Efficacy of spoken word comprehension therapy in patients with chronic aphasia: a cross-over randomised controlled trial with structural imaging

Objective: The efficacy of spoken language comprehension therapies for persons with aphasia remains equivocal. We investigated the efficacy of a self-led therapy app, ‘Listen-In’, and examined the relation between brain structure and therapy response. Methods: A cross-over randomised repeated measures trial with five testing time points (12-week intervals), conducted at the university or participants' homes, captured baseline (T1), therapy (T2-T4) and maintenance (T5) effects. Participants with chronic poststroke aphasia and spoken language comprehension impairments completed consecutive Listen-In and standard care blocks (both 12 weeks with order randomised). Repeated measures analyses of variance compared change in spoken language comprehension on two co-primary outcomes over therapy versus standard care. Three structural MRI scans (T2-T4) for each participant (subgroup, n=25) were analysed using cross-sectional and longitudinal voxel-based morphometry. Results: Thirty-five participants completed, on average, 85 hours (IQR=70–100) of Listen-In (therapy first, n=18). The first study-specific co-primary outcome (Auditory Comprehension Test (ACT)) showed large and significant improvements for trained spoken words over therapy versus standard care (11%, Cohen’s d=1.12). Gains were largely maintained at 12 and 24 weeks. There were no therapy effects on the second standardised co-primary outcome (Comprehensive Aphasia Test: Spoken Words and Sentences). Change on ACT trained words was associated with volume of pretherapy right hemisphere white matter and post-therapy grey matter tissue density changes in bilateral temporal lobes. Conclusions: Individuals with chronic aphasia can improve their spoken word comprehension many years after stroke. Results contribute to hemispheric debates implicating the right hemisphere in therapy-driven language recovery. Listen-In will soon be available on GooglePlay. Trial registration number: NCT02540889

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Methods: This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95–1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83–1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08–1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319–1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110–1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs. Interpretation: These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Valproate is a first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic generalised or difficult to classify epilepsy, but not for women of child-bearing potential because of teratogenicity. Levetiracetam is increasingly prescribed for these patient populations despite scarcity of evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam compared with valproate in participants with newly diagnosed generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare levetiracetam with valproate as first-line treatment for patients with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services (69 centres overall) across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked generalised or unclassifiable seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either levetiracetam or valproate, using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factors. Participants and investigators were aware of treatment allocation. For participants aged 12 years or older, the initial advised maintenance doses were 500 mg twice per day for levetiracetam and valproate, and for children aged 5–12 years, the initial daily maintenance doses advised were 25 mg/kg for valproate and 40 mg/kg for levetiracetam. All drugs were administered orally. SANAD II was designed to assess the non-inferiority of levetiracetam compared with valproate for the primary outcome time to 12-month remission. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·314, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on valproate. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Per-protocol (PP) analyses excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 520 participants were recruited between April 30, 2013, and Aug 2, 2016, and followed up for a further 2 years. 260 participants were randomly allocated to receive levetiracetam and 260 participants to receive valproate. The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 255 participants randomly allocated to valproate and 254 randomly allocated to levetiracetam. Median age of participants was 13·9 years (range 5·0–94·4), 65% were male and 35% were female, 397 participants had generalised epilepsy, and 123 unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission (HR 1·19 [95% CI 0·96–1·47]); non-inferiority margin 1·314. The PP analysis showed that the 12-month remission was superior with valproate than with levetiracetam. There were two deaths, one in each group, that were unrelated to trial treatments. Adverse reactions were reported by 96 (37%) participants randomly assigned to valproate and 107 (42%) participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was dominated by valproate in the cost-utility analysis, with a negative incremental net health benefit of −0·040 (95% central range −0·175 to 0·037) and a probability of 0·17 of being cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Interpretation: Compared with valproate, levetiracetam was found to be neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. For girls and women of child-bearing potential, these results inform discussions about benefit and harm of avoiding valproate. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme

Defend or repair? Explaining responses to in-group moral failure by disentangling feelings of shame, rejection, and inferiority

