Relation between the Global Burden of Disease and Randomized Clinical Trials Conducted in Latin America Published in the Five Leading Medical Journals

Background: Since 1990 non communicable diseases and injuries account for the majority of death and disability-adjusted life years in Latin America. We analyzed the relationship between the global burden of disease and Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) conducted in Latin America that were published in the five leading medical journals.Methodology/Principal Findings: We included all RCTs in humans, exclusively conducted in Latin American countries, and published in any of the following journals: Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, Journal of the American Medical Association, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine. We described the trials and reported the number of RCTs according to the main categories of the global burden of disease. Sixty-six RCTs were identified. Communicable diseases accounted for 38 (57%) reports. Maternal, perinatal, and nutritional conditions accounted for 19 (29%) trials. Non-communicable diseases represent 48% of the global burden of disease but only 14% of reported trials. No trial addressed injuries despite its 18% contribution to the burden of disease in 2000.Conclusions/Significance: A poor correlation between the burden of disease and RCTs publications was found. Non communicable diseases and injuries account for up to two thirds of the burden of disease in Latin America but these topics are seldom addressed in published RCTs in the selected sample of journals. Funding bodies of health research and editors should be aware of the increasing burden of non communicable diseases and injuries occurring in Latin America to ensure that this growing epidemic is not neglected in the research agenda and not affected by publication bias

Noncommunicable diseases and injuries in Latin America and the Caribbean: Time for action

The region is in a privileged position to quickly translate investment in health research into practice, argue Perel and colleagues

Mobile phone text messaging to improve medication adherence in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide at least 100 million people are thought to have prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD). This population has a five times greater chance of suffering a recurrent cardiovascular event than people without known CVD. Secondary CVD prevention is defined as action aimed to reduce the probability of recurrence of such events. Drug interventions have been shown to be cost-effective in reducing this risk and are recommended in international guidelines. However, adherence to recommended treatments remains sub-optimal. In order to influence non-adherence, there is a need to develop scalable and cost-effective behaviour-change interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of mobile phone text messaging in patients with established arterial occlusive events on adherence to treatment, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, and adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science on Web of Science on 7 November 2016, and two clinical trial registers on 12 November 2016. We contacted authors of included studies for missing information and searched reference lists of relevant papers. We applied no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials with at least 50% of the participants with established arterial occlusive events. We included trials investigating interventions using short message service (SMS) or multimedia messaging service (MMS) with the aim to improve adherence to medication for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Eligible comparators were no intervention or other modes of communication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. In addition, we attempted to contact all authors on how the SMS were developed. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials (reported in 13 reports) with 1310 participants randomised. Follow-up ranged from one month to 12 months. Due to heterogeneity in the methods, population and outcome measures, we were unable to conduct meta-analysis on these studies. All seven studies reported on adherence, but using different methods and scales. Six out of seven trials showed a beneficial effect of mobile phone text messaging for medication adherence. Dale 2015a, reported significantly greater medication adherence score in the intervention group (Mean Difference (MD) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.97; 123 participants randomised) at six months. Khonsari 2015 reported less adherence in the control group (Relative Risk (RR) 4.09, 95% CI 1.82 to 9.18; 62 participants randomised) at eight weeks. Pandey 2014 (34 participants randomised) assessed medication adherence through self-reported logs with 90% adherence in the intervention group compared to 70% in the control group at 12 months. Park 2014a (90 participants randomised) reported a greater increase of the medication adherence score in the control group, but also measured adherence with an event monitoring system for a number of medications with adherence levels ranging from 84.1% adherence to 86.2% in the intervention group and 79.7% to 85.7% in the control group at 30 days. Quilici 2013, reported reduced odds of non-adherence in the intervention group (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.86, 521 participants randomised) at 30 days. Fang 2016, reported that participants given SMS alone had reduced odds of being non-adherent compared to telephone reminders (OR 0.40 95% CI 0.18 to 0.63; 280 patients randomised). Kamal 2015 reported higher levels of adherence in the intervention arm (adjusted MD 0.54, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.85; 200 participants randomised). Khonsari 2015 was the only study to report fatal cardiovascular events and only reported two events, both in the control arm. No study reported on the other primary outcomes. No study reported repetitive thumb injury or road traffic crashes or other adverse events that were related to the intervention.Four authors replied to our questionnaire on SMS development. No study reported examining causes of non-adherence or provided SMS tailored to individual patient characteristics.The included studies were small, heterogeneous and included participants recruited directly after acute events. All studies were assessed as having high risk of bias across at least one domain. Most of the studies came from high-income countries, with two studies conducted in an upper middle-income country (China, Malaysia), and one study from a lower middle-income country (Pakistan). The quality of the evidence was found to be very low. There was no obvious conflicts of interest from authors, although only two declared their funding. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: While the results of this systematic review are promising, there is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of text message-based interventions for adherence to medications for secondary prevention of CVD. Sufficiently powered, high-quality randomised trials are needed, particularly in low- and middle-income countries

