TB STIGMA – MEASUREMENT GUIDANCE

TB is the most deadly infectious disease in the world, and stigma continues to play a significant role in worsening the epidemic. Stigma and discrimination not only stop people from seeking care but also make it more difficult for those on treatment to continue, both of which make the disease more difficult to treat in the long-term and mean those infected are more likely to transmit the disease to those around them. TB Stigma – Measurement Guidance is a manual to help generate enough information about stigma issues to design and monitor and evaluate efforts to reduce TB stigma. It can help in planning TB stigma baseline measurements and monitoring trends to capture the outcomes of TB stigma reduction efforts. This manual is designed for health workers, professional or management staff, people who advocate for those with TB, and all who need to understand and respond to TB stigma

Relevant factors for the optimal duration of extended endocrine therapy in early breast cancer

Purpose: For postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer, the optimal subgroup and duration of extended endocrine therapy is not clear yet. The aim of this study using the IDEAL patient cohort was to identify a subgroup for which longer (5 years) extended therapy is beneficial over shorter (2.5 years) extended endocrine therapy. Methods: In the IDEAL trial, 1824 patients who completed 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy (either 5 years of tamoxifen (12%), 5 years of an AI (29%), or a sequential strategy of both (59%)) were randomized between either 2.5 or 5 years of extended letrozole. For each prior therapy subgroup, the value of longer therapy was assessed for both node-negative and node-positive patients using Kaplan Meier and Cox regression survival analyses. Results: In node-positive patients, there was a significant benefit of 5 years (over 2.5 years) of extended therapy (disease-free survival (DFS) HR 0.67, p = 0.03, 95% CI 0.47–0.96). This effect was only observed in patients who were treated initially with a sequential scheme (DFS HR 0.60, p = 0.03, 95% CI 0.38–0.95). In all other subgroups, there was no significant benefit of longer extended therapy. Similar results were found in patients who were randomized for their initial adjuvant therapy in the TEAM trial (DFS HR 0.37, p = 0.07, 95% CI 0.13–1.06), although this additional analysis was underpowered for definite conclusions. Conclusions: This study suggests that node-positive patients could benefit from longer extended endocrine therapy, although this effect appears isol

Results of a diagnostic imaging audit in a randomised clinical trial in rectal cancer highlight the importance of careful planning and quality control

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the modality used for baseline assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and restaging after neoadjuvant treatment. The overall audited quality of MR imaging in large multicentre trials on rectal cancer is so far not routinely reported.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected MR images obtained within the Rectal Cancer And Pre-operative Induction Therapy Followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial and performed an audit of the technical features of image acquisition. The required MR sequences and slice thickness stated in the RAPIDO protocol were used as a reference.RESULTS: Out of 920 participants of the RAPIDO study, MR investigations of 668 and 623 patients in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, were collected. Of these, 304/668 (45.5%) and 328/623 (52.6%) MR images, respectively, fulfilled the technical quality criteria. The main reason for non-compliance was exceeding slice thickness 238/668, 35.6% in the baseline setting and 162/623, 26.0% in the restaging setting. In 166/668, 24.9% and 168/623, 27.0% MR images in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, one or more of the required pulse sequences were missing.CONCLUSION: Altogether, 49.0% of the MR images obtained within the RAPIDO trial fulfilled the image acquisition criteria required in the study protocol. High-quality MR imaging should be expected for the appropriate initial treatment and response evaluation of patients with LARC, and efforts should be made to maximise the quality of imaging in clinical trials and in clinical practice.CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This audit highlights the importance of adherence to MR image acquisition criteria for rectal cancer, both in multicentre trials and in daily clinical practice. High-resolution images allow correct staging, treatment stratification and evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment.KEY POINTS: - Complying to MR acquisition guidelines in multicentre trials is challenging. - Neglection on MR acquisition criteria leads to poor staging and treatment. - MR acquisition guidelines should be followed in trials and clinical practice. - Researchers should consider mandatory audits prior to study initiation.</p

Results of a diagnostic imaging audit in a randomised clinical trial in rectal cancer highlight the importance of careful planning and quality control

