Telephone interventions for symptom management in adults with cancer

Background People with cancer experience a variety of symptoms as a result of their disease and the therapies involved in its management. Inadequate symptom management has implications for patient outcomes including functioning, psychological well‐being, and quality of life (QoL). Attempts to reduce the incidence and severity of cancer symptoms have involved the development and testing of psycho‐educational interventions to enhance patients' symptom self‐management. With the trend for care to be provided nearer patients' homes, telephone‐delivered psycho‐educational interventions have evolved to provide support for the management of a range of cancer symptoms. Early indications suggest that these can reduce symptom severity and distress through enhanced symptom self‐management. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of telephone‐delivered interventions for reducing symptoms associated with cancer and its treatment. To determine which symptoms are most responsive to telephone interventions. To determine whether certain configurations (e.g. with/without additional support such as face‐to‐face, printed or electronic resources) and duration/frequency of intervention calls mediate observed cancer symptom outcome effects. Search methods We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 1); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to January 2019); Embase via OVID (1980 to January 2019); (CINAHL) via Athens (1982 to January 2019); British Nursing Index (1984 to January 2019); and PsycINFO (1989 to January 2019). We searched conference proceedings to identify published abstracts, as well as SIGLE and trial registers for unpublished studies. We searched the reference lists of all included articles for additional relevant studies. Finally, we handsearched the following journals: Cancer, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Psycho‐oncology, Cancer Practice, Cancer Nursing, Oncology Nursing Forum, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, and Palliative Medicine. We restricted our search to publications published in English. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTs that compared one or more telephone interventions with one other, or with other types of interventions (e.g. a face‐to‐face intervention) and/or usual care, with the stated aim of addressing any physical or psychological symptoms of cancer and its treatment, which recruited adults (over 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of cancer, regardless of tumour type, stage of cancer, type of treatment, and time of recruitment (e.g. before, during, or after treatment). Data collection and analysis We used Cochrane methods for trial selection, data extraction and analysis. When possible, anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, emotional distress, pain, uncertainty, sexually‐related and lung cancer symptoms as well as secondary outcomes are reported as standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and we presented a descriptive synthesis of study findings. We reported on findings according to symptoms addressed and intervention types (e.g. telephone only, telephone combined with other elements). As many studies included small samples, and because baseline scores for study outcomes often varied for intervention and control groups, we used change scores and associated standard deviations. The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was interpreted using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Main results Thirty‐two studies were eligible for inclusion; most had moderate risk of bias,often related to blinding. Collectively, researchers recruited 6250 people and studied interventions in people with a variety of cancer types and across the disease trajectory, although many participants had breast cancer or early‐stage cancer and/or were starting treatment. Studies measured symptoms of anxiety, depression, emotional distress, uncertainty, fatigue, and pain, as well as sexually‐related symptoms and general symptom intensity and/or distress. Interventions were primarily delivered by nurses (n = 24), most of whom (n = 16) had a background in oncology, research, or