =5). Qualitative data was gathered from focus groups to assess the utility of the ICAR: Communication and Collaboration. Quantitative and qualitative data were also gathered from a convenience sample of student participants (n =19) to investigate the perceived value of this interprofessional experience. Quantitative data revealed that there was moderate inter-rater reliability for four out of five of the subscales. Three themes emerged from the rater and student focus groups. Students found the interprofessional education (IPE) opportunity to be valuable. They also felt that it enhanced their understanding of the OT/PA profession, as well as their comfort and ability to collaborate and communicate with other professionals. The results of this study suggest that the ICAR: Communication and Collaboration Dimensions has the potential to maintain inter-rater reliability among healthcare students. The results of this study also indicate that healthcare students view IPE events as being highly valuable and beneficial

Fine-mapping of the HNF1B multicancer locus identifies candidate variants that mediate endometrial cancer risk.

Common variants in the hepatocyte nuclear factor 1 homeobox B (HNF1B) gene are associated with the risk of Type II diabetes and multiple cancers. Evidence to date indicates that cancer risk may be mediated via genetic or epigenetic effects on HNF1B gene expression. We previously found single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at the HNF1B locus to be associated with endometrial cancer, and now report extensive fine-mapping and in silico and laboratory analyses of this locus. Analysis of 1184 genotyped and imputed SNPs in 6608 Caucasian cases and 37 925 controls, and 895 Asian cases and 1968 controls, revealed the best signal of association for SNP rs11263763 (P = 8.4 × 10(-14), odds ratio = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.82-0.89), located within HNF1B intron 1. Haplotype analysis and conditional analyses provide no evidence of further independent endometrial cancer risk variants at this locus. SNP rs11263763 genotype was associated with HNF1B mRNA expression but not with HNF1B methylation in endometrial tumor samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Genetic analyses prioritized rs11263763 and four other SNPs in high-to-moderate linkage disequilibrium as the most likely causal SNPs. Three of these SNPs map to the extended HNF1B promoter based on chromatin marks extending from the minimal promoter region. Reporter assays demonstrated that this extended region reduces activity in combination with the minimal HNF1B promoter, and that the minor alleles of rs11263763 or rs8064454 are associated with decreased HNF1B promoter activity. Our findings provide evidence for a single signal associated with endometrial cancer risk at the HNF1B locus, and that risk is likely mediated via altered HNF1B gene expression

Self-Guided Psychological Treatment for Depressive Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis

Background: A number of trials have examined the effects of self-guided psychological intervention, without any contact between the participants and a therapist or coach. The results and sizes of these trials have been mixed. This is the first quantitative meta-analysis, aimed at organizing and evaluating the literature, and estimating effect size. Method: We conducted systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase up to January 2010, and identified additional studies through earlier meta-analyses, and the references of included studies. We identified seven randomized controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 1,362 respondents. The overall quality of the studies was high. A post-hoc power calculation showed that the studies had sufficient statistical power to detect an effect size of d = 0.19. Results: The overall mean effect size indicating the difference between self-guided psychological treatment and control groups at post-test was d = 0.28 (pless than0.001), which corresponds to a NNT of 6.41. At 4 to 12 months follow-up the effect size was d = 0.23. There was no indication for significant publication bias. Conclusions: We found evidence that self-guided psychological treatment has a small but significant effect on participants with increased levels of depressive symptomatology.Original Publication:Pim Cuijpers, Tara Donker, Robert Johansson, David C. Mohr, Annemieke van Straten and Gerhard Andersson, Self-Guided Psychological Treatment for Depressive Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis, 2011, PLoS ONE, (6), 6.http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021274Copyright: Public Library of Science (PLoS)http://www.plos.org

Effect of genetic testing for risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus on health behaviors and outcomes: study rationale, development and design

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Type 2 diabetes is a prevalent chronic condition globally that results in extensive morbidity, decreased quality of life, and increased health services utilization. Lifestyle changes can prevent the development of diabetes, but require patient engagement. Genetic risk testing might represent a new tool to increase patients' motivation for lifestyle changes. Here we describe the rationale, development, and design of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the clinical and personal utility of incorporating type 2 diabetes genetic risk testing into comprehensive diabetes risk assessments performed in a primary care setting.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Patients are recruited in the laboratory waiting areas of two primary care clinics and enrolled into one of three study arms. Those interested in genetic risk testing are randomized to receive <it>either </it>a standard risk assessment (SRA) for type 2 diabetes incorporating conventional risk factors plus upfront disclosure of the results of genetic risk testing ("SRA+G" arm), <it>or </it>the SRA alone ("SRA" arm). Participants not interested in genetic risk testing will not receive the test, but will receive SRA (forming a third, "no-test" arm). Risk counseling is provided by clinic staff (not study staff external to the clinic). Fasting plasma glucose, insulin levels, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference are measured at baseline and 12 months, as are patients' self-reported behavioral and emotional responses to diabetes risk information. Primary outcomes are changes in insulin resistance and BMI after 12 months; secondary outcomes include changes in diet patterns, physical activity, waist circumference, and perceived risk of developing diabetes.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The utility, feasibility, and efficacy of providing patients with genetic risk information for common chronic diseases in primary care remain unknown. The study described here will help to establish whether providing type 2 diabetes genetic risk information in a primary care setting can help improve patients' clinical outcomes, risk perceptions, and/or their engagement in healthy behavior change. In addition, study design features such as the use of existing clinic personnel for risk counseling could inform the future development and implementation of care models for the use of individual genetic risk information in primary care.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00849563">NCT00849563</a></p

