Cost-effectiveness of a bone substitute delivering gentamicin in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis of long bones: Protocol for the CONVICTION randomized multicenter study

IntroductionChronic osteomyelitis is a serious osteoarticular infection that most often occurs in the long bones, responsible for significant morbidity with the risk of fracture and amputation. Despite advances in both antibiotics and surgical treatment, the probability of recurrence of infection remains at around 20%. Cerament-G (BONESUPPORT AB, Sweden) is a synthetic bone substitute that fills the bone void left by surgery, prevents infection and promotes bone regeneration within this space. Cerament-G also provides the local delivery of high doses of gentamicin over several weeks. Two prospective observational studies described a number of infectious recurrences of 4 and 5% after the use of Cerament-G. Although available in France, Cerament-G is currently not reimbursed and its high cost constitutes a barrier to its use. We hypothesize that the use of Cerament-G will lead to fewer costs to the collectivity while improving patient utility and, as an innovative strategy, will be superior to standard of care on recurrence of infection.Methods and analysisThe Conviction Study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind study conducted in 14 French Reference Centers for Complex Osteoarticular infections. The main objective is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using Cerament-G in the treatment of chronic long bone osteomyelitis by comparing this innovative strategy to standard of care. A cost-utility analysis from the collective perspective will be conducted over a 24-month time horizon after the initial surgery. The outcome for the main medico-economic evaluation will be Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs).DiscussionThe study is being conducted throughout the CRIOAc network in France, in referral centers for the management of complex infections which will facilitate patient recruitment. This study has several limitations: the investigators have to be trained to handle the device, and it was impossible to blind the surgeon.ConclusionIf the use of Cerament-G is demonstrated to be superior to leaving the dead space empty during surgery for patients with stage III chronic long bone osteomyelitis, its use will be recommended to improve the prognosis of such patients, and this device may eventually qualify for reimbursement through the French Health Insurance scheme.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol received authorization from the Ethics Committee CPP Sud Méditerranée V on April 27, 2021 (21.03.10.77652) and the French National Agency for Medicines and Health Products on May 6, 2021 (2020-A02299-30). Results will be disseminated to the scientific community through congresses and publication in peer-reviewed journals

Survival advantages conferred to colon cancer cells by E-selectin-induced activation of the PI3K-NFκB survival axis downstream of Death receptor-3

International audienceABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Extravasation of circulating cancer cells is a key event of metastatic dissemination that is initiated by the adhesion of cancer cells to endothelial cells. It requires interactions between adhesion receptors on endothelial cells and their counter-receptors on cancer cells. Notably, E-selectin, a major endothelial adhesion receptor, interacts with Death receptor-3 present on metastatic colon carcinoma cells. This interaction confers metastatic properties to colon cancer cells by promoting the adhesion of cancer cells to endothelial cells and triggering the activation of the pro-migratory p38 and pro-survival ERK pathways in the cancer cells. In the present study, we investigated further the mechanisms by which the E-selectin-activated pathways downstream of DR3 confer a survival advantage to colon cancer cells. METHODS: Cell survival has been ascertained by using the WST-1 assay and by evaluating the activation of the PI3 kinase/NFκB survival axis. Apoptosis has been assayed by determining DNA fragmentation by Hoechst staining and by measuring cleavage of caspases-8 and -3. DR3 isoforms have been identified by PCR. For more precise quantification, targeted PCR reactions were carried out, and the amplified products were analyzed by automated chip-based microcapillary electrophoresis on an Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer instrument. RESULTS: Interaction between DR3-expressing HT29 colon carcinoma cells and E-selectin induces the activation of the PI3K/Akt pathway. Moreover, p65/RelA, the anti-apoptotic subunit of NFκB, is rapidly translocated to the nucleus in response to E-selectin. This translocation is impaired by the PI3K inhibitor LY294002. Furthermore, inhibition of the PI3K/Akt pathway increases the cleavage of caspase 8 in colon cancer cells treated with E-selectin and this effect is still further increased when both ERK and PI3K pathways are concomitantly inhibited. Intriguingly, metastatic colon cancer cell lines such as HT29 and SW620 express higher levels of a splice variant of DR3 that has no trans-membrane domain and no death domain. CONCLUSION: Colon cancer cells acquire an increased capacity to survive via the activation of the PI3K/NFκB pathway following the stimulation of DR3 by E-selectin. Generation of a DR3 splice variant devoid of death domain can further contribute to protect against apoptosis

