An evidence based approach towards optimising the management of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the skin

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a common cancer yet its treatment is under-researched. The objective of this thesis was to develop a proposal for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to address uncertainties relating to the management of the condition, and to ultimately improve the management of affected patients. Two systematic reviews were initially conducted to appraise the current evidence base for SCC treatments. Only one RCT was eligible for inclusion in the Cochrane systematic review; a small study which found no significant difference in time to recurrence between patients treated with post-operative 13-cis retinoic acid and interferon, and those not receiving adjuvant treatment. Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies included 118 studies. Pooled estimates of recurrence were lowest after cryotherapy and curettage and electrodesiccation, although lesions treated by these modalities were mostly small and low-risk. Although pooled recurrence after Mohs surgery appeared lower than after conventional excision or radiotherapy, the differences were not significant with overlapping 95% confidence intervals. For photodynamic therapy, pooled recurrence after apparently successful initial treatment was particularly high (26%). Evidence relating to the effectiveness of topical and systemic treatments was very limited. Estimates of recurrence were used to inform the sample size calculation for the proposed RCT. A survey of healthcare professionals was conducted to establish research priorities and identify clinically important management uncertainties from which initial trial scenarios were formulated. High-risk SCCs were identified as a research priority, with optimal surgical management and the role of adjuvant radiotherapy being key areas of uncertainty. Through multi-disciplinary collaboration, a proposal for a two-stage RCT has been developed; in the first stage, locoregional recurrence after conventional surgery with a controlled excision margin will be compared with Mohs surgery, and in the second stage locoregional recurrence will be compared between patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy versus those receiving no adjuvant treatment. Feasibility work conducted during the development of the trial has involved: a) A retrospective analysis of SCCs treated over twelve-months to determine the number of patients and types of SCCs potentially eligible for recruitment into the proposed trial and to further inform the sample size calculation. Within five years of treatment 6% of 357 patients experienced local recurrence, 3% had regional recurrence and 1.5% died of their SCC. Comparison of the most recent American Joint Cancer Council (AJCC7) and an alternative Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) classification showed that approximately 50% of SCCs were T2 in both schemes and eligible for entry into the first stage of the proposed trial. However, an additional BHW T2b substage better stratified outcomes dependent on the number of risk features, and indicated that 19% of all SCCs would potentially be also eligible for the second stage of the trial. b) A questionnaire and focus group study to assess the acceptability of the RCT and to identify possible barriers to recruitment. Participants had a desire to be better informed about SCC, wanting information relating to the trial to be provided in a variety of formats. 71% of participants were hypothetically willing to be randomised into the surgical stage of the proposed trial but had more concerns about the second stage involving adjuvant radiotherapy. Lack of equipoise and confusion about the concept of randomisation will need to be carefully addressed when presenting the trial to participants. The proposed trial will be the first to directly compare treatments for the types of SCC seen commonly in clinical practice. For the trial to be adequately powered, an estimated 5400 participants will need to be recruited, so a multi-centre, multi-disciplinary approach will be necessary

An evidence based approach towards optimising the management of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the skin