Between-centre differences and treatment effects in randomized controlled trials: A case study in traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND: In Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), large between-centre differences in outcome exist and many clinicians believe that such differences influence estimation of the treatment effect in randomized controlled trial (RCTs). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of between-centre differences in outcome on the estimated treatment effect in a large RCT in TBI. METHODS: We used data from the MRC CRASH trial on the efficacy of corticosteroid infusion in patients with TBI. We analyzed the effect of the treatment on 14 day mortality with fixed effect logistic regression. Next we used random effects logistic regression with a random intercept to estimate the treatment effect taking into account between-centre differences in outcome. Between-centre differences in outcome were expressed with a 95% range of odds ratios (OR) for centres compared to the average, based on the variance of the random effects (tau2). A random effects logistic regression model with random slopes was used to allow the treatment effect to vary by centre. The variation in treatment effect between the centres was expressed in a 95% range of the estimated treatment ORs. RESULTS: In 9978 patients from 237 centres, 14-day mortality was 19.5%. Mortality was higher in the treatment group (OR = 1.22, p = 0.00010). Using a random effects model showed large between-centre differences in outcome (95% range of centre effects: 0.27- 3.71), but did not substantially change the estimated treatment effect (OR = 1.24, p = 0.00003). There was limited, although statistically significant, between-centre variation in the treatment effect (OR = 1.22, 95% treatment OR range: 1.17-1.26). CONCLUSION: Large between-centre differences in outcome do not necessarily affect the estimated treatment effect in RCTs, in contrast to current beliefs in the clinical area of TBI

Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 1: a framework for researching clinical outcomes.

The PROGRESS series (www.progress-partnership.org) sets out a framework of four interlinked prognosis research themes and provides examples from several disease fields to show why evidence from prognosis research is crucial to inform all points in the translation of biomedical and health related research into better patient outcomes. Recommendations are made in each of the four papers to improve current research standards What is prognosis research? Prognosis research seeks to understand and improve future outcomes in people with a given disease or health condition. However, there is increasing evidence that prognosis research standards need to be improved Why is prognosis research important? More people now live with disease and conditions that impair health than at any other time in history; prognosis research provides crucial evidence for translating findings from the laboratory to humans, and from clinical research to clinical practice This first article introduces the framework of four interlinked prognosis research themes and then focuses on the first of the themes - fundamental prognosis research, studies that aim to describe and explain future outcomes in relation to current diagnostic and treatment practices, often in relation to quality of care Fundamental prognosis research provides evidence informing healthcare and public health policy, the design and interpretation of randomised trials, and the impact of diagnostic tests on future outcome. It can inform new definitions of disease, may identify unanticipated benefits or harms of interventions, and clarify where new interventions are required to improve prognosis

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of text messages targeting adherence to cardiovascular medications in secondary prevention: the txt2heart Colombia randomised controlled trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-platelet therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers, beta-blockers and statins are cost-effective in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) for reducing the risk of ASCVD events. Unfortunately, there is abundant evidence that adherence to these cardiovascular medications is far from ideal. A recent Cochrane review showed a potential beneficial effect of Short Message Service (SMS) interventions on adherence to medication in ASCVD patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The txt2heart study is a pragmatic randomised single-blind controlled trial. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an intervention with SMS messages delivered by mobile phones to improve adherence to cardiovascular medications in patients with ASCVD. The intervention consists of behavioural techniques delivered via SMS. The primary outcome is change in blood serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels as an indicator of adherence to statins. Secondary outcomes will include systolic blood pressure as an indicator of adherence to blood-lowering therapies and heart rate as an indicator of adherence to beta-blockers, urine levels of 11-dehydrothromboxane B2, self-reported adherence to cardiovascular medications and rates of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation due to cardiovascular disease. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in compliance with the protocol, regulatory requirements, Good Clinical Practice and ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The Ethics Committee of Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia evaluated and approved the trial. The txt2heart Colombia trial aims to provide robust evidence to evaluate whether SMS messages delivered through mobile telephones change the behaviour of Colombian patients who have suffered a cardiovascular event. Trial results will be presented to the local health authorities, and if the intervention is effective and safe, we hope this strategy will be implemented quickly because of its low cost and wide-reaching impact on the population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03098186

How many are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease? Rapid global, regional and national estimates for 2020

