Peripheral neuropathy in HIV patients in sub-Saharan Africa failing first-line therapy and the response to second-line ART in the EARNEST trial.

Sensory peripheral neuropathy (PN) remains a common complication in HIV-positive patients despite effective combination anti-retroviral therapy (ART). Data on PN on second-line ART is scarce. We assessed PN using a standard tool in patients failing first-line ART and for 96 weeks following a switch to PI-based second-line ART in a large Randomised Clinical Trial in Sub-Saharan Africa. Factors associated with PN were investigated using logistic regression. Symptomatic PN (SPN) prevalence was 22 % at entry (N = 1,251) and was associated (p < 0.05) with older age (OR = 1.04 per year), female gender (OR = 1.64), Tuberculosis (TB; OR = 1.86), smoking (OR = 1.60), higher plasma creatinine (OR = 1.09 per 0.1 mg/dl increase), CD4 count (OR = 0.83 per doubling) and not consuming alcohol (OR = 0.55). SPN prevalence decreased to 17 % by week 96 (p = 0.0002) following similar trends in all study groups (p = 0.30). Asymptomatic PN (APN) increased over the same period from 21 to 29 % (p = 0.0002). Signs suggestive of PN (regardless of symptoms) returned to baseline levels by week 96. At weeks 48 and 96, after adjusting for time-updated associations above and baseline CD4 count and viral load, SPN was strongly associated with TB (p < 0.0001). In summary, SPN prevalence was significantly reduced with PI-based second-line therapy across all treatment groups, but we did not find any advantage to the NRTI-free regimens. The increase of APN and stability of PN-signs regardless of symptoms suggest an underlying trend of neuropathy progression that may be masked by reduction of symptoms accompanying general health improvement induced by second-line ART. SPN was strongly associated with isoniazid given for TB treatment

New Insights on Long-Term Hepatitis B Virus Responses in HIV–Hepatitis B virus Co-infected Patients: Implications for Antiretroviral Management in Hepatitis B virus-Endemic Settings

BACKGROUND: WHO treatment guidelines recommend tenofovir plus lamivudine or emtricitabine as the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor backbone in first-line regimens for HIV-infected adults. Lamivudine alone is not recommended, because of the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance. We studied HBV responses in a large cohort of co-infected patients in a resource-limited setting. SETTING: Clinical centers in Uganda and Zimbabwe. METHODS: DART was a randomized trial of monitoring practices in HIV-infected adults starting antiretroviral therapy. Baseline samples were tested retrospectively for HBV serological markers and HBV DNA. Longitudinal HBV DNA testing at 48 weeks and the last available sample before HBV-relevant modification of antiretroviral therapy was performed on patients with detectable HBV DNA at baseline. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients were followed for up to 4.8 years. Of the drugs with anti-HBV activity, 166 were prescribed lamivudine-tenofovir and 58 lamivudine alone. Ninety-eight percent (96/98) patients with baseline HBV DNA 6 log10 IU/mL. Of the 83 patients suppressed at 48 weeks and with follow-up data, only 7(8%) experienced viral rebound (range 200-3460 IU/mL). Of the 20 patients not suppressed at 48 weeks and with follow-up data, HBV DNA levels generally declined with lamivudine-tenofovir, but increased with lamivudine alone. Alanine transaminase flares were not observed in any patient who experienced viral rebound. CONCLUSIONS: The suppressive effect of lamivudine alone was highly durable (up to 5 years) in HIV-HBV co-infected patients with baseline HBV DNA <6 log10 IU/mL. It may be feasible to develop stratified approaches using lamivudine as the only drug with anti-HBV activity

Establishing anchor-based minimally important differences (MID) with the EORTC quality-of-life measures: a meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: As patient assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in cancer clinical trials has increased over the years, so has the need to attach meaningful interpretations to differences in HRQOL scores between groups and changes within groups. Determining what represents a minimally important difference (MID) in HRQOL scores is useful to clinicians, patients and researchers, and can be used as a benchmark for assessing the success of a healthcare intervention. Our objective is to provide an evidence-based protocol to determine MIDs for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment for Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). We will mainly focus on MID estimation for group-level comparisons. Responder thresholds for individual-level change will also be estimated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Data will be derived from published phase II and III EORTC trials that used the QLQ-C30 instrument, covering several cancer sites. We will use individual patient data to estimate MIDs for different cancer sites separately. Focus is on anchor-based methods. Anchors will be selected per disease site from available data. A disease-oriented and methodological panel will provide independent guidance on anchor selection. We aim to construct multiple clinical anchors per QLQ-C30 scale and also to compare with several anchor-based methods. The effects of covariates, for example, gender, age, disease stage and so on, will also be investigated. We will examine how our estimated MIDs compare with previously published guidelines, hence further contributing to robust MID guidelines for the EORTC QLQ-C30. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All patient data originate from completed clinical trials with mandatory written informed consent, approved by local ethical committees. Our findings will be presented at scientific conferences, disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and also compiled in a MID 'blue book' which will be made available online on the EORTC Quality of Life Group website as a free guideline document