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a common cancer yet its treatment is under-researched. The objective of this thesis was to develop a proposal for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to address uncertainties relating to the management of the condition, and to ultimately improve the management of affected patients. Two systematic reviews were initially conducted to appraise the current evidence base for SCC treatments. Only one RCT was eligible for inclusion in the Cochrane systematic review; a small study which found no significant difference in time to recurrence between patients treated with post-operative 13-cis retinoic acid and interferon, and those not receiving adjuvant treatment. Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies included 118 studies. Pooled estimates of recurrence were lowest after cryotherapy and curettage and electrodesiccation, although lesions treated by these modalities were mostly small and low-risk. Although pooled recurrence after Mohs surgery appeared lower than after conventional excision or radiotherapy, the differences were not significant with overlapping 95% confidence intervals. For photodynamic therapy, pooled recurrence after apparently successful initial treatment was particularly high (26%). Evidence relating to the effectiveness of topical and systemic treatments was very limited. Estimates of recurrence were used to inform the sample size calculation for the proposed RCT. A survey of healthcare professionals was conducted to establish research priorities and identify clinically important management uncertainties from which initial trial scenarios were formulated. High-risk SCCs were identified as a research priority, with optimal surgical management and the role of adjuvant radiotherapy being key areas of uncertainty. Through multi-disciplinary collaboration, a proposal for a two-stage RCT has been developed; in the first stage, locoregional recurrence after conventional surgery with a controlled excision margin will be compared with Mohs surgery, and in the second stage locoregional recurrence will be compared between patients treated with adjuvant radiotherapy versus those receiving no adjuvant treatment. Feasibility work conducted during the development of the trial has involved: a) A retrospective analysis of SCCs treated over twelve-months to determine the number of patients and types of SCCs potentially eligible for recruitment into the proposed trial and to further inform the sample size calculation. Within five years of treatment 6% of 357 patients experienced local recurrence, 3% had regional recurrence and 1.5% died of their SCC. Comparison of the most recent American Joint Cancer Council (AJCC7) and an alternative Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) classification showed that approximately 50% of SCCs were T2 in both schemes and eligible for entry into the first stage of the proposed trial. However, an additional BHW T2b substage better stratified outcomes dependent on the number of risk features, and indicated that 19% of all SCCs would potentially be also eligible for the second stage of the trial. b) A questionnaire and focus group study to assess the acceptability of the RCT and to identify possible barriers to recruitment. Participants had a desire to be better informed about SCC, wanting information relating to the trial to be provided in a variety of formats. 71% of participants were hypothetically willing to be randomised into the surgical stage of the proposed trial but had more concerns about the second stage involving adjuvant radiotherapy. Lack of equipoise and confusion about the concept of randomisation will need to be carefully addressed when presenting the trial to participants. The proposed trial will be the first to directly compare treatments for the types of SCC seen commonly in clinical practice. For the trial to be adequately powered, an estimated 5400 participants will need to be recruited, so a multi-centre, multi-disciplinary approach will be necessary

Point of care testing of Influenza A/B and RSV in an adult respiratory assessment unit is associated with improvement in isolation practices and reduction in hospital length of stay

Introduction. Every winter seasonal influenza and other viral respiratory infections increase pressure on the health services and are associated with nosocomial infection and morbidity.Aim. To compare provision of point-of-care (POC) testing with laboratory-based testing for influenza and RSV detection on an adult respiratory assessment unit to assess the impact on isolation practices and length of stay (LOS).Methodology. Prospective interrupted ‘on-off’ study in adults admitted to the respiratory unit between December 2018 and April 2019 with a suspected respiratory tract infection. Nasopharyngeal samples were tested using either the GeneXpert rapid POC test for influenza and RSV (on-period), or were sent to the laboratory for multiplex PCR testing against a panel of 12 respiratory viruses (off-period). Outcome measures were time to patient isolation for infection control, LOS and turnaround time from admission to test results.Results. Of 1145 patients evaluated, 755 were tested with POC and 390 with laboratory multiplex; a respiratory virus was identified in 164 (21.7 %) and 138 (35.4 %) patients respectively. A positive POC test was associated with a shorter time to isolation (mean difference 16.9 h, P [less than] 0.001), shorter LOS (mean difference 15.5 h, P=0.05,) and shorter turnaround time (mean difference 28.3 h, P[less than] 0.001), compared to laboratory testing.Conclusion. Use of GeneXpert POC testing for Flu/RSV is associated with rapid reporting of results with significant improvements in isolation practices and reductions in LOS

Systematic review of respiratory viral pathogens identified in adults with community-acquired pneumonia in Europe

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is an important respiratory disease and the fifth leading cause of mortality in Europe. The development of molecular diagnostic tests has highlighted the contributions of respiratory viruses to the aetiology of CAP, suggesting the incidence of viral pneumonia may have been previously underestimated. We performed a systematic review and meta analysis to describe the overall identification of respiratory viruses in adult patients with CAP in Europe, following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO; CRD42016037233). We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, WHOLIS, COCHRANE library and grey literature sources for relevant studies, and screened these against protocol eligibility criteria. Two researchers performed data extraction and risk of bias assessments, independently, using a piloted form. Results were synthesised narratively, and random effects meta-analyses performed to calculate pooled estimates of effect; heterogeneity was quantified using I2.Twenty-eight studies met inclusion criteria of which 21 were included in the primary meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of patients with identified respiratory viruses was 22.0% (95% CI: 18.0%-27.0%), rising to 29.0% (25.0%–34.0%) in studies where polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnostics were performed. Influenza virus was the most frequently detected virus in 9% (7%-12%) of adults with CAP. Respiratory viruses make a substantial contribution to the aetiology of CAP in adult patients in Europe; one or more respiratory viruses are detected in about one quarter of all cases

