Protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with observation/conservative management for preventing recurrent symptoms and complications in adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones (C-Gall trial)

Acknowledgments Previous CHaRT director John Norrie for his work with the concept of this study. Funding The trial is funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme (funder number: 14/192/71).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Medications that relax the lower oesophageal sphincter and risk of oesophageal cancer : An analysis of two independent population-based databases

Acknowledgements We acknowledge collaboration with the Research Applications and Data Management Team lead by Ms Katie Wilde, University of Aberdeen in conducting our study. This research has been conducted using the UK Bio-bank Resource under application number 34374.Peer reviewedPostprin

Effectiveness of conservative management versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the prevention of recurrent symptoms and complications in adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease (C-GALL trial) : pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial

Acknowledgments This project will be published in full in the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme series. Data monitoring committee: Catherine Hewitt (University of York), Jonathan Lund (University of Nottingham), Tim McAdam (Belfast Health and Social Care Trust), and Amir Nisar (Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust). Trial steering group: David Beard (University of Oxford), Ian Beckingham (Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust), John Leeds (Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust), and Dee McDonald (patient representative). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project No 14/192/71). The Health Services Research Unit of the University of Aberdeen is funded in part by the chief scientist’s office of the Scottish government’s health and social care directorates. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the chief scientist’s office, HTA programme, NIHR, NHS, or Department of Health. The funder had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conservative management for adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones : the C-GALL RCT

Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the men and women who participated in C-GALL. We also thank the CHaRT data coordinators and trials managers who helped support the study: Zoe Batham, Louise Campbell, Janice Cruden, Dianne Dejean, Jackie Ellington, Andrea Fraser and Bev Smith (data coordinators), Tracey Davidson and Alison McDonald (Trial managers). We are grateful to Kirsty McCormack and John Norrie for their help and advice in developing the grant proposal, to the Programming Team in CHaRT for developing and maintaining the study website. We thank Juliette Snow and Rachael West for their help with contracting, and Louise Cotterell, Kerry Duffus and Anne Buckle for their assistance in managing the budget. Our thanks go also to the Research Governance team (Louise King, Stacey Dawson, Lynn McKay) at the University of Aberdeen for their advice and support during the study. Thanks to Jamie McAllister (NHS Grampian) for providing unit cost data for the within trial economic analysis. Thanks to the Chen et al. for allowing the C-GALL group the use of the Otago ConditionSpecific Questionnaire (OCSQ) for gallstone disease, developed by Chen et al. in the University of Otago, New Zealand.1,2 1. Chen TY, Landmann MG, Potter JC, van Rij AM. Questionnaire to aid priority and outcomes assessment in gallstone disease. ANZ J Surg. 2006;76(7):569-74. 2. Chen TY. A novel set of condition-specific quality of life questionnaires in elective general surgical patient prioritization and outcome assessment [dissertation]. Dunedin (NZ): University of Otago; 2012. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10523/2588 Members of the PMG for their ongoing support and advice. The independent members of the TSC and DMC, and the staff at the recruiting sites (listed below) who facilitated recruitment, treatment and follow up of trial participants. Trial funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) XXX programme and will be published in full in HTA journal; Vol. XX, No. XXPeer reviewe