psychiatry. Ten interventions were delivered solely by telephone; the rest combined telephone with additional elements (i.e. face‐to‐face consultations and digital/online/printed resources). The number of calls delivered ranged from 1 to 18; most interventions provided three or four calls. Twenty‐one studies provided evidence on effectiveness of telephone‐delivered interventions and the majority appeared to reduce symptoms of depression compared to control. Nine studies contributed quantitative change scores (CSs) and associated standard deviation results (or these could be calculated). Likewise, many telephone interventions appeared effective when compared to control in reducing anxiety (16 studies; 5 contributed quantitative CS results); fatigue (9 studies; 6 contributed to quantitative CS results); and emotional distress (7 studies; 5 contributed quantitative CS results). Due to significant clinical heterogeneity with regards to interventions introduced, study participants recruited, and outcomes measured, meta‐analysis was not conducted. For other symptoms (uncertainty, pain, sexually‐related symptoms, dyspnoea, and general symptom experience), evidence was limited; similarly meta‐analysis was not possible, and results from individual studies were largely conflicting, making conclusions about their management through telephone‐delivered interventions difficult to draw. Heterogeneity was considerable across all trials for all outcomes. Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes in the review. Outcomes were all downgraded due to concerns about overall risk of bias profiles being frequently unclear, uncertainty in effect estimates and due to some inconsistencies in results and general heterogeneity. Unsubstantiated evidence suggests that telephone interventions in some capacity may have a place in symptom management for adults with cancer. However, in the absence of reliable and homogeneous evidence, caution is needed in interpreting the narrative synthesis. Further, there were no clear patterns across studies regarding which forms of interventions (telephone alone versus augmented with other elements) are most effective. It is impossible to conclude with any certainty which forms of telephone intervention are most effective in managing the range of cancer‐related symptoms that people with cancer experience. Authors' conclusions Telephone interventions provide a convenient way of supporting self‐management of cancer‐related symptoms for adults with cancer. These interventions are becoming more important with the shift of care closer to patients' homes, the need for resource/cost containment, and the potential for voluntary sector providers to deliver healthcare interventions. Some evidence supports the use of telephone‐delivered interventions for symptom management for adults with cancer; most evidence relates to four commonly experienced symptoms ‐ depression, anxiety, emotional distress, and fatigue. Some telephone‐delivered interventions were augmented by combining them with face‐to‐face meetings and provision of printed or digital materials. Review authors were unable to determine whether telephone alone or in combination with other elements provides optimal reduction in symptoms; it appears most likely that this will vary by symptom. It is noteworthy that, despite the potential for telephone interventions to deliver cost savings, none of the studies reviewed included any form of health economic evaluation. Further robust and adequately reported trials are needed across all cancer‐related symptoms, as the certainty of evidence generated in studies within this review was very low, and reporting was of variable quality. Researchers must strive to reduce variability between studies in the future. Studies in this review are characterised by clinical and methodological diversity; the level of this diversity hindered comparison across studies. At the very least, efforts should be made to standardise outcome measures. Finally, studies were compromised by inclusion of small samples, inadequate concealment of group allocation, lack of observer blinding, and short length of follow‐up. Consequently, conclusions related to symptoms most amenable to management by telephone‐delivered interventions are tentative