Research on shame about in-group moral failure has yielded paradoxical results. In some studies, shame predicts self-defensive motivations to withdraw. In other studies, shame predicts pro-social motivations, such as restitution. We think that this paradox can be explained by disentangling the numerous appraisals and feelings subsumed under the label “shame.” In 2 studies, we asked community samples of Norwegians about their in-group's discrimination against the Tater minority. Confirmatory factor analysis validated the measures of the appraisals and feelings used in Study 1 ( N = 206) and Study 2 ( N = 173). In both studies, an appraisal of the in-group as suffering a moral defect best predicted felt shame, whereas an appraisal of concern for condemnation of the in-group best predicted felt rejection. In both studies, felt rejection best predicted self-defensive motivation, whereas felt shame best predicted pro-social motivation. Implications for conceptualizing and studying shame are discussed

Ideas, Concerns, Expectations and Effects on life (ICEE) in GP consultations:an observational study using video-recorded UK consultations

BACKGROUND: Eliciting patients' ideas, concerns, expectations, and whether a problem has an 'effect' on their life (ICEE), is a widely recommended communication technique. However, it is not known how frequently ICEE components are raised in UK GP consultations. AIM: To assess the frequency of ICEE in routine GP consultations with adult patients and explore variables associated with ICEE. DESIGN & SETTING: An observational study was undertaken. It involved secondary analysis of a pre-existing archive of video-recorded, face-to-face GP consultations in the UK. METHOD: Observational coding of 92 consultations took place. Associations were assessed using binomial and ordered logistic regression. RESULTS: Most consultations included at least one ICEE component (90.2%). The most common ICEE component per consultation was patient ideas (79.3%), followed by concerns (55.4%), expectations (51.1%), and then effects on life (42.4%). For all ICEE components patients more commonly initiated the ICEE dialogue, and in only three consultations (3.3%) did GPs directly ask patients about their expectations. Problems that were acute (odds ratio [OR] 2.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.36 to 6.53, P = 0.007) or assessed by GPs aged ≥50 years (OR 2.10, 95% CI = 1.07 to 4.13, P = 0.030) were associated with more ICEE components. Problems assessed later in the consultation (OR 0.60 per problem order increase, 95% CI = 0.41 to 0.87, P = 0.007) by patients aged ≥75 years (OR 0.40, 95% CI = 0.16 to 0.98, P = 0.046) and from the most deprived cohort (OR 0.39, 95% CI = 0.17 to 0.92, P = 0.032) were associated with fewer ICEE components. Patient ideas were associated with more patients being 'very satisfied' post-consultation (OR 10.74, 95% CI = 1.60 to 72.0, P = 0.014) and the opposite was true of concerns (OR 0.14, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.86, P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: ICEE components were associated with patient satisfaction and demographic variables. Further research is required to assess if the way ICEE are communicated affects these associations and other potential confounders.Not permittedNot hel

Efficacy of spoken word comprehension therapy in patients with chronic aphasia: a cross-over randomised controlled trial with structural imaging

Objective: The efficacy of spoken language comprehension therapies for persons with aphasia remains equivocal. We investigated the efficacy of a self-led therapy app, ‘Listen-In’, and examined the relation between brain structure and therapy response. Methods: A cross-over randomised repeated measures trial with five testing time points (12-week intervals), conducted at the university or participants' homes, captured baseline (T1), therapy (T2-T4) and maintenance (T5) effects. Participants with chronic poststroke aphasia and spoken language comprehension impairments completed consecutive Listen-In and standard care blocks (both 12 weeks with order randomised). Repeated measures analyses of variance compared change in spoken language comprehension on two co-primary outcomes over therapy versus standard care. Three structural MRI scans (T2-T4) for each participant (subgroup, n=25) were analysed using cross-sectional and longitudinal voxel-based morphometry. Results: Thirty-five participants completed, on average, 85 hours (IQR=70–100) of Listen-In (therapy first, n=18). The first study-specific co-primary outcome (Auditory Comprehension Test (ACT)) showed large and significant improvements for trained spoken words over therapy versus standard care (11%, Cohen’s d=1.12). Gains were largely maintained at 12 and 24 weeks. There were no therapy effects on the second standardised co-primary outcome (Comprehensive Aphasia Test: Spoken Words and Sentences). Change on ACT trained words was associated with volume of pretherapy right hemisphere white matter and post-therapy grey matter tissue density changes in bilateral temporal lobes. Conclusions: Individuals with chronic aphasia can improve their spoken word comprehension many years after stroke. Results contribute to hemispheric debates implicating the right hemisphere in therapy-driven language recovery. Listen-In will soon be available on GooglePlay. Trial registration number: NCT02540889

