Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Effective integration of caregivers and families as part of the care team for people with cancer

BACKGROUND: Informal caregivers (family or friends of people with cancer) are a group of highly important people who support those diagnosed with cancer to remain at home and out of hospital, but this comes at a significant personal cost. Understanding strategies to support cancer caregivers is critical. OBJECTIVE: This article will present an overview of cancer caregiving and how the caregivers involved can be assisted by general practitioners (GPs). Two key approaches to general practice teams supporting caregivers will be explored: acknowledging and integrating caregivers as part of the care team and providing referrals into services and supports. DISCUSSION: The general practice team is ideally positioned to assist in the support of cancer caregivers. GPs can assist caregivers by acknowledging them as valid and important members of the care team and referring them into existing support programs. These strategies are central to supporting this important, but often forgotten, group of people affected by cancer

Overcoming challenges in conducting systematic reviews in implementation science: a methods commentary

Abstract Consolidation of the literature using systematic reviews is a critical way to advance a discipline and support evidence-based decision-making in healthcare. However, unique challenges exist that impact the conduct of systematic reviews in implementation science. In this commentary, we reflect on our combined experience to describe five key challenges unique to systematic reviews of primary implementation research. These challenges include (1) descriptors used in implementation science publications, (2) distinction between evidence-based interventions and implementation strategies, (3) assessment of external validity, (4) synthesis of implementation studies with substantial clinical and methodological diversity, and (5) variability in defining implementation ‘success’. We outline possible solutions and highlight resources that can be used by authors of primary implementation research, as well as systematic review and editorial teams, to overcome the identified challenges and optimise the utility of future systematic reviews in implementation science

Simulating the healthcare workforce impact and capacity for pancreatic cancer care in Victoria: a model-based analysis

Abstract Background The incidence of pancreatic cancer is rising. With improvements in knowledge for screening and early detection, earlier detection of pancreatic cancer will continue to be more common. To support workforce planning, our aim is to perform a model-based analysis that simulates the potential impact on the healthcare workforce, assuming an earlier diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Methods We developed a simulation model to estimate the demand (i.e. new cases of pancreatic cancer) and supply (i.e. the healthcare workforce including general surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pain medicine physicians, and palliative care physicians) between 2023 and 2027 in Victoria, Australia. The model compares the current scenario to one in which pancreatic cancer is diagnosed at an earlier stage. The incidence of pancreatic cancer in Victoria, five-year survival rates, and Victoria’s population size were obtained from Victorian Cancer Registry, Cancer Council NSW, and Australian Bureau of Statistics respectively. The healthcare workforce data were sourced from the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care’s Health Workforce Data. The model was constructed at the remoteness level. We analysed the new cases and the number of healthcare workforce by profession together to assess the impact on the healthcare workforce. Results In the status quo, over the next five years, there will be 198 to 220 stages I-II, 297 to 330 stage III, and 495 to 550 stage IV pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed annually, respectively. Assuming 20–70% of the shift towards pancreatic cancer’s earlier diagnosis (shifting from stage IV to stages I-II pancreatic cancer within one year), the stages I-II cases could increase to 351 to 390 or 598 to 665 per year. The shift to early diagnosis led to substantial survival gains, translating into an additional 284 or 795 out of 5246 patients with pancreatic cancer remaining alive up to year 5 post-diagnosis. Workforce supply decreases significantly by the remoteness levels, and remote areas face a shortage of key medical professionals registered in delivering pancreatic cancer care, suggesting travel necessities by patients or clinicians. Conclusion Improving the early detection and diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is expected to bring significant survival benefits, although there are workforce distribution imbalances in Victoria that may affect the ability to achieve the anticipated survival gain