22 research outputs found
Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study
Study question Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future infertility research be developed? Summary answer: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. What is known already: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. Study design, size, duration: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). Participants/materials, setting, methods: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. Main results and the role of chance: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. Limitations, reasons for caution: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition, and an arbitrary consensus threshold. Wider implications of the findings: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Ferility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. Study funding/competing interest(s): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. Trial registration number: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.J.M.N.Duffy, H.AlAhwany, S.Bhattacharya, B.Collura ... Bernardus Mol ... Mary Hull ... et al
Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study
STUDY QUESTION:Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? SUMMARY ANSWER:A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY:Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION:A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS:Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION:We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS:Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S):This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of data, or manuscript preparation. B.W.J.M. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). S.B. was supported by University of Auckland Foundation Seelye Travelling Fellowship. S.B. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.J.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.J M N Duffy, H AlAhwany, S Bhattacharya, B Collura, C Curtis, J L H Evers ... et al
CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and antibodies are associated with protection against Delta vaccine breakthrough infection: a nested case-control study within the PITCH study
Serological correlates of protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection after vaccination (âvaccine breakthroughâ) have been described. However, T cell correlates of protection against breakthrough are incompletely defined, especially the specific contributions of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Here, 279 volunteers in the Protective Immunity from T Cells in Healthcare Workers (PITCH) UK cohort study were enrolled in a nested case-control study. Cases were those who tested SARS-CoV-2 PCR or lateral flow device (LFD) positive after two vaccine doses during the Delta-predominant era (n = 32), while controls were those who did not report a positive test or undergo anti-nucleocapsid immunoglobulin G (IgG) seroconversion during this period (n = 247). Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to vaccination was associated with reduced odds of vaccine breakthrough. Using samples from 28 d after the second vaccine dose, before all breakthroughs occurred, we observed future cases had lower ancestral spike (S)- and receptor binding domain-specific IgG titers and S1- and S2-specific T cell interferon gamma (IFNÎł) responses compared with controls, although these differences did not persist when individuals were stratified according to previous infection status before vaccination. In a subset of matched infection-naĂŻve cases and controls, vaccine breakthrough cases had lower CD4+ and CD8+ IFNÎł and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) responses to Delta S peptides compared with controls. For CD8+ responses, this difference appeared to be driven by reduced responses to Delta compared with ancestral peptides among cases; this reduced response to Delta peptides was not observed in controls. Our findings support a protective role for T cells against Delta breakthrough infection
Rhenium and yttrium ions as antimicrobial agents against multidrug resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii biofilms
© 2019 The Authors. Letters in Applied Microbiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for Applied Microbiology. Antimicrobial resistance presents major global concerns to patient health. In this study, metal ions of molybdenum, rhenium, yttrium and thallium were tested against bacteria in planktonic and biofilm form using one strain of Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii. The antimicrobial efficacy of the metal ions was evaluated against the planktonic bacterial strains using minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and minimum bactericidal concentrations, whilst the efficacy of the metal ions against biofilms was tested using a crystal violet biofilm assay. Live Dead staining was used to visualize the antimicrobial activity elicited by the metal ions on the bacterial cell. The results showed that higher concentrations of the metals were required to inhibit the growth of biofilms (72·9 mg l â1 to 416·7 mg l â1 ), in comparison to their planktonic counterparts. MICs of the metal ions (<46·9 mg l â1 ) (planktonic cells) did not affect biofilm formation. Overall, rhenium and yttrium were effective antimicrobial agents. Molybdenum demonstrated the greatest level of biotoxicity. When taking into account these results and the known toxicity of thallium, it is possible that rhenium or yttrium ions could be developed as effective biocidal formulations in order to prevent transmission in healthcare environments. Significance and Impact of the Study: The metal ions, molybdenum, rhenium, thallium and yttrium were tested against both Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii in planktonic and biofilm forms. This research demonstrated that all the metal ions may be effective antimicrobial agents. However, molybdenum induced high levels of cytotoxicity, whilst, there was no significant difference in the toxicity of the other metal ions tested. When considering the results for the antimicrobial efficacy and biotoxicity of the metal ions, in conjunction with the known toxicity of thallium in certain chemical compositions, it was concluded that overall rhenium or yttrium ions may be effective antimicrobial agents, one potential application may be utilizing these metal ions in hospital surface cleaning formulations
Developing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future infertility research
Background: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and outcome reporting bias, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret.