Effectiveness of Conservative Management versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Prevention of Recurrent Symptoms and Complications in Adults with Uncomplicated Symptomatic Gallstone Disease (C-GALL Trial): Pragmatic, Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of conservative management compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the prevention of symptoms and complications in adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease. DESIGN: Parallel group, pragmatic randomised, superiority trial. SETTING: 20 secondary care centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 434 adults (\u3e18 years) with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease referred to secondary care, assessed for eligibility between August 2016 and November 2019, and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive conservative management or laparoscopic cholecystectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Conservative management or surgical removal of the gallbladder. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary patient outcome was quality of life, measured by area under the curve, over 18 months using the short form 36 (SF-36) bodily pain domain, with higher scores (range 0-100) indicating better quality of life. Other outcomes included costs to the NHS, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: Of 2667 patients assessed for eligibility, 434 were randomised: 217 to the conservative management group and 217 to the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. By 18 months, 54 (25%) participants in the conservative management arm and 146 (67%) in the cholecystectomy arm had received surgery. The mean SF-36 norm based bodily pain score was 49.4 (standard deviation 11.7) in the conservative management arm and 50.4 (11.6) in the cholecystectomy arm. The SF-36 bodily pain area under the curve up to 18 months did not differ (mean difference 0.0, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to 1.7; P=1.00). Conservative management was less costly (mean difference -£1033, (-$1334; -€1205), 95% credible interval -£1413 to -£632) and QALYs did not differ (mean difference -0.019, 95% credible interval -0.06 to 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In the short term (≤18 months), laparoscopic surgery is no more effective than conservative management for adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease, and as such conservative management should be considered as an alternative to surgery. From an NHS perspective, conservative management may be cost effective for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease. As costs, complications, and benefits will continue to be incurred in both groups beyond 18 months, future research should focus on longer term follow-up to establish effectiveness and lifetime cost effectiveness and to identify the cohort of patients who should be routinely offered surgery

VectorNet Data Series 3: Culicoides Abundance Distribution Models for Europe and Surrounding Regions

This is the third in a planned series of data papers presenting modelled vector distributions produced during the ECDC and EFSA funded VectorNet project. The data package presented here includes those Culicoides vectors species first modelled in 2015 as part of the VectorNet gap analysis work namely C. imicola, C. obsoletus, C. scoticus, C. dewulfi, C. chiopterus, C. pulicaris, C. lupicaris, C. punctatus, and C. newsteadi. The known distributions of these species within the Project area (Europe, the Mediterranean Basin, North Africa, and Eurasia) are currently incomplete to a greater or lesser degree. The models are designed to fill the gaps with predicted distributions, to provide a) first indication of vector species distributions across the project geographical extent, and b) assistance in targeting surveys to collect distribution data for those areas with no field validated information. The models are based on input data from light trap surveillance of adult Culicoides across continental Europe and surrounding regions (71.8°N –33.5°S, – 11.2°W – 62°E), concentrated in Western countries, supplemented by transect samples in eastern and northern Europe. Data from central EU are relatively sparse.Peer reviewe

Grand challenges in entomology: Priorities for action in the coming decades

Entomology is key to understanding terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems at a time of unprecedented anthropogenic environmental change and offers substantial untapped potential to benefit humanity in a variety of ways, from improving agricultural practices to managing vector-borne diseases and inspiring technological advances. We identified high priority challenges for entomology using an inclusive, open, and democratic four-stage prioritisation approach, conducted among the membership and affiliates (hereafter ‘members’) of the UK-based Royal Entomological Society (RES). A list of 710 challenges was gathered from 189 RES members. Thematic analysis was used to group suggestions, followed by an online vote to determine initial priorities, which were subsequently ranked during an online workshop involving 37 participants. The outcome was a set of 61 priority challenges within four groupings of related themes: (i) ‘Fundamental Research’ (themes: Taxonomy, ‘Blue Skies’ [defined as research ideas without immediate practical application], Methods and Techniques); (ii) ‘Anthropogenic Impacts and Conservation’ (themes: Anthropogenic Impacts, Conservation Options); (iii) ‘Uses, Ecosystem Services and Disservices’ (themes: Ecosystem Benefits, Technology and Resources [use of insects as a resource, or as inspiration], Pests); (iv) ‘Collaboration, Engagement and Training’ (themes: Knowledge Access, Training and Collaboration, Societal Engagement). Priority challenges encompass research questions, funding objectives, new technologies, and priorities for outreach and engagement. Examples include training taxonomists, establishing a global network of insect monitoring sites, understanding the extent of insect declines, exploring roles of cultivated insects in food supply chains, and connecting professional with amateur entomologists. Responses to different challenges could be led by amateur and professional entomologists, at all career stages. Overall, the challenges provide a diverse array of options to inspire and initiate entomological activities and reveal the potential of entomology to contribute to addressing global challenges related to human health and well-being, and environmental change