Clinical evaluation of medical devices

Les dispositifs médicaux (DM) sont des produits de santé qui représentent un ensemblehétérogène de plus de 500 000 technologies, allant de la plus simple à la plus complexe.Contrairement au médicament, il n’existe pas de démarche formelle quant aux étapes dudéveloppement clinique des DM, notamment pour ceux les plus à risque.L’objectif de ce travail de thèse était de décrire les données cliniques disponibles en Francelorsqu’un DM accède au marché, et de proposer des solutions pour améliorer la quantité etla qualité des études cliniques réalisées. Pour cela, nous avons exploré deux voies :l’accompagnement des industriels pour la mise en place d’études cliniques qui répondentaux attentes des différents acteurs ; et l’utilisation de registres pour améliorer le niveau depreuve disponible, en générant des données cliniques complémentaires dès la diffusion.L’évaluation clinique des DM est complexe et difficile ; elle nécessite un apprentissage desindustriels et des interactions avec les autorités de santé. Toutefois, le niveau des donnéescliniques disponibles pour évaluer les DM doit et peut être amélioré, notamment par laspécialisation de méthodologistes et l’accompagnement des industriels par des plateformesproches du terrain clinique.Medical devices are health products representing a heterogeneous set of more than 500 000technologies, from the simplest to the most complex ones. Unlike drugs, there is no formalframework for the stages of clinical development of medical devices, especially those with ahigher degree of risk.The objective of this thesis was to describe clinical data available in France when a medicaldevice is launched, and suggest some options to improve the quality and quantity of clinicalstudies performed. To this end, we explored two ways: supporting enterprises for theimplementation of clinical studies that meet the expectations of all stakeholders; and usingregistries to improve the level of available evidence by generating additional post-marketingclinical data.The clinical evaluation of medical devices is complex and difficult, and must go through thelearning of industrials and interactions with health authorities. However, the level of clinicalevidence should and can be improved, including the specialization of methodologists and theaccompaniment of enterprises through platforms close to the clinical field

Evaluation clinique des dispositifs médicaux

Medical devices are health products representing a heterogeneous set of more than 500 000technologies, from the simplest to the most complex ones. Unlike drugs, there is no formalframework for the stages of clinical development of medical devices, especially those with ahigher degree of risk.The objective of this thesis was to describe clinical data available in France when a medicaldevice is launched, and suggest some options to improve the quality and quantity of clinicalstudies performed. To this end, we explored two ways: supporting enterprises for theimplementation of clinical studies that meet the expectations of all stakeholders; and usingregistries to improve the level of available evidence by generating additional post-marketingclinical data.The clinical evaluation of medical devices is complex and difficult, and must go through thelearning of industrials and interactions with health authorities. However, the level of clinicalevidence should and can be improved, including the specialization of methodologists and theaccompaniment of enterprises through platforms close to the clinical field.Les dispositifs médicaux (DM) sont des produits de santé qui représentent un ensemblehétérogène de plus de 500 000 technologies, allant de la plus simple à la plus complexe.Contrairement au médicament, il n’existe pas de démarche formelle quant aux étapes dudéveloppement clinique des DM, notamment pour ceux les plus à risque.L’objectif de ce travail de thèse était de décrire les données cliniques disponibles en Francelorsqu’un DM accède au marché, et de proposer des solutions pour améliorer la quantité etla qualité des études cliniques réalisées. Pour cela, nous avons exploré deux voies :l’accompagnement des industriels pour la mise en place d’études cliniques qui répondentaux attentes des différents acteurs ; et l’utilisation de registres pour améliorer le niveau depreuve disponible, en générant des données cliniques complémentaires dès la diffusion.L’évaluation clinique des DM est complexe et difficile ; elle nécessite un apprentissage desindustriels et des interactions avec les autorités de santé. Toutefois, le niveau des donnéescliniques disponibles pour évaluer les DM doit et peut être amélioré, notamment par laspécialisation de méthodologistes et l’accompagnement des industriels par des plateformesproches du terrain clinique

Evolution des coûts de prise en charge de la mucoviscidose dans un contexte d'évolution des pratiques (étude économique menée sur un échantillon de patients lyonnais en 2000 et 2003)

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Surveillance active des dispositifs médicaux (application aux registres de prothèses articulaires)

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

La chimiothérapie hyperthermique intrapéritonéale dans les cancers ovariens récidivants (analyse coût-efficacité par la construction d'un modèle d'aide à la décision médico-économique)

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Fate of protocols submitted to a French national funding scheme: a cohort study.

The fate of clinical research projects funded by a grant has been investigated, but there is no information on the projects which did not receive funding. The fate of these projects is not known: do they apply for and/or receive funding from other sources or are they carried out without specific funding?The aim of the study was to describe all clinical research projects submitted to a French national funding scheme (PHRC 2000) and to assess project initiation, completion and publication status taking into account whether or not they received funding.This study is a retrospective cohort. The initial project characteristics were retrieved from the submission files and follow-up information was collected from the primary investigator. The percentages of projects started, completed and published were studied.A total of 481 projects were studied. Follow-up information was obtained for 366. Overall, 185 projects were initiated (51%); 139 of them were funded by the PHRC 2000 or other sources. The most commonly cited reason for not initiating a project was a lack of funding. Subsequently, 121 of the projects initiated were completed (65%). Accrual difficulties were the main reason cited to explain why studies were stopped prematurely or were still ongoing. Finally, 88 of the completed projects were published (73%). Amongst the completed projects, the only factor explaining publication was the statistical significance of the results.Obtainment of funding was a determining factor for project initiation. However, once initiated, the funding did not influence completion or publication