A Comparative Analysis of the Chronic Effects of Fine Particulate Matter

The American Cancer Society study (ACS) and the Harvard Six Cities study (SCS) are the two landmark cohort studies for estimating the chronic effects of fine particulate matter PM2.5 on mortality. To date, no comparative analysis of these studies has been carried out using a different study design, study period, data, and modeling approach. In this paper, we estimate the chronic effects of PM on mortality for the period 2000-2002 by using mortality data from Medicare and \PM levels from the National Air Pollution Monitoring Network for the same counties included in the SCS and the ACS. We use a log-linear regression model which controls for individual-level risk factors (age and gender) and area-level covariates (education, income level, poverty and employment). We found that a 10 units increase in the yearly average PM2.5 is associated with 10.9% (95% CI: 9.0, 12.8) and with 20.8% (95% CI: 12.3, 30.0) increase in all-cause mortality by using Medicare data for the ACS and SCS counties. The results are similar to those reported by the original SCS and ACS indicating that fine particulate matter is still significantly associated with mortality when more recent air pollution and mortality data are used. Our findings suggest that national government based data, like the Medicare, are useful for advancing our understanding of the chronic effects of ambient air pollution on health

Evaluating Vaccine Efficacy Against SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Although interim results from several large placebo-controlled phase 3 trials demonstrated high vaccine efficacy (VE) against symptomatic COVID-19, it is unknown how effective the vaccines are in preventing people from becoming asymptomatically in- fected and potentially spreading the virus unwittingly. It is more difficult to evaluate VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection than against symptomatic COVID-19 because infection is not observed directly but rather is known to occur between two antibody or RT-PCR tests. Ad- ditional challenges arise as community transmission changes over time and as participants are vaccinated on different dates because of staggered enrollment of participants or crossover of placebo recipients to the vaccine arm before the end of the study. Here, we provide valid and efficient statistical methods for estimating potentially waning VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection with blood or nasal samples under time-varying community transmission, stag- gered enrollment, and blinded or unblinded crossover. We demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed methods through numerical studies mimicking the BNT162b2 phase 3 trial and the Prevent COVID U study. In addition, we assess how crossover and the frequency of diagnostic tests affect the precision of VE estimates

Efficacy of Messenger RNA-1273 Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Acquisition in Young Adults From March to December 2021

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of messenger RNA (mRNA)-1273 against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is not well defined, particularly among young adults. METHODS: Adults aged 18-29 years with no known history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or prior vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were recruited from 44 US sites from 24 March to 13 September 2021 and randomized 1:1 to immediate vaccination (receipt of 2 doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine at months 0 and 1) or the standard of care (receipt of COVID-19 vaccine). Randomized participants were followed up for SARS-CoV-2 infection measured by nasal swab testing and symptomatic COVID-19 measured by nasal swab testing plus symptom assessment and assessed for the primary efficacy outcome. A vaccine-declined observational group was also recruited from 16 June to 8 November 2021 and followed up for SARS-CoV-2 infection as specified for the randomized participants. RESULTS: The study enrolled 1149 in the randomized arms and 311 in the vaccine-declined group and collected >122 000 nasal swab samples. Based on randomized participants, the efficacy of 2 doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 52.6% (95% confidence interval, -14.1% to 80.3%), with the majority of infections due to the Delta variant. Vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 was 71.0% (95% confidence interval, -9.5% to 92.3%). Precision was limited owing to curtailed study enrollment and off-study vaccination censoring. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the vaccine-declined group was 1.8 times higher than in the standard-of-care group. CONCLUSIONS: mRNA-1273 vaccination reduced the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection from March to September 2021, but vaccination was only one factor influencing risk. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04811664

STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.

Incomplete reporting has been identified as a major source of avoidable waste in biomedical research. Essential information is often not provided in study reports, impeding the identification, critical appraisal, and replication of studies. To improve the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies, the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was developed. Here we present STARD 2015, an updated list of 30 essential items that should be included in every report of a diagnostic accuracy study. This update incorporates recent evidence about sources of bias and variability in diagnostic accuracy and is intended to facilitate the use of STARD. As such, STARD 2015 may help to improve completeness and transparency in reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies

Vaccine efficacy of ALVAC-HIV and bivalent subtype C gp120–MF59 in adults

BACKGROUND : A safe, effective vaccine is essential to eradicating human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. A canarypox–protein HIV vaccine regimen (ALVAC-HIV plus AIDSVAX B/E) showed modest efficacy in reducing infection in Thailand. An analogous regimen using HIV-1 subtype C virus showed potent humoral and cellular responses in a phase 1–2a trial in South Africa. Efficacy data and additional safety data were needed for this regimen in a larger population in South Africa. METHODS : In this phase 2b–3 trial, we randomly assigned 5404 adults without HIV-1 infection to receive the vaccine (2704 participants) or placebo (2700 participants). The vaccine regimen consisted of injections of ALVAC-HIV at months 0 and 1, followed by four booster injections of ALVAC-HIV plus bivalent subtype C gp120–MF59 adjuvant at months 3, 6, 12, and 18. The primary efficacy outcome was the occurrence of HIV-1 infection from randomization to 24 months. RESULTS : In January 2020, prespecified criteria for non-efficacy were met at an interim analysis; further vaccinations were subsequently halted. The median age of the trial participants was 24 years; 70% of the participants were women. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups. During the 24-month followup, HIV-1 infection was diagnosed in 138 participants in the vaccine group and in 133 in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.30; P = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS : The ALVAC–gp120 regimen did not prevent HIV-1 infection among participants in South Africa despite previous evidence of immunogenicity.Supported by grants (HHSN272201300033C and HHSN272201600012C) to Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics (now part of the GlaxoSmithKline [GSK] Biologicals) by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for the selection and process development of the two gp120 envelope proteins TV1.C and 1086.C; by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Global Health Grant (OPP1017604) and NIAID for the manufacture and release of the gp120 clinical grade material; and by U.S. Public Health Service Grants — UM1 AI068614 to the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN), UM1 AI068635 to the HVTN Statistical and Data Management Center, and UM1 AI068618 to the HVTN Laboratory Center — from the NIAID. GSK Biologicals contributed financially to the provision of preexposure prophylaxis to trial participants. The South African Medical Research Council supported its affiliated research sites.http://www.nejm.orgam2022School of Health Systems and Public Health (SHSPH

Improving Nursing Home Care through Feedback On PerfoRMance Data (INFORM): Protocol for a cluster-randomized trial

Background Audit and feedback is effective in improving the quality of care. However, methods and results of international studies are heterogeneous, and studies have been criticized for a lack of systematic use of theory. In TREC (Translating Research in Elder Care), a longitudinal health services research program, we collect comprehensive data from care providers and residents in Canadian nursing homes to improve quality of care and life of residents, and quality of worklife of caregivers. The study aims are to a) systematically feed back TREC research data to nursing home care units, and b) compare the effectiveness of three different theory-based feedback strategies in improving performance within care units. Methods INFORM (Improving Nursing Home Care through Feedback On PerfoRMance Data) is a 3.5-year pragmatic, three-arm, parallel, cluster-randomized trial. We will randomize 67 Western Canadian nursing homes with 203 care units to the three study arms, a standard feedback strategy and two assisted and goal-directed feedback strategies. Interventions will target care unit managerial teams. They are based on theory and evidence related to audit and feedback, goal setting, complex adaptive systems, and empirical work on feeding back research results. The primary outcome is the increased number of formal interactions (e.g., resident rounds or family conferences) involving care aides – non-registered caregivers providing up to 80% of direct care. Secondary outcomes are a) other modifiable features of care unit context (improved feedback, social capital, slack time) b) care aides’ quality of worklife (improved psychological empowerment, job satisfaction), c) more use of best practices, and d) resident outcomes based on the Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimum Data Set 2.0. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, immediately after the 12-month intervention period, and 18 months post intervention. Discussion INFORM is the first study to systematically assess the effectiveness of different strategies to feed back research data to nursing home care units in order to improve their performance. Results of this study will enable development of a practical, sustainable, effective, and cost-effective feedback strategy for routine use by managers, policy makers and researchers. The results may also be generalizable to care settings other than nursing homes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02695836 . Date of registration: 24 February 201

Measuring the Performance of Markers for Guiding Treatment Decisions

Treatment selection markers, sometimes called predictive markers, are factors that help clinicians select therapies that maximize good outcomes and minimize adverse outcomes for patients. Existing statistical methods for evaluating a treatment selection marker include assessing its prognostic value, evaluating treatment effects in patients with a restricted range of marker values, and testing for a statistical interaction between marker value and treatment. These methods are inadequate, because they give misleading measures of performance that do not answer key clinical questions about how the marker might help patients choose treatment, how treatment decisions should be made on the basis of a continuous marker measurement, what effect using the marker to select treatment would have on the population, or what proportion of patients would have treatment changes on the basis of marker measurement. Marker-by-treatment predictiveness curves are proposed as a more useful aid to answering these clinically relevant questions, because they illustrate treatment effects as a function of marker value, outcomes when using or not using the marker to select treatment, and the proportion of patients for whom treatment recommendations change after marker measurement. Randomized therapeutic clinical trials, in which entry criteria and treatment regimens are not restricted by the marker, are also proposed as the basis for constructing the curves and evaluating and comparing marker

Data from: Power/Sample Size Calculations for Assessing Correlates of Risk in Clinical Efficacy Trials

In a randomized controlled clinical trial that assesses treatment efficacy, a common objective is to assess the association of a measured biomarker response endpoint with the primary study endpoint in the active treatment group, using a case-cohort, case-control, or two-phase sampling design. Methods for power and sample size calculations for such biomarker association analyses typically do not account for the level of treatment efficacy, precluding interpretation of the biomarker association results in terms of biomarker effect modification of treatment efficacy, with detriment that the power calculations may tacitly and inadvertently assume that the treatment harms some study participants. We develop power and sample size methods accounting for this issue, and the methods also account for inter-individual variability of the biomarker that is not biologically relevant (e.g., due to technical measurement error). We focus on a binary study endpoint and on a biomarker subject to measurement error that is normally distributed or categorical with two or three levels. We illustrate the methods with preventive HIV vaccine efficacy trials, and include an R package implementing the methods