Grand challenges in entomology: priorities for action in the coming decades

1. Entomology is key to understanding terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems at a time of unprecedented anthropogenic environmental change and offers substantial untapped potential to benefit humanity in a variety of ways, from improving agricultural practices to managing vector-borne diseases and inspiring technological advances. 2. We identified high priority challenges for entomology using an inclusive, open, and democratic four-stage prioritisation approach, conducted among the membership and affiliates (hereafter ‘members’) of the UK-based Royal Entomological Society (RES). 3. A list of 710 challenges was gathered from 189 RES members. Thematic analysis was used to group suggestions, followed by an online vote to determine initial priorities, which were subsequently ranked during an online workshop involving 37 participants. 4. The outcome was a set of 61 priority challenges within four groupings of related themes: (i) ‘Fundamental Research’ (themes: Taxonomy, ‘Blue Skies’ [defined as research ideas without immediate practical application], Methods and Techniques); (ii) ‘Anthropogenic Impacts and Conservation’ (themes: Anthropogenic Impacts, Conservation Options); (iii) ‘Uses, Ecosystem Services and Disservices’ (themes: Ecosystem Benefits, Technology and Resources [use of insects as a resource, or as inspiration], Pests); (iv) ‘Collaboration, Engagement and Training’ (themes: Knowledge Access, Training and Collaboration, Societal Engagement). 5. Priority challenges encompass research questions, funding objectives, new technologies, and priorities for outreach and engagement. Examples include training taxonomists, establishing a global network of insect monitoring sites, understanding the extent of insect declines, exploring roles of cultivated insects in food supply chains, and connecting professional with amateur entomologists. Responses to different challenges could be led by amateur and professional entomologists, at all career stages. 6. Overall, the challenges provide a diverse array of options to inspire and initiate entomological activities and reveal the potential of entomology to contribute to addressing global challenges related to human health and well-being, and environmental change

Grand challenges in entomology: priorities for action in the coming decades

Entomology is key to understanding terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems at a time of unprecedented anthropogenic environmental change and offers substantial untapped potential to benefit humanity in a variety of ways, from improving agricultural practices to managing vector-borne diseases and inspiring technological advances. We identified high priority challenges for entomology using an inclusive, open, and democratic four-stage prioritisation approach, conducted among the membership and affiliates (hereafter ‘members’) of the UK-based Royal Entomological Society (RES). A list of 710 challenges was gathered from 189 RES members. Thematic analysis was used to group suggestions, followed by an online vote to determine initial priorities, which were subsequently ranked during an online workshop involving 37 participants. The outcome was a set of 61 priority challenges within four groupings of related themes: (i) ‘Fundamental Research’ (themes: Taxonomy, ‘Blue Skies’ [defined as research ideas without immediate practical application], Methods and Techniques); (ii) ‘Anthropogenic Impacts and Conservation’ (themes: Anthropogenic Impacts, Conservation Options); (iii) ‘Uses, Ecosystem Services and Disservices’ (themes: Ecosystem Benefits, Technology and Resources [use of insects as a resource, or as inspiration], Pests); (iv) ‘Collaboration, Engagement and Training’ (themes: Knowledge Access, Training and Collaboration, Societal Engagement). Priority challenges encompass research questions, funding objectives, new technologies, and priorities for outreach and engagement. Examples include training taxonomists, establishing a global network of insect monitoring sites, understanding the extent of insect declines, exploring roles of cultivated insects in food supply chains, and connecting professional with amateur entomologists. Responses to different challenges could be led by amateur and professional entomologists, at all career stages. Overall, the challenges provide a diverse array of options to inspire and initiate entomological activities and reveal the potential of entomology to contribute to addressing global challenges related to human health and well-being, and environmental change