Current state of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research

The 5th EORTC Quality of Life in Cancer Clinical Trials Conference presented the current state of quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) research from the perspectives of researchers, regulators, industry representatives, patients and patient advocates and health care professionals. A major theme was the assessment of the burden of cancer treatments, and this was discussed in terms of regulatory challenges in using PRO assessments in clinical trials, patients' experiences in cancer clinical trials, innovative methods and standardisation in cancer research, innovative methods across the disease sites or populations and cancer survivorship. Conferees demonstrated that PROs are becoming more accepted and major efforts are ongoing internationally to standardise PROs measurement, analysis and reporting in trials. Regulators are keen to collaborate with all stakeholders to ensure that the right questions are asked and the right answers are communicated. Improved technology and increased flexibility of measurement instruments are making PROs data more robust. Patients are being encouraged to be patient partners. International collaborations are essential, because this work cannot be accomplished on a national level

Establishing anchor-based minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in glioma patients

Background. Minimally important differences (MIDs) allow interpretation of the clinical relevance of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) results. This study aimed to estimate MIDs for all European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) scales for interpreting group-level results in brain tumor patients.Methods. Clinical and HRQOL data from three glioma trials were used. Clinical anchors were selected for each EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, based on correlation (>0.30) and clinical plausibility of association. Changes in both HRQOL and the anchors were calculated, and for each scale and time period, patients were categorized into one of the three clinical change groups: deteriorated by one anchor category, no change, or improved by one anchor category. Mean change method and linear regression were applied to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-group change and between-group differences in change over time, respectively. Distribution-based methods were applied to generate supportive evidence.Results. A total of 1687 patients were enrolled in the three trials. The retained anchors were performance status and eight Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales. MIDs for interpreting within-group change ranged from 4 to 12 points for improvement and -4 to -14 points for deterioration. MIDs for between-group difference in change ranged from 4 to 9 for improvement and -4 to -16 for deterioration. Most anchor-based MIDs were closest to the 0.3 SD distribution-based estimates (range: 3-10).Conclusions. MIDs for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales generally ranged between 4 and 11 points for both within-group mean change and between-group mean difference in change. These results can be used to interpret QLQ-C30 results from glioma trials.Neurolog

Establishing anchor-based minimally important differences for the EORTC QLQ-C30 in glioma patients

Background: Minimally important differences (MIDs) allow interpretation of the clinical relevance of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) results. This study aimed to estimate MIDs for all European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) scales for interpreting group-level results in brain tumor patients. Methods: Clinical and HRQOL data from three glioma trials were used. Clinical anchors were selected for each EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, based on correlation (>0.30) and clinical plausibility of association. Changes in both HRQOL and the anchors were calculated, and for each scale and time period, patients were categorized into one of the three clinical change groups: deteriorated by one anchor category, no change, or improved by one anchor category. Mean change method and linear regression were applied to estimate MIDs for interpreting within-group change and between-group differences in change over time, respectively. Distribution-based methods were applied to generate supportive evidence. Results: A total of 1687 patients were enrolled in the three trials. The retained anchors were performance status and eight Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scales. MIDs for interpreting within-group change ranged from 4 to 12 points for improvement and −4 to −14 points for deterioration. MIDs for between-group difference in change ranged from 4 to 9 for improvement and −4 to −16 for deterioration. Most anchor-based MIDs were closest to the 0.3 SD distribution-based estimates (range: 3-10). Conclusions: MIDs for the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales generally ranged between 4 and 11 points for both within-group mean change and between-group mean difference in change. These results can be used to interpret QLQ-C30 results from glioma trials

