57 research outputs found
Pre- and postprandial variation in implicit attention to food images reflects appetite and sensory-specific satiety
The effect of Korean pine nut oil (PinnoThinâ„¢) on food intake, feeding behaviour and appetite: A double-blind placebo-controlled trial
Certain free fatty acids have been shown to have potent effects on food intake and self-reported changes in appetite; effects associated with increases in the release of endogenous cholecystokinin (CCK) and glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1). In the current study, the effects of a Korean pine nut oil product, PinnoThinâ„¢, at doses 2 g, 4 g and 6 g triglyceride (TG) and 2 g free fatty acid (FFA), on food intake and appetite were examined in a cross-over double-blind placebo-controlled randomised counter-balanced design in 42 overweight female volunteers. 2 g FFA PinnoThinâ„¢, given 30 minutes prior to an ad-libitum buffet test lunch, significantly reduced food intake (gram) by 9% (F(4,164) = 2.637, p = 0.036) compared to olive oil control. No significant effect of PinnoThinâ„¢ on macronutrient intake or ratings of appetite were observed. Given the recent data showing that the TG form of PinnoThinâ„¢ may also reduce appetite by increasing CCK release, the lack of any effect of the TG form found in this study could be attributed to the timing of the dosing regime. Collectively, these data suggest that PinnoThinâ„¢ may exert satiating effects consistent with its known action on CCK and GLP-1 release, and previously observed effects on self-reported appetite ratings
Presence of Nonhemolytic Pneumolysin in Serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae Associated with Disease Outbreaks
Pneumolysin is an important virulence factor of the human pathogen Streptococcus pneumoniae. Sequence analysis of the ply gene from 121 clinical isolates of S. pneumoniae uncovered a number of alleles. Twenty-two strains were chosen for further analysis, and 14 protein alleles were discovered. Five of these had been reported previously, and the remaining 9 were novel. Cell lysates were used to determine the specific hemolytic activities of the pneumolysin proteins. Six strains showed no hemolytic activity, and the remaining 16 were hemolytic, to varying degrees. We report that the nonhemolytic allele reported previously in serotype 1, sequence type (ST) 306 isolates is also present in a number of pneumococcal isolates of serotype 8 that belong to the ST53 lineage. Serotype 1 and 8 pneumococci are known to be associated with outbreaks of invasive disease. The nonhemolytic pneumolysin allele is therefore associated with the dominant clones of outbreak-associated serotypes of S. pneumonia
Visualising harms in publications of randomised controlled trials: consensus and recommendations
OBJECTIVE: To improve communication of harm in publications of randomised controlled trials via the development of recommendations for visually presenting harm outcomes. DESIGN: Consensus study. SETTING: 15 clinical trials units registered with the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, an academic population health department, Roche Products, and The BMJ. PARTICIPANTS: Experts in clinical trials: 20 academic statisticians, one industry statistician, one academic health economist, one data graphics designer, and two clinicians. MAIN OUTCOME: measures A methodological review of statistical methods identified visualisations along with those recommended by consensus group members. Consensus on visual recommendations was achieved (at least 60% of the available votes) over a series of three meetings with participants. The participants reviewed and critically appraised candidate visualisations against an agreed framework and voted on whether to endorse each visualisation. Scores marginally below this threshold (50-60%) were revisited for further discussions and votes retaken until consensus was reached. RESULTS: 28 visualisations were considered, of which 10 are recommended for researchers to consider in publications of main research findings. The choice of visualisations to present will depend on outcome type (eg, binary, count, time-to-event, or continuous), and the scenario (eg, summarising multiple emerging events or one event of interest). A decision tree is presented to assist trialists in deciding which visualisations to use. Examples are provided of each endorsed visualisation, along with an example interpretation, potential limitations, and signposting to code for implementation across a range of standard statistical software. Clinician feedback was incorporated into the explanatory information provided in the recommendations to aid understanding and interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Visualisations provide a powerful tool to communicate harms in clinical trials, offering an alternative perspective to the traditional frequency tables. Increasing the use of visualisations for harm outcomes in clinical trial manuscripts and reports will provide clearer presentation of information and enable more informative interpretations. The limitations of each visualisation are discussed and examples of where their use would be inappropriate are given. Although the decision tree aids the choice of visualisation, the statistician and clinical trial team must ultimately decide the most appropriate visualisations for their data and objectives. Trialists should continue to examine crude numbers alongside visualisations to fully understand harm profiles
Recommended from our members
Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01378-
Recommended from our members
Publisher Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study.
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: Outcomes from the UK 'Alert Level 4' phase of the B-MaP-C study
Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study
Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown
Correction: Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study
From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: registration 2021-03-26, online 2021-04-12, pub-electronic 2021-04-12, pub-print 2021-08-31Publication status: PublishedA Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01378-
Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study
From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-08-11, rev-recd 2020-12-04, accepted 2020-12-10, registration 2020-12-11, pub-electronic 2021-03-25, online 2021-03-25, pub-print 2021-05-25Publication status: PublishedAbstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown
- …