High incidence of Epstein-Barr virus, cytomegalovirus and human herpesvirus 6 infections in children with cancer

BACKGROUND: A prospective single-center study was performed to study infection with lymphotropic herpesviruses (LH) Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), cytomegalovirus (CMV) and human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) in children with cancer. METHODS: The group of 186 children was examined for the presence of LH before, during and 2 months after the end of anticancer treatment. Serology of EBV and CMV was monitored in all children, serology of HHV-6 and DNA analysis of all three LH was monitored in 70 children. RESULTS: At the time of cancer diagnosis (pre-treatment), there was no difference between cancer patients and age-matched healthy controls in overall IgG seropositivity for EBV (68.8% vs. 72.0%; p = 0.47) and CMV (37.6% vs. 41.7%; p = 0.36). During anticancer therapy, primary or reactivated EBV and CMV infection was present in 65 (34.9%) and 66 (35.4%) of 186 patients, respectively, leading to increased overall post-treatment IgG seropositivity that was significantly different from controls for EBV (86.6% vs. 72.0%; p = 0.0004) and CMV (67.7% vs. 41.7%; p < 0.0001). Overall pre-treatment IgG seropositivity for HHV-6 was significantly lower in patients than in controls (80.6% vs. 91.3%; p = 0.0231) which may be in agreement with Greaves hypothesis of protective effect of common infections in infancy to cancer development. Primary or reactivated HHV-6 infection was present in 23 (32.9%) of 70 patients during anticancer therapy leading to post-treatment IgG seropositivity that was not significantly different from controls (94.3% vs. 91.3%; p = 0.58). The LH infection occurred independently from leukodepleted blood transfusions given. Combination of serology and DNA analysis in detection of symptomatic EBV or CMV infection was superior to serology alone. CONCLUSION: EBV, CMV and HHV-6 infections are frequently present during therapy of pediatric malignancy

Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI): A Prospective Longitudinal Observational Study

BACKGROUND: Current classification of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is suboptimal, and management is based on weak evidence, with little attempt to personalize treatment. A need exists for new precision medicine and stratified management approaches that incorporate emerging technologies. OBJECTIVE: To improve characterization and classification of TBI and to identify best clinical care, using comparative effectiveness research approaches. METHODS: This multicenter, longitudinal, prospective, observational study in 22 countries across Europe and Israel will collect detailed data from 5400 consenting patients, presenting within 24 hours of injury, with a clinical diagnosis of TBI and an indication for computed tomography. Broader registry-level data collection in approximately 20 000 patients will assess generalizability. Cross sectional comprehensive outcome assessments, including quality of life and neuropsychological testing, will be performed at 6 months. Longitudinal assessments will continue up to 24 months post TBI in patient subsets. Advanced neuroimaging and genomic and biomarker data will be used to improve characterization, and analyses will include neuroinformatics approaches to address variations in process and clinical care. Results will be integrated with living systematic reviews in a process of knowledge transfer. The study initiation was from October to December 2014, and the recruitment period was for 18 to 24 months. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI should provide novel multidimensional approaches to TBI characterization and classification, evidence to support treatment recommendations, and benchmarks for quality of care. Data and sample repositories will ensure opportunities for legacy research. DISCUSSION: Comparative effectiveness research provides an alternative to reductionistic clinical trials in restricted patient populations by exploiting differences in biology, care, and outcome to support optimal personalized patient management