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the modality used for baseline assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and restaging after neoadjuvant treatment. The overall audited quality of MR imaging in large multicentre trials on rectal cancer is so far not routinely reported.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected MR images obtained within the Rectal Cancer And Pre-operative Induction Therapy Followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial and performed an audit of the technical features of image acquisition. The required MR sequences and slice thickness stated in the RAPIDO protocol were used as a reference.RESULTS: Out of 920 participants of the RAPIDO study, MR investigations of 668 and 623 patients in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, were collected. Of these, 304/668 (45.5%) and 328/623 (52.6%) MR images, respectively, fulfilled the technical quality criteria. The main reason for non-compliance was exceeding slice thickness 238/668, 35.6% in the baseline setting and 162/623, 26.0% in the restaging setting. In 166/668, 24.9% and 168/623, 27.0% MR images in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, one or more of the required pulse sequences were missing.CONCLUSION: Altogether, 49.0% of the MR images obtained within the RAPIDO trial fulfilled the image acquisition criteria required in the study protocol. High-quality MR imaging should be expected for the appropriate initial treatment and response evaluation of patients with LARC, and efforts should be made to maximise the quality of imaging in clinical trials and in clinical practice.CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This audit highlights the importance of adherence to MR image acquisition criteria for rectal cancer, both in multicentre trials and in daily clinical practice. High-resolution images allow correct staging, treatment stratification and evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment.KEY POINTS: - Complying to MR acquisition guidelines in multicentre trials is challenging. - Neglection on MR acquisition criteria leads to poor staging and treatment. - MR acquisition guidelines should be followed in trials and clinical practice. - Researchers should consider mandatory audits prior to study initiation.</p

Results of a diagnostic imaging audit in a randomised clinical trial in rectal cancer highlight the importance of careful planning and quality control

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the modality used for baseline assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and restaging after neoadjuvant treatment. The overall audited quality of MR imaging in large multicentre trials on rectal cancer is so far not routinely reported.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected MR images obtained within the Rectal Cancer And Pre-operative Induction Therapy Followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial and performed an audit of the technical features of image acquisition. The required MR sequences and slice thickness stated in the RAPIDO protocol were used as a reference.RESULTS: Out of 920 participants of the RAPIDO study, MR investigations of 668 and 623 patients in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, were collected. Of these, 304/668 (45.5%) and 328/623 (52.6%) MR images, respectively, fulfilled the technical quality criteria. The main reason for non-compliance was exceeding slice thickness 238/668, 35.6% in the baseline setting and 162/623, 26.0% in the restaging setting. In 166/668, 24.9% and 168/623, 27.0% MR images in the baseline and restaging setting, respectively, one or more of the required pulse sequences were missing.CONCLUSION: Altogether, 49.0% of the MR images obtained within the RAPIDO trial fulfilled the image acquisition criteria required in the study protocol. High-quality MR imaging should be expected for the appropriate initial treatment and response evaluation of patients with LARC, and efforts should be made to maximise the quality of imaging in clinical trials and in clinical practice.CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This audit highlights the importance of adherence to MR image acquisition criteria for rectal cancer, both in multicentre trials and in daily clinical practice. High-resolution images allow correct staging, treatment stratification and evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment.KEY POINTS: - Complying to MR acquisition guidelines in multicentre trials is challenging. - Neglection on MR acquisition criteria leads to poor staging and treatment. - MR acquisition guidelines should be followed in trials and clinical practice. - Researchers should consider mandatory audits prior to study initiation.</p

Medico-legal reasoning in disability assessment: A focus group and validation study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Decisions on disability pensions are based, among others, on medical reports. The way these medical assessments are performed is largely unclear. The aim of the study was to determine which grounds are used by social insurance physicians (SIPs) in these assessments and to determine if the identification of these grounds can help improve the quality of assessments in social insurance practice. The article describes a focus group study and a questionnaire study with SIPs in four different countries.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Using focus group discussions of SIPs discussing the same case in Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway and Slovenia (N = 29) we determined the arguments and underlying grounds as used by the SIP's. We used a questionnaire study among other SIPs (N = 60) in the same countries to establish a first validation of these grounds.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Grounds in the focus groups were comparable between the countries studied. The grounds were also recognized by SIPs who had not participated in the focus groups. SIPs agreed most on grounds with regard to the claimant's health condition, and about the claimant's duty to explore rehabilitation and work resumption, but less on accepting permanent incapacity when all options for treatment were exhausted.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Grounds that SIPs use refer to a limited group of key elements of disability evaluation. SIPs interpret disability in social insurance according to the handicapped role and strive at making their evaluation fair trials. ICF is relevant with regard to the health condition and to the process of evaluation. Identification of grounds is a valuable instrument for controlling the quality of disability evaluation. The grounds also appear to be internationally comparable which may enhance scientific study in this area.</p