Australia IBD microbiome (AIM) study : protocol for a multicentre longitudinal prospective cohort study

Introduction: Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis are common chronic idiopathic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), which cause considerable morbidity. Although the precise mechanisms of disease remain unclear, evidence implicates a strong multidirectional interplay between diet, environmental factors, genetic determinants/immune perturbations and the gut microbiota. IBD can be brought into remission using a number of medications, which act by suppressing the immune response. However, none of the available medications address any of the underlying potential mechanisms. As we understand more about how the microbiota drives inflammation, much interest has focused on identifying microbial signals/triggers in the search for effective therapeutic targets. We describe the establishment of the Australian IBD Microbiota (AIM) Study, Australia’s first longitudinal IBD bioresource, which will identify and correlate longitudinal microbial and metagenomics signals to disease activity as evaluated by validated clinical instruments, patient-reported surveys, as well as biomarkers. The AIM Study will also gather extensive demographic, clinical, lifestyle and dietary data known to influence microbial composition in order to generate a more complete understanding of the interplay between patients with IBD and their microbiota. Methods: The AIM Study is an Australian multicentre longitudinal prospective cohort study, which will enrol 1000 participants; 500 patients with IBD and 500 healthy controls over a 5-year period. Assessment occurs at 3monthly intervals over a 24-month period. At each assessment oral and faecal samples are self-collected along with patient-reported outcome measures, with clinical data also collected at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Intestinal tissue will be sampled whenever a colonoscopy is performed. Dietary intake, general health and psychological state will be assessed using validated selfreport questionnaires. Samples will undergo metagenomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic and culturomic analyses. Omics data will be integrated with clinical data to identify predictive biomarkers of response to therapy, disease behaviour and environmental factors in patients with IBD. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Research Ethics Committee (HREC 2019/ ETH11443). Findings will be reported at national and international gastroenterology meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals

Efficacy of spoken word comprehension therapy in patients with chronic aphasia: a cross-over randomised controlled trial with structural imaging

Objective:\ua0The efficacy of spoken language comprehension therapies for persons with aphasia remains equivocal. We investigated the efficacy of a self-led therapy app, ‘Listen-In’, and examined the relation between brain structure and therapy response.Methods:\ua0A cross-over randomised repeated measures trial with five testing time points (12-week intervals), conducted at the university or participants' homes, captured baseline (T1), therapy (T2-T4) and maintenance (T5) effects. Participants with chronic poststroke aphasia and spoken language comprehension impairments completed consecutive Listen-In and standard care blocks (both 12 weeks with order randomised). Repeated measures analyses of variance compared change in spoken language comprehension on two co-primary outcomes over therapy versus standard care. Three structural MRI scans (T2-T4) for each participant (subgroup, n=25) were analysed using cross-sectional and longitudinal voxel-based morphometry.Results:\ua0Thirty-five participants completed, on average, 85 hours (IQR=70–100) of Listen-In (therapy first, n=18). The first study-specific co-primary outcome (Auditory Comprehension Test (ACT)) showed large and significant improvements for trained spoken words over therapy versus standard care (11%, Cohen’s d=1.12). Gains were largely maintained at 12 and 24 weeks. There were no therapy effects on the second standardised co-primary outcome (Comprehensive Aphasia Test: Spoken Words and Sentences). Change on ACT trained words was associated with volume of pretherapy right hemisphere white matter and post-therapy grey matter tissue density changes in bilateral temporal lobes.Conclusions:\ua0Individuals with chronic aphasia can improve their spoken word comprehension many years after stroke. Results contribute to hemispheric debates implicating the right hemisphere in therapy-driven language recovery. Listen-In will soon be available on GooglePlay.Trial registration number:\ua0NCT02540889