The Effectiveness of Contract Farming for Raising Income of Smallholder Farmers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: a Systematic Review

Contract farming is used by an increasing number of firms as a preferred modality to source products from smallholder farmers in low and middle-income countries. Quality requirements of consumers, economies of scale in production or land ownership rights are common incentives for firms to offer contractual arrangements to farmers. Prices and access to key technology, key inputs or support services are the main incentives for farmers to enter into these contracts. There is great heterogeneity in contract farming, with differences in contracts, farmers, products, buyers, and institutional environments. The last decade shows a rapid increase in studies that use quasi-experimental research designs to assess the effects of specific empirical instances of contract farming on smallholders. The objective of this systematic review was to distill generalised inferences from this rapidly growing body of evidence. The review synthesised the studies in order to answer two questions: 1: What is known about the effect size of contract farming on income and food security of smallholder farmers in low- and middle-income countries? 2: Under which enabling or limiting conditions are contract farming arrangements effective for improving income and food security of smallholders

Clinical course of untreated cerebral cavernous malformations: A meta-analysis of individual patient data

SummaryBackgroundCerebral cavernous malformations (CCMs) can cause symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), but the estimated risks are imprecise and predictors remain uncertain. We aimed to obtain precise estimates and predictors of the risk of ICH during untreated follow-up in an individual patient data meta-analysis.MethodsWe invited investigators of published cohorts of people aged at least 16 years, identified by a systematic review of Ovid MEDLINE and Embase from inception to April 30, 2015, to provide individual patient data on clinical course from CCM diagnosis until first CCM treatment or last available follow-up. We used survival analysis to estimate the 5-year risk of symptomatic ICH due to CCMs (primary outcome), multivariable Cox regression to identify baseline predictors of outcome, and random-effects models to pool estimates in a meta-analysis.FindingsAmong 1620 people in seven cohorts from six studies, 204 experienced ICH during 5197 person-years of follow-up (Kaplan-Meier estimated 5-year risk 15·8%, 95% CI 13·7–17·9). The primary outcome of ICH within 5 years of CCM diagnosis was associated with clinical presentation with ICH or new focal neurological deficit (FND) without brain imaging evidence of recent haemorrhage versus other modes of presentation (hazard ratio 5·6, 95% CI 3·2–9·7) and with brainstem CCM location versus other locations (4·4, 2·3–8·6), but age, sex, and CCM multiplicity did not add independent prognostic information. The 5-year estimated risk of ICH during untreated follow-up was 3·8% (95% CI 2·1–5·5) for 718 people with non-brainstem CCM presenting without ICH or FND, 8·0% (0·1–15·9) for 80 people with brainstem CCM presenting without ICH or FND, 18·4% (13·3–23·5) for 327 people with non-brainstem CCM presenting with ICH or FND, and 30·8% (26·3–35·2) for 495 people with brainstem CCM presenting with ICH or FND.InterpretationMode of clinical presentation and CCM location are independently associated with ICH within 5 years of CCM diagnosis. These findings can inform decisions about CCM treatment.FundingUK Medical Research Council, Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government, and UK Stroke Association

Five endometrial cancer risk loci identified through genome-wide association analysis.

We conducted a meta-analysis of three endometrial cancer genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and two follow-up phases totaling 7,737 endometrial cancer cases and 37,144 controls of European ancestry. Genome-wide imputation and meta-analysis identified five new risk loci of genome-wide significance at likely regulatory regions on chromosomes 13q22.1 (rs11841589, near KLF5), 6q22.31 (rs13328298, in LOC643623 and near HEY2 and NCOA7), 8q24.21 (rs4733613, telomeric to MYC), 15q15.1 (rs937213, in EIF2AK4, near BMF) and 14q32.33 (rs2498796, in AKT1, near SIVA1). We also found a second independent 8q24.21 signal (rs17232730). Functional studies of the 13q22.1 locus showed that rs9600103 (pairwise r(2) = 0.98 with rs11841589) is located in a region of active chromatin that interacts with the KLF5 promoter region. The rs9600103[T] allele that is protective in endometrial cancer suppressed gene expression in vitro, suggesting that regulation of the expression of KLF5, a gene linked to uterine development, is implicated in tumorigenesis. These findings provide enhanced insight into the genetic and biological basis of endometrial cancer.I.T. is supported by Cancer Research UK and the Oxford Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre. T.H.T.C. is supported by the Rhodes Trust and the Nuffield Department of Medicine. Funding for iCOGS infrastructure came from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692 and C8197/A16565), the US National Institutes of Health (R01 CA128978, U19 CA148537, U19 CA148065 and U19 CA148112), the US Department of Defense (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, the Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. SEARCH recruitment was funded by a programme grant from Cancer Research UK (C490/A10124). Stage 1 and stage 2 case genotyping was supported by the NHMRC (552402 and 1031333). Control data were generated by the WTCCC, and a full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the data is available from the WTCCC website. We acknowledge use of DNA from the British 1958 Birth Cohort collection, funded by UK Medical Research Council grant G0000934 and Wellcome Trust grant 068545/Z/02; funding for this project was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award 085475. NSECG was supported by the European Union's Framework Programme 7 CHIBCHA grant and Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics Core Grant 090532/Z/09Z, and CORGI was funded by Cancer Research UK. BCAC is funded by Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118 and C1287/A12014). OCAC is supported by a grant from the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund thanks to donations by the family and friends of Kathryn Sladek Smith (PPD/RPCI.07) and the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the University of Cambridge.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.356

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707