Raltegravir-intensified initial antiretroviral therapy in advanced HIV in Africa: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In sub-Saharan Africa, severely immunocompromised HIV-infected individuals have high mortality (10%) shortly after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). This group also have the greatest risk of morbidity and mortality associated with immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), a paradoxical response to successful ART. Integrase inhibitors lead to significantly more rapid declines in HIV viral load (VL) than all other ART classes. We hypothesised that intensifying standard triple-drug ART with the integrase inhibitor, raltegravir, would reduce HIV VL faster, and hence reduce early mortality, although this strategy could also risk more IRIS events. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In a 2x2x2 factorial open-label parallel-group trial, treatment-naïve HIV-infected adults, adolescents and children >5 years with CD4 0.7), and despite significantly greater VL suppression with raltegravir-intensified-ART at 4-weeks (343/836 (41.0%) vs 113/841 (13.4%) standard-ART, p<0.001) and 12-weeks (567/789 (71.9%) vs 415/803 (51.7%) standard-ART, p<0.001). Through 48-weeks there was no evidence of differences in mortality (aHR=0.98 (95%CI 0.76-1.28) p=0.91); serious (aHR=0.99 (0.81-1.21) p=0.88), grade-4 (aHR=0.88 (0.71-1.09) p=0.29) or ART-modifying (aHR=0.90 (0.63-1.27) p=0.54) adverse events (the latter occurring in occurring in 59 (6.5%) raltegravir-intensified-ART vs 66 (7.3%) standard-ART); in events judged compatible with IRIS (occurring in 89 (9.9%) raltegravir-intensified-ART vs 86 (9.5%) standard-ART, p=0.79) or hospitalizations (aHR=0.94 (95%CI 0.76-1.17) p=0.59). At 12 weeks, one and two raltegravir-intensified participants had predicted intermediate-level and high-level raltegravir resistance respectively. At 48 weeks, the NRTI mutation K219E/Q (p=0.004), and the NNRTI mutations K101E/P (p=0.03) and P225H (p=0.007), were less common in raltegravir-intensified-ART, with weak evidence of less intermediate or high-level resistance to tenofovir (p=0.06), abacavir (p=0.08) and rilpivirine (p=0.07). Limitations were limited clinical, radiological and/or microbiological information for some participants, reflecting available services at the centres, and lack of baseline genotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Although 12-weeks raltegravir-intensification was well-tolerated and reduced HIV viraemia significantly faster than standard triple-drug ART during the time of greatest risk for early death, this strategy did not reduce mortality or clinical events, and is not warranted. There was no excess of IRIS-compatible events, suggesting integrase inhibitors can be used safely as part of standard triple-drug first-line therapy in severely immuno-compromised individuals

Statistical analysis of patient-reported outcome data in randomised controlled trials of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, are important endpoints in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), there is little consensus about the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of these data. We did a systematic review to assess the variability, quality, and standards of PRO data analyses in advanced breast cancer RCTs. We searched PubMed for English language articles published in peer-reviewed journals between Jan 1, 2001, and Oct 30, 2017. Eligible articles were those that reported PRO results from RCTs of adult patients with advanced breast cancer receiving anti-cancer treatments with reported sample sizes of at least 50 patients—66 RCTs met the selection criteria. Only eight (12%) RCTs reported a specific PRO research hypothesis. Heterogeneity in the statistical methods used to assess PRO data was observed, with a mixture of longitudinal and cross-sectional techniques. Not all articles addressed the problem of multiple testing. Fewer than half of RCTs (28 [42%]) reported the clinical significance of their findings. 48 (73%) did not report how missing data were handled. Our systematic review shows a need to improve standards in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of PRO data in cancer RCTs. Lack of standardisation makes it difficult to draw robust conclusions and compare findings across trials. The Setting International Standards in the Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Data Consortium was set up to address this need and develop recommendations on the analysis of PRO data in RCTs

High prevalence of epilepsy in onchocerciasis endemic regions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Background: An increased prevalence of epilepsy has been reported in many onchocerciasis endemic areas. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of epilepsy in onchocerciasis endemic areas in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and investigate whether a higher annual intake of Ivermectin was associated with a lower prevalence of epilepsy. Methodology/Principle findings: Between July 2014 and February 2016, house-to-house epilepsy prevalence surveys were carried out in areas with a high level of onchocerciasis endemicity: 3 localities in the Bas-Uele, 24 in the Tshopo and 21 in the Ituri province. Ivermectin uptake was recorded for every household member. This database allowed a matched case-control pair subset to be created that enabled putative risk factors for epilepsy to be tested using univariate logistic regression models. Risk factors relating to onchocerciasis were tested using a multivariate random effects model. To identify presence of clusters of epilepsy cases, the Kulldorff's scan statistic was used. Of 12, 408 people examined in the different health areas 407 (3.3%) were found to have a history of epilepsy. A high prevalence of epilepsy was observed in health areas in the 3 provinces: 6.8–8.5% in Bas-Uele, 0.8–7.4% in Tshopo and 3.6–6.2% in Ituri. Median age of epilepsy onset was 9 years, and the modal age 12 years. The case control analysis demonstrated that before the appearance of epilepsy, compared to the same life period in controls, persons with epilepsy were around two times less likely (OR: 0.52; 95%CI: (0.28, 0.98)) to have taken Ivermectin than controls. After the appearance of epilepsy, there was no difference of Ivermectin intake between cases and controls. Only in Ituri, a significant cluster (p-value = 0.0001) was identified located around the Draju sample site area. Conclusions: The prevalence of epilepsy in health areas in onchocerciasis endemic regions in the DRC was 2–10 times higher than in non-onchocerciasis endemic regions in Africa. Our data suggests that Ivermectin protects against epilepsy in an onchocerciasis endemic region. However, a prospective population based intervention study is needed to confirm this

Mapping the medical outcomes study HIV health survey (MOS-HIV) to the EuroQoL 5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) utility index

10.1186/s12955-019-1135-8Health and Quality of Life Outcomes1718