GBA and APOE Impact Cognitive Decline in Parkinson's Disease : A 10-Year Population-Based Study

Acknowledgments: We would like to thank all participants, study personnel from each study, and funders of individual studies and of PICC. We would like to thank Artur Wozniak and Adrian Martin from the University of Aberdeen, Data Management Department, for help in developing the PICC database. We acknowledge the contributions of members of the individual study groups as detailed below. Members of PICC Steering Group: Dr. Angus D. Macleod, Dr. Carl E. Counsell (Chair), University of Aberdeen, UK; Prof. Ole-Bjørn Tysnes, University of Bergen, Norway; Marta Camacho, Dr. Caroline WilliamsGray, University of Cambridge, UK; Dr. Rachael A. Lawson, Newcastle University, UK; Dr. Jodi Maple-Grødem, Prof. Guido Alves, Stavanger University Hospital, Norway; Prof. Lars Forgren, Umeå University, Sweden. CamPaIGN study: Roger A. Barker, Thomas Foltynie, Sarah L. Mason, Caroline H. Williams-Gray. ICICLE-PD Study: David Burn, Lynn Rochester, Alison J. Yarnall, Rachael A. Lawson, Gordon W. Duncan, Tien K. Khoo. NYPUM Study: Lars Forsgren, Jan Linder, Mona Edström, Jörgen Andersson, Linda Eriksson, David Bäckström, Gun-Marie Hariz, Magdalena Domellöf. ParkWest Study: ParkWest Principal investigators: Guido Alves (Norwegian Centre for Movement Disorders, Stavanger University Hospital) and Ole-Bjørn Tysnes (Haukeland University Hospital). Study personnel: Michaela Dreetz Gjerstad, Kenn Freddy Pedersen, Elin Bjelland Forsaa, Veslemøy Hamre Frantzen, Anita Laugaland, Jodi MapleGrødem, Johannes Lange, Karen Simonsen, Eldbjørg Fiske and Ingvild Dalen (Stavanger University Hospital); Bernd Müller, Geir Olve Skeie and Marit Renså (Haukeland University Hospital); Wenche Telstad, Aliaksei Labusau and Jane Kastet (Førde Hospital); Ineke HogenEsch, Marianne Kjerandsen and Liv Kari Håland (Haugesund Hospital); Karen Herlofson, Solgunn Ongre, and Siri Bruun (Sørlandet Hospital Arendal). PICNICS study: Roger A. Barker, Marta Camacho, Gemma Cummins, Jonathan R. Evans, David P. Breen, Ruwani S. Wijeyekoon, Caroline H. Williams-Gray. PINE Study: Medical: Carl E. Counsell, Kate S. M. Taylor, Robert Caslake, Angus D. Macleod, David J. M. McGhee, Diane Swallow; Research nurse/assistant: Joanne Gordon, Clare Harris, Ann Hayman, Nicola Johannesson, Hazel Forbes; Data management: Valerie Angus, Alasdair Finlayson, David Dawson, Katie Wilde, David Ritchie, Artur Wozniak; Statisticians: Neil Scott, Shona Fielding; Radiology: Prof. Alison Murray; Pathology: Ishbel Gall, Dr. James MacKenzie, Prof. Colin Smith; Secretarial: Aileen Sylvester, Susan Mitchell, Pam Rebecca, Ann Christie, and Diane McCosh. Funding agencies: This work was supported by the Research Council of Norway (287842). The CamPaIGN study has received funding from the Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Council, the Patrick Berthoud Trust, and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014). The ICICLE-PD study was funded by Parkinson’s UK (J-0802, G-1301, G-1507) and supported by the Lockhart Parkinson’s Disease Research Fund, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Newcastle Biomedical Research Unit and Centre based at Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Newcastle University. The NYPUM study was supported by grants from the Swedish Medical Research Council, Erling-Persson Foundation, the Swedish Brain Foundation (Hjärnfonden), Umeå University, Västerbotten County Council, King Gustaf V and Queen Victoria Freemason Foundation, Swedish Parkinson Foundation, Swedish Parkinson Research Foundation, Kempe Foundation, Swedish PD Association, the European Research Council, and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation. The Norwegian ParkWest study has received funding from the Research Council of Norway (177966), the Western Norway Regional Health Authority (911218), the Norwegian Parkinson’s Research Foundation, and Rebergs Legacy. The PICNICS study was funded by the Cure Parkinson’s Trust, the Van Geest Foundation, the Medical Research Council, Parkinson’s UK, and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014). The PINE study was funded by Parkinson’s UK (grant numbers G0502, G0914, and G1302), the Scottish Chief Scientist Office (CAF/12/05, PCL/17/10), Academy of Medical Sciences, NHS Grampian endowments, the BMA Doris Hillier award, RS Macdonald Trust, the BUPA Foundation, and SPRING. The PICC collaboration has been supported by The Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government (PCL/17/10), the Academy of Medical Sciences, Parkinson’s UK (initial collaborator meeting) and the Norwegian Association for Public Health. C.R.S.’s work was supported by NIH grants NINDS/NIA R01NS115144, U01NS095736, U01NS100603, and the American Parkinson Disease Association Center for Advanced Parkinson Research. This research was funded in whole, or in part by the UKRI Medical Research Council [MR/R007446/1]. For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Discovery of drug-omics associations in type 2 diabetes with generative deep-learning models.