BackgroundThe risk of severe COVID-19 disease is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness, and how this varies between countries may inform the design of possible strategies to shield those at highest risk.MethodsWe estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease by age (5-year age groups), sex and country (n=188) based on prevalence data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study for 2017 and United Nations population estimates for 2020. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at-risk because of their age, using thresholds from 50-70 years. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 disease was determined by mapping conditions listed in GBD to the guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and US. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity.ResultsWe estimate that 1.7 (1.0 - 2.4) billion individuals (22% [15-28%] of the global population) are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease. The share of the population at increased risk ranges from 16% in Africa to 31% in Europe. Chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes and chronic respiratory disease (CRD) were the most prevalent conditions in males and females aged 50+ years. African countries with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS and Island countries with a high prevalence of diabetes, also had a high share of the population at increased risk. The prevalence of multimorbidity (&gt;1 underlying conditions) was three times higher in Europe than in Africa (10% vs 3%).ConclusionBased on current guidelines and prevalence data from GBD, we estimate that one in five individuals worldwide has a condition that is on the list of those at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease. However, for many of these individuals the underlying condition will be undiagnosed or not severe enough to be captured in health systems, and in some cases the increase in risk may be quite modest. There is an urgent need for robust analyses of the risks associated with different underlying conditions so that countries can identify the highest risk groups and develop targeted shielding policies to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.Research in contextEvidence before this studyAs the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, countries are considering policies of ‘shielding’ the most vulnerable, but there is currently very limited evidence on the number of individuals that might need to be shielded. Guidelines on who is currently believed to be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness have been published online by the WHO and public health agencies in the UK and US. We searched PubMed (“Risk factors” AND “COVID-19”) without language restrictions, from database inception until April 5, 2020, and identified 62 studies published between Feb 15, 2020 and March 20, 2020. Evidence from China, Italy and the USA indicates that older individuals, males and those with underlying conditions, such as CVD, diabetes and CRD, are at greater risk of severe COVID-19 illness and death.Added value of this studyThis study combines evidence from large international databases and new analysis of large multimorbidity studies to inform policymakers about the number of individuals that may be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness in different countries. We developed a tool for rapid assessments of the number and percentage of country populations that would need to be targeted under different shielding policies.Implications of all the available evidenceQuantifying how many and who is at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness is critical to help countries design more effective interventions to protect vulnerable individuals and reduce pressure on health systems. This information can also inform a broader assessment of the health, social and economic implications of shielding various groups.</jats:sec

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Administering Tranexamic Acid to Bleeding Trauma Patients Using Evidence from the CRASH-2 Trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of giving tranexamic acid (TXA) to bleeding trauma patients in low, middle and high income settings. METHODS: The CRASH-2 trial showed that TXA administration reduces the risk of death in bleeding trauma patients with a small but statistically significant increase in non-intensive care stay. A Markov model was used to assess the cost effectiveness of TXA in Tanzania, India and the United Kingdom (UK). The health outcome was the number of life years gained (LYs). Two costs were considered: the cost of administering TXA and the cost of additional days in hospital. Cost data were obtained from hospitals, World Health Organization (WHO) database and UK reference costs. Cost-effectiveness was measured in international dollars ($) per LY. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results to model assumptions. FINDINGS: Administering TXA to bleeding trauma patients within three hours of injury saved an estimated 372, 315 and 755 LYs per 1,000 trauma patients in Tanzania, India and the UK respectively. The cost of giving TXA to 1,000 patients was$17,483 in Tanzania, $19,550 in India and$30,830 in the UK. The incremental cost of giving TXA versus not giving TXA was $18,025 in Tanzania,$20,670 in India and $48,002 in the UK. The estimated incremental cost per LY gained of administering TXA is$48, $66 and$64 in Tanzania, India and the UK respectively. CONCLUSION: Early administration of TXA to bleeding trauma patients is likely to be highly cost effective in low, middle and high income settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This paper uses data collected by the CRASH 2 trial: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN86750102, Clinicaltrials.govNCT00375258 and South African Clinical Trial Register DOH-27-0607-1919

Electrocardiographic findings and prognostic values in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the World Heart Federation Global Study

BACKGROUND COVID-19 affects the cardiovascular system and ECG abnormalities may be associated with worse prognosis. We evaluated the prognostic value of ECG abnormalities in individuals with COVID-19. METHODS Multicentre cohort study with adults hospitalised with COVID-19 from 40 hospitals across 23 countries. Patients were followed-up from admission until 30 days. ECG were obtained at each participating site and coded according to the Minnesota coding criteria. The primary outcome was defined as death from any cause. Secondary outcomes were admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Multiple logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of ECG abnormalities with the outcomes. RESULTS Among 5313 participants, 2451 had at least one ECG and were included in this analysis. The mean age (SD) was 58.0 (16.1) years, 60.7% were male and 61.1% from lower-income to middle-income countries. The prevalence of major ECG abnormalities was 21.3% (n=521), 447 (18.2%) patients died, 196 (8.0%) had MACE and 1115 (45.5%) were admitted to an ICU. After adjustment, the presence of any major ECG abnormality was associated with a higher risk of death (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.78) and cardiovascular events (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.30 to 2.51). Sinus tachycardia (>120 bpm) with an increased risk of death (OR 3.86; 95% CI 1.97 to 7.48), MACE (OR 2.68; 95% CI 1.10 to 5.85) and ICU admission OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.03 to 4.00). Atrial fibrillation, bundle branch block, ischaemic abnormalities and prolonged QT interval did not relate to the outcomes. CONCLUSION Major ECG abnormalities and a heart rate >120 bpm were prognostic markers in adults hospitalised with COVID-19