Co-infections in people with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: In previous influenza pandemics, bacterial co-infections have been a major cause of mortality. We aimed to evaluate the burden of co-infections in patients with COVID-19. Methods: We systematically searched Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, LILACS and CINAHL for eligible studies published from 1 January 2020 to 17 April 2020. We included patients of all ages, in all settings. The main outcome was the proportion of patients with a bacterial, fungal or viral co-infection. .Results: Thirty studies including 3834 patients were included. Overall, 7% of hospitalised COVID-19 patients had a bacterial co-infection (95% CI 3-12%, n=2183, I2=92∙2%). A higher proportion of ICU patients had bacterial co-infections than patients in mixed ward/ICU settings (14%, 95% CI 5-26, I2=74∙7% versus 4%, 95% CI 1-9, I2= 91∙7%). The commonest bacteria were Mycoplasma pneumonia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Haemophilus influenzae. The pooled proportion with a viral co-infection was 3% (95% CI 1-6, n=1014, I2=62∙3%), with Respiratory Syncytial Virus and influenza A the commonest. Three studies reported fungal co-infections.Conclusions: A low proportion of COVID-19 patients have a bacterial co-infection; less than in previous influenza pandemics. These findings do not support the routine use of antibiotics in the management of confirmed COVID-19 infection

Non-invasive pneumococcal pneumonia due to vaccine serotypes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundNon-invasive pneumococcal pneumonia causes significant morbidity and mortality in older adults. Understanding pneumococcal sero-epidemiology in adults ≥50 years is necessary to inform vaccination policies and the updating of pneumococcal vaccines.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis to determine the proportion of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in people ≥50 years due to pneumococcus and the proportion caused by pneumococcal vaccine serotypes. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed from 1 January 1990 to 30 March 2021. Heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analysis according to a) patient group (stratified versus age) and depth of testing, b) detection/serotyping method, and c) continent. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020192002).FindingsTwenty-eight studies were included (34,216 patients). In the period 1–5 years after introduction of childhood PCV10/13 immunisation, 18% of CAP cases (95% CI 13–24%) were attributable to pneumococcus, with 49% (43–54%) of pneumococcal CAP due to PCV13 serotypes. The estimated proportion of pneumococcal CAP was highest in one study that used 24-valent serotype-specific urinary-antigen detection (ss-UAD)(30% [28–31%]), followed by studies based on diagnostic serology (28% [24–33%]), PCR (26% [15–37%]), ss-UAD14 (17% [13–22%]), and culture alone (14% [10–19%]). A higher estimate was observed in Europe (26% [21–30%] than North America (11% [9–12%](p<0·001). PCV13-serotype estimates were also influenced by serotyping methods.InterpretationNon-invasive pneumococcal CAP and vaccine-type pneumococcal CAP remains a burden in older adults despite widespread introduction of pneumococcal infant immunisation. Studies heavily reliant on ss-UADs restricted to vaccine-type serotypes may overestimate the proportion of potentially vaccine-preventable pneumococcal pneumonia. Sero-epidemiological data from low-income countries are lacking

Corticosteroids as Adjunctive Therapy in the Treatment of Influenza: An Updated Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective: Corticosteroids may be beneficial in sepsis but uncertainty remains over their effects in severe influenza. This systematic review updates the current evidence regarding corticosteroids in the treatment of influenza and examines the effect of dose on outcome.Data Sources: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL, Web of Science) and trial registries were searched to October 2018 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental designs and observational cohort studies reporting corticosteroid versus no corticosteroid treatment in individuals with influenza. Study Selection and Data Extraction:Two researchers independently assessed studies for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RCTs) or Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (observational studies). Where appropriate, we estimated the effect of corticosteroids by random effects meta-analyses using the generic inverse variance method. Meta‐regression analysis was used to assess the association of corticosteroid dose and mortality. Data Synthesis: We identified 30 eligible studies, all observational apart from one RCT. Twenty-one observational studies were included in the meta-analysis of mortality, which suggested an adverse association with corticosteroid therapy (Odds ratio (OR) 3.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.31 to 6.60, 15 studies; adjusted hazard ratio 1.49, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.02, 6 studies). Risk of bias assessment was consistent with potential confounding by indication. Pooled analysis of seven studies showed increased odds of hospital-acquired infection in people treated with corticosteroids (unadjusted OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.95). Meta-regression of the effect of dose on mortality did not reveal an association, but reported doses of corticosteroids in included studies were high (mostly >40 mg methylprednisolone (or equivalent) per day).Conclusions:Corticosteroid treatment in influenza is associated with increased mortality and hospital-acquired infection, but the evidence relates mainly to high corticosteroid doses and is of low quality with potential confounding by indication a major concern.