The application of multiple omics technologies in biomedical cohorts has the potential to reveal patient-level disease characteristics and individualized response to treatment. However, the scale and heterogeneous nature of multi-modal data makes integration and inference a non-trivial task. We developed a deep-learning-based framework, multi-omics variational autoencoders (MOVE), to integrate such data and applied it to a cohort of 789 people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes with deep multi-omics phenotyping from the DIRECT consortium. Using in silico perturbations, we identified drug-omics associations across the multi-modal datasets for the 20 most prevalent drugs given to people with type 2 diabetes with substantially higher sensitivity than univariate statistical tests. From these, we among others, identified novel associations between metformin and the gut microbiota as well as opposite molecular responses for the two statins, simvastatin and atorvastatin. We used the associations to quantify drug-drug similarities, assess the degree of polypharmacy and conclude that drug effects are distributed across the multi-omics modalities. [Abstract copyright: © 2023. The Author(s).

Whole blood co-expression modules associate with metabolic traits and type 2 diabetes : an IMI-DIRECT study

Background The rising prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) poses a major global challenge. It remains unresolved to what extent transcriptomic signatures of metabolic dysregulation and T2D can be observed in easily accessible tissues such as blood. Additionally, large-scale human studies are required to further our understanding of the putative inflammatory component of insulin resistance and T2D. Here we used transcriptomics data from individuals with (n = 789) and without (n = 2127) T2D from the IMI-DIRECT cohorts to describe the co-expression structure of whole blood that mainly reflects processes and cell types of the immune system, and how it relates to metabolically relevant clinical traits and T2D. Methods Clusters of co-expressed genes were identified in the non-diabetic IMI-DIRECT cohort and evaluated with regard to stability, as well as preservation and rewiring in the cohort of individuals with T2D. We performed functional and immune cell signature enrichment analyses, and a genome-wide association study to describe the genetic regulation of the modules. Phenotypic and trans-omics associations of the transcriptomic modules were investigated across both IMI-DIRECT cohorts. Results We identified 55 whole blood co-expression modules, some of which clustered in larger super-modules. We identified a large number of associations between these transcriptomic modules and measures of insulin action and glucose tolerance. Some of the metabolically linked modules reflect neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in blood while others are independent of white blood cell estimates, including a module of genes encoding neutrophil granule proteins with antibacterial properties for which the strongest associations with clinical traits and T2D status were observed. Through the integration of genetic and multi-omics data, we provide a holistic view of the regulation and molecular context of whole blood transcriptomic modules. We furthermore identified an overlap between genetic signals for T2D and co-expression modules involved in type II interferon signaling. Conclusions Our results offer a large-scale map of whole blood transcriptomic modules in the context of metabolic disease and point to novel biological candidates for future studies related to T2D.Peer reviewe

Risk factors for infection after liver transplantation

AbstractInfection is a common cause of morbidity and mortality after liver transplantation. Risk factors relate to transplantation factors, donor and recipient factors. Transplant factors include ischaemia-reperfusion damage, amount of intra-operative blood transfusion, level and type of immunosuppression, rejection, and complications, prolonged intensive care stay with dialysis or ventilation, type of biliary drainage, repeat operations, re-transplantation, antibiotics, antiviral regimen, and environment. Donor risk factors include infection, prolonged intensive care stay, quality of the donor liver (e.g. steatosis), and viral status. For the recipient the most important are MELD score >30, malnutrition, renal failure, acute liver failure, presence of infection or colonisation, and immune status for viruses like cytomegalovirus. In recent years it has become clear that genetic polymorphisms in innate immunity, especially the lectin pathway of complement activation and in Toll-like receptors importantly contribute to the infection risk after liver transplantation. Therefore, the risk for infections after liver transplantation is a multifactorial problem and all factors need attention to reduce this risk

Nursing considerations to complement the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines

Objectives: To provide a series of recommendations based on the best available evidence to guide clinicians providing nursing care to patients with severe sepsis. Design: Modified Delphi method involving international experts and key individuals in subgroup work and electronic-based discussion among the entire group to achieve consensus. Methods: We used the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines as a framework to inform the structure and content of these guidelines. We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to rate the quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations, with grade 1 indicating clear benefit in the septic population and grade 2 indicating less confidence in the benefits in the septic population. In areas without complete agreement between all authors, a process of electronic discussion of all evidence was undertaken until consensus was reached. This process was conducted independently of any funding. Results: Sixty-three recommendations relating to the nursing care of severe sepsis patients are made. Prevention recommendations relate to education, accountability, surveillance of nosocomial infections, hand hygiene, and prevention of respiratory, central line-related, surgical site, and urinary tract infections, whereas infection management recommendations related to both control of the infection source and transmission-based precautions. Recommendations related to initial resuscitation include improved recognition of the deteriorating patient, diagnosis of severe sepsis, seeking further assistance, and initiating early resuscitation measures. Important elements of hemodynamic support relate to improving both tissue oxygenation and macrocirculation. Recommendations related to supportive nursing care incorporate aspects of nutrition, mouth and eye care, and pressure ulcer prevention and management. Pediatric recommendations relate to the use of antibiotics, steroids, vasopressors and inotropes, fluid resuscitation, sedation and analgesia, and the role of therapeutic end points. Conclusion: Consensus was reached regarding many aspects of nursing care of the severe sepsis patient. Despite this, there is an urgent need for further evidence to better inform this area of critical care

Height, selected genetic markers and prostate cancer risk:Results from the PRACTICAL consortium

Background: Evidence on height and prostate cancer risk is mixed, however, recent studies with large data sets support a possible role for its association with the risk of aggressive prostate cancer. Methods: We analysed data from the PRACTICAL consortium consisting of 6207 prostate cancer cases and 6016 controls and a subset of high grade cases (2480 cases). We explored height, polymorphisms in genes related to growth processes as main effects and their possible interactions. Results: The results suggest that height is associated with high-grade prostate cancer risk. Men with height 4180cm are at a 22% increased risk as compared to men with height o173cm (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01–1.48). Genetic variants in the growth pathway gene showed an association with prostate cancer risk. The aggregate scores of the selected variants identified a significantly increased risk of overall prostate cancer and high-grade prostate cancer by 13% and 15%, respectively, in the highest score group as compared to lowest score group. Conclusions: There was no evidence of gene-environment interaction between height and the selected candidate SNPs. Our findings suggest a role of height in high-grade prostate cancer. The effect of genetic variants in the genes related to growth is seen in all cases and high-grade prostate cancer. There is no interaction between these two exposures.</p

Investigating the relationship between specific negative symptoms and metacognitive functioning in psychosis: a systematic review

Background: Disrupted metacognition is implicated in development and maintenance of negative symptoms, but more fine-grained analyses would inform precise treatment targeting for individual negative symptoms. Aims: This systematic review identifies and examines datasets that test whether specific metacognitive capacities distinctly influence negative symptoms. Materials and Methods: PsycINFO, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases plus hand searching of relevant articles, journals and grey literature identified quantitative research investigating negative symptoms and metacognition in adults aged 16+ with psychosis. Authors of included articles were contacted to identify unique datasets and missing information. Data were extracted for a risk of bias assessment using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Results: 85 published reports met criteria and are estimated to reflect 32 distinct datasets and 1623 unique participants. The data indicated uncertainty about the relationship between summed scores of negative symptoms and domains of metacognition, with significant findings indicating correlation coefficients from 0.88 to −0.23. Only eight studies investigated the relationship between metacognition and individual negative symptoms, with mixed findings. Studies were mostly moderate-to-low risk of bias. Discussion: The relationship between negative symptoms and metacognition is rarely the focus of studies reviewed here, and negative symptom scores are often summed. This approach may obscure relationships between metacognitive domains and individual negative symptoms which may be important for understanding how negative symptoms are developed and maintained. Conclusion: Methodological challenges around overlapping participants, variation in aggregation of negative symptom items and types of analyses used, make a strong case for use of Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis to further elucidate these relationships