Objectives: To develop a core outcome set to standardise outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility.
Methods: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods including a three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries) (1).
Results: The core outcome set consists of: (1) viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancies); (2) pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); (3) live birth; (4) gestational age at delivery; (5) birth weight; (6) neonatal mortality; and (7) major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable.
Conclusions: Embedding the core outcome set within randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set
Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study.
STUDY QUESTION: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future infertility research be developed?
SUMMARY ANSWER: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries).
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition, and an arbitrary consensus threshold.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Ferility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative:Â 1023
COVID-19: Rapid antigen detection for SARS-CoV-2 by lateral flow assay: A national systematic evaluation of sensitivity and specificity for mass-testing
Background
Lateral flow device (LFD) viral antigen immunoassays have been developed around the world as diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection. They have been proposed to deliver an infrastructure-light, cost-economical solution giving results within half an hour.
Methods
LFDs were initially reviewed by a Department of Health and Social Care team, part of the UK government, from which 64 were selected for further evaluation from 1st August to 15th December 2020. Standardised laboratory evaluations, and for those that met the published criteria, field testing in the Falcon-C19 research study and UK pilots were performed (UK COVID-19 testing centres, hospital, schools, armed forces).
Findings
4/64 LFDs so far have desirable performance characteristics (orient Gene, Deepblue, Abbott and Innova SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Qualitative Test). All these LFDs have a viral antigen detection of >90% at 100,000 RNA copies/ml. 8951 Innova LFD tests were performed with a kit failure rate of 5.6% (502/8951, 95% CI: 5.1â6.1), false positive rate of 0.32% (22/6954, 95% CI: 0.20â0.48). Viral antigen detection/sensitivity across the sampling cohort when performed by laboratory scientists was 78.8% (156/198, 95% CI 72.4â84.3).
Interpretation
Our results suggest LFDs have promising performance characteristics for mass population testing and can be used to identify infectious positive individuals. The Innova LFD shows good viral antigen detection/sensitivity with excellent specificity, although kit failure rates and the impact of training are potential issues. These results support the expanded evaluation of LFDs, and assessment of greater access to testing on COVID-19 transmission.
Funding
Department of Health and Social Care. University of Oxford. Public Health England Porton Down, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, National Institute of Health Research
Clinical course of COVID-19 infections in patients with Behçetâs disease in The Netherlands
Objective The aim of this study is to investigate the cumulative incidence and the severity of COVID-19 infections in patients with Behçetâs disease. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients with Behçetâs disease was conducted. We obtained the data systematically from electronic patient files and through telephone interviews between February 2020 and May 1, 2021. The main outcomes were COVID-19 infection, disease duration, hospitalisation, intensive care admission and mortality. The secondary outcome was adherence to quarantine measures as recommended by the government. Results 185 Behçetâs disease patients were included (mean age 42.2 years, 54% female); 58% of the patients were receiving colchicine, 30% anti-TNFα, 16% azathioprine and 8% systemic steroids. 30 patients (16.2%) were positive for COVID-19. Within our cohort, the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was therefore 16.2% (95% CI 11.2â22.3%), which is significantly increased when compared to the general Dutch population (8.7% (95% CI 8.72â8.73%)) (p<0.001). Four out of 30 (13%) patients were admitted to the hospital. There was no COVID-19 related mortality observed. Patients adhered to government measures; except in the period between the 1st of June and the 28th of September, this cohort received more visitors than in period 1 and 3. Conclusion In this cohort, Behçetâs disease patients have a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, without an increase of virus-related mortality. The course of COVID-19 disease in this cohort is relatively mild, with a lower admission rate than expected of patients using immunosuppressive medication