Spotlight influenza: Laboratory-confirmed seasonal influenza in people with acute respiratory illness: a literature review and meta-analysis, WHO European Region, 2004 to 2017

Background: Across the WHO European Region, there are few estimates of the proportion of people seeking medical care for influenza-like illness or acute respiratory infections and who have confirmed seasonal influenza infection when tested for respiratory viruses.Methods: We conducted meta-analyses of data extracted from a) literature review of studies published between 2004 and 2017; b) sentinel data from the European surveillance system (TESSy), pooling within-season estimates by influenza type/subtype, setting (outpatient/inpatient) and age-group, to estimate the proportion of people tested who have laboratory-confirmed medically-attended seasonal influenza in Europe.Results: In the literature review, the pooled proportion for all influenza was 33% (95% CI, 30%-36%), and higher among outpatients (36% [33-40%]) than inpatients (24% [20-29%]). Pooled estimates for all influenza by age group were: 0-17 years, 26% (22-31); 18-64 years, 41% (32-50); ≥65 years, 33% (27-40%). From TESSY data, 33% (31-24%) of outpatients and 24% (21-27%) of inpatients were positive. The highest proportion of influenza A overall was in people aged 18-64 years (22% [16-29%]). By subtype, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was highest in 18-64 year-olds (16% [11-21%]) whereas influenza A(H3N2) was highest in those ≥65 years (10% [2-22%]). For influenza B, the highest proportion of infections was those aged 18-64 years (15% [9-24%]). Estimated proportions of confirmed influenza varied across seasons and across countries. Conclusions: Both the literature review and TESSy analyses showed a higher proportion of laboratory-confirmed influenza in non-hospitalised patients, with further variation by influenza type, age-group, country and season

Decline in seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness with vaccination program maturation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesEvidence suggests repeated influenza vaccination may reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE). Using influenza vaccination program maturation (number of years since program inception) [PM] as proxy for population-level repeated vaccination, we assessed the impact on pooled adjusted end-season VE estimates from outpatient test-negative design studies.MethodsWe systematically searched and selected full-text publications from January 2011 to February 2020 (PROSPERO: CRD42017064595). We obtained influenza vaccination program inception year for each country and calculated PM as the difference between the year of deployment and year of program inception. We categorized PM into halves (cut at the median), tertiles, and quartiles, and calculated pooled VE using an inverse variance, random effects model. The primary outcome was pooled VE against all influenza.ResultsWe included 72 articles from 11,931 unique citations. Across the three categorizations of PM, a lower pooled VE against all influenza for all patients was observed with PM. Substantially higher reductions were observed in older adults (≥65 years). We observed similar results for A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and influenza B.ConclusionsThe evidence suggests influenza VE declines with vaccination PM. This study forms the basis for further discussions and examinations of the potential impact of vaccination PM on seasonal VE

Effectiveness of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: The clinical effectiveness of monovalent influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccines has not been comprehensively summarised. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) for adjuvanted and unadjuvanted vaccines. Methods: We searched healthcare databases and grey literature from 11 June 2009 to 12 November 2014. Two researchers independently assessed titles and abstracts to identify studies for full review. Random effects meta-analyses estimated the pooled effect size of vaccination compared to placebo or no vaccination for crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) to prevent laboratory confirmed influenza illness (LCI) and related hospitalization. VE was calculated as (1-pooled OR) ∗ 100. Narrative synthesis was undertaken where meta-analysis was not possible. Results: We identified 9229 studies of which 38 at moderate risk of bias met protocol eligibility criteria; 23 were suitable for meta-analysis. Pooled adjusted VE against LCI with adjuvanted and unadjuvanted vaccines both reached statistical significance (adjuvanted: VE = 80%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 59–90%; unadjuvanted: VE = 66%; 95% CI 47–78%); in planned secondary analyses, VE in adults often failed to reach statistical significance and pooled point estimates were lower than observed in children. Overall pooled adjusted VE against hospitalization was 61% (95% CI 14–82%); in planned secondary analyses, adjusted VE attained statistical significance in adults aged 18–64 years and children for adjuvanted vaccines. Adjuvanted vaccines were significantly more effective in children compared to adults for both outcomes. Conclusions: Adjuvanted and unadjuvanted monovalent influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccines were both effective in preventing LCI. Overall, the vaccines were also effective against influenza-related hospitalization. For both outcomes adjuvanted vaccines were more effective in children than in adults