Don't spin the pen: two alternative methods for second-stage sampling in urban cluster surveys

In two-stage cluster surveys, the traditional method used in second-stage sampling (in which the first household in a cluster is selected) is time-consuming and may result in biased estimates of the indicator of interest. Firstly, a random direction from the center of the cluster is selected, usually by spinning a pen. The houses along that direction are then counted out to the boundary of the cluster, and one is then selected at random to be the first household surveyed. This process favors households towards the center of the cluster, but it could easily be improved. During a recent meningitis vaccination coverage survey in Maradi, Niger, we compared this method of first household selection to two alternatives in urban zones: 1) using a superimposed grid on the map of the cluster area and randomly selecting an intersection; and 2) drawing the perimeter of the cluster area using a Global Positioning System (GPS) and randomly selecting one point within the perimeter. Although we only compared a limited number of clusters using each method, we found the sampling grid method to be the fastest and easiest for field survey teams, although it does require a map of the area. Selecting a random GPS point was also found to be a good method, once adequate training can be provided. Spinning the pen and counting households to the boundary was the most complicated and time-consuming. The two methods tested here represent simpler, quicker and potentially more robust alternatives to spinning the pen for cluster surveys in urban areas. However, in rural areas, these alternatives would favor initial household selection from lower density (or even potentially empty) areas. Bearing in mind these limitations, as well as available resources and feasibility, investigators should choose the most appropriate method for their particular survey context

Evaluation and Management of Deficiency of Adenosine Deaminase 2: An International Consensus Statement

IMPORTANCE: Deficiency of adenosine deaminase 2 (DADA2) is a recessively inherited disease characterized by systemic vasculitis, early-onset stroke, bone marrow failure, and/or immunodeficiency affecting both children and adults. DADA2 is among the more common monogenic autoinflammatory diseases, with an estimate of more than 35 000 cases worldwide, but currently, there are no guidelines for diagnostic evaluation or management. OBJECTIVE: To review the available evidence and develop multidisciplinary consensus statements for the evaluation and management of DADA2. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The DADA2 Consensus Committee developed research questions based on data collected from the International Meetings on DADA2 organized by the DADA2 Foundation in 2016, 2018, and 2020. A comprehensive literature review was performed for articles published prior to 2022. Thirty-two consensus statements were generated using a modified Delphi process, and evidence was graded using the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. FINDINGS: The DADA2 Consensus Committee, comprising 3 patient representatives and 35 international experts from 18 countries, developed consensus statements for (1) diagnostic testing, (2) screening, (3) clinical and laboratory evaluation, and (4) management of DADA2 based on disease phenotype. Additional consensus statements related to the evaluation and treatment of individuals with DADA2 who are presymptomatic and carriers were generated. Areas with insufficient evidence were identified, and questions for future research were outlined. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: DADA2 is a potentially fatal disease that requires early diagnosis and treatment. By summarizing key evidence and expert opinions, these consensus statements provide a framework to facilitate diagnostic evaluation and management of DADA2

JAK1/2 inhibition with baricitinib in the treatment of autoinflammatory interferonopathies

BACKGROUND. Monogenic IFN-mediated autoinflammatory diseases present in infancy with systemic inflammation, an IFN response gene signature, inflammatory organ damage, and high mortality. We used the JAK inhibitor baricitinib, with IFN-blocking activity in vitro, to ameliorate disease. METHODS. Between October 2011 and February 2017, 10 patients with CANDLE (chronic atypical neutrophilic dermatosis with lipodystrophy and elevated temperatures), 4 patients with SAVI (stimulator of IFN genes-associated [STING-associated] vasculopathy with onset in infancy), and 4 patients with other interferonopathies were enrolled in an expanded access program. The patients underwent dose escalation, and the benefit was assessed by reductions in daily disease symptoms and corticosteroid requirement. Quality of life, organ inflammation, changes in IFN-induced biomarkers, and safety were longitudinally assessed. RESULTS. Eighteen patients were treated for a mean duration of 3.0 years (1.5-4.9 years). The median daily symptom score decreased from 1.3 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.93-1.78) to 0.25 (IQR, 0.1-0.63) (P < 0.0001). In 14 patients receiving corticosteroids at baseline, daily prednisone doses decreased from 0.44 mg/kg/day (IQR, 0.31-1.09) to 0.11 mg/kg/day (IQR, 0.02-0.24) (P < 0.01), and 5 of 10 patients with CANDLE achieved lasting clinical remission. The patients' quality of life and height and bone mineral density Z-scores significantly improved, and their IFN biomarkers decreased. Three patients, two of whom had genetically undefined conditions, discontinued treatment because of lack of efficacy, and one CANDLE patient discontinued treatment because of BK viremia and azotemia. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory infections, gastroenteritis, and BK viruria and viremia. CONCLUSION. Upon baricitinib treatment, clinical manifestations and inflammatory and IFN biomarkers improved in patients with the monogenic interferonopathies CANDLE, SAVI, and other interferonopathies. Monitoring safety and efficacy is important in benefit-risk assessment

Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. METHODS: We did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91-1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed. INTERPRETATION: Remote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease