Is physician assessment of alcohol consumption useful in predicting risk of severe liver disease among people with HIV and HIV/HCV co-infection?

Background Alcohol consumption is a known risk factor for liver disease in HIV-infected populations. Therefore, knowledge of alcohol consumption behaviour and risk of disease progression associated with hazardous drinking are important in the overall management of HIV disease. We aimed at assessing the usefulness of routine data collected on alcohol consumption in predicting risk of severe liver disease (SLD) among people living with HIV (PLWHIV) with or without hepatitis C infection seen for routine clinical care in Italy. Methods We included PLWHIV from two observational cohorts in Italy (ICONA and HepaICONA). Alcohol consumption was assessed by physician interview and categorized according to the National Institute for Food and Nutrition Italian guidelines into four categories: abstainer; moderate; hazardous and unknown. SLD was defined as presence of FIB4 > 3.25 or a clinical diagnosis of liver disease or liver-related death. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between level of alcohol consumption at baseline and risk of SLD. Results Among 9542 included PLWHIV the distribution of alcohol consumption categories was: abstainers 3422 (36%), moderate drinkers 2279 (23%), hazardous drinkers 637 (7%) and unknown 3204 (34%). Compared to moderate drinkers, hazardous drinking was associated with higher risk of SLD (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.03–2.03). After additionally controlling for mode of HIV transmission, HCV infection and smoking, the association was attenuated (aHR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.94–1.85). There was no evidence that the association was stronger when restricting to the HIV/HCV co-infected population. Conclusions Using a brief physician interview, we found evidence for an association between hazardous alcohol consumption and subsequent risk of SLD among PLWHIV, but this was not independent of HIV mode of transmission, HCV-infection and smoking. More efforts should be made to improve quality and validity of data on alcohol consumption in cohorts of HIV/HCV-infected individuals

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a self-guided internet intervention for social anxiety symptoms in a general population sample : randomized controlled trial

Background: Many people are accessing digital self-help for mental health problems, often with little evidence of effectiveness.Social anxiety is one of the most common sources of mental distress in the population and many people with symptoms do not seek help for what represents a significant public health problem. Objective: Two group randomized controlled trial conducted in England between 11th May 2016 and 27th June 2018. Adults with social anxiety symptoms who were not receiving treatment for social anxiety were recruited using online advertisements. All participants had unrestricted access to usual care and were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either a web-based unguided self-help intervention based on cognitive-behavioural principles, or to a waiting list control group. All outcomes were collected through self-report online questionnaires. The primary outcome was the change in 17-item self-report Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN-17) score from baseline to 6 weeks using a linear mixed-effect model that used data from all timepoints (6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 months). Methods: Two group randomized controlled trial conducted in England between 11th May 2016 and 27th June 2018. Adults with social anxiety symptoms who were not receiving treatment for social anxiety were recruited using online advertisements. All participants had unrestricted access to usual care and were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either a web-based unguided self-help intervention based on cognitive-behavioural principles, or to a waiting list control group. All outcomes were collected through self-report online questionnaires. The primary outcome was the change in 17-item self-report Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN-17) score from baseline to 6 weeks using a linear mixed-effect model that used data from all timepoints (6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 months). Results: 2212 participants were randomized. Six were excluded from analyses as ineligible. Of the 2116 eligible randomized participants (mean age 37 years, 80% women), 70.1% (1484/2116) had follow-up data available for analysis, and 56.9% (1205/2116) had data on the primary outcome, although attrition was higher in the intervention arm. At 6 weeks the mean (95% CI, P value) adjusted difference in change in SPIN-17 score in the intervention group compared to control, was -1.94 (-3.13 to -0.75, P=0.0014), a standardised mean difference effect size of 0.2. The improvement was maintained at 12 months. Given the high drop-out, sensitivity analyses explored missing data assumptions and were consistent with the primary analysis finding. The economic evaluation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with a small health status benefit and a reduction in health service utilisation. Conclusions: For people with social anxiety symptoms who are not receiving other forms of help, this study suggests that an online self-help tool based on cognitive behavioural principles can provide a small improvement in social anxiety symptoms compared with no intervention, although drop-out rates were high. Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02451878. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0245187

Methods and processes for development of a CONSORT extension for reporting pilot randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Feasibility and pilot studies are essential components of planning or preparing for a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). They are intended to provide useful information about the feasibility of the main RCT-with the goal of reducing uncertainty and thereby increasing the chance of successfully conducting the main RCT. However, research has shown that there are serious inadequacies in the reporting of pilot and feasibility studies. Reasons for this include a lack of explicit publication policies for pilot and feasibility studies in many journals, unclear definitions of what constitutes a pilot or feasibility RCT/study, and a lack of clarity in the objectives and methodological focus. All these suggest that there is an urgent need for new guidelines for reporting pilot and feasibility studies. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to describe the methods and processes in our development of an extension to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for reporting pilot and feasibility RCTs, that are executed in preparation for a future, more definitive RCT. METHODS/DESIGN: There were five overlapping parts to the project: (i) the project launch-which involved establishing a working group and conducting a review of the literature; (ii) stakeholder engagement-which entailed consultation with the CONSORT group, journal editors and publishers, the clinical trials community, and funders; (iii) a Delphi process-used to assess the agreement of experts on initial definitions and to generate a reporting checklist for pilot RCTs, based on the 2010 CONSORT statement extension applicable to reporting pilot studies; (iv) a consensus meeting-to discuss, add, remove, or modify checklist items, with input from experts in the field; and (v) write-up and implementation-which included a guideline document which gives an explanation and elaboration (E&E) and which will provide advice for each item, together with examples of good reporting practice. This final part also included a plan for dissemination and publication of the guideline. CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that implementation of our guideline will improve the reporting completeness, transparency, and quality of pilot RCTs, and hence benefit several constituencies, including authors of journal manuscripts, funding agencies, educators, researchers, and end-users

Access and response to direct antiviral agents (DAA) in HIV-HCV co-infected patients in Italy: Data from the Icona cohort

Background Real-life data on access and response to direct antiviral agents (DAA) in HIV-HCV coinfected individuals are lacking. Methods HCV viremic, HIV-positive patients from Icona and Hepaicona cohorts nave to DAA by January 2013 were included. Access and predictors of starting DAA were evaluated. Switches of antiretroviral drugs at starting DAA were described. We calculated sustained virological response (SVR12) in those reaching 12 weeks after end-of-treatment (EOT), and defined treatment failure (TF) as discontinuation of DAA before EOT or non-SVR12. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier curves, univariable and multivariable analyses evaluating predictors of access to DAA and of treatment outcome (non-SVR and TF). Results 2,607 patients included. During a median follow-up of 38 (IQR:30-41) months, 920 (35.3%) patients started DAA. Eligibility for reimbursement was the strongest predictor to access to treatment: 761/1,090 (69.8%) eligible and 159/1,517 (10.5%) non-eligible to DAA reimbursement. Older age, HIV-RNA50 copies/mL were associated to faster DAA initiation, higher CD4 count and HCV-genotype 3 with delayed DAA initiation in those eligible to DAA reimbursement. Up to 28% of patients (36% of those on ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors, PI/r) underwent antiretroviral (ART) modification at DAA initiation. 545/595 (91.6%) patients reaching EOT achieved SVR12. Overall, TF occurred in 61/606 patients (10.1%), with 11 discontinuing DAA before EOT. Suboptimal DAA was the only independent predictor of both non-SVR12 (AHR 2.52, 95%CI:1.24-5.12) and TF (AHR: 2.19; 95%CI:1.13-4.22). Conclusions Only 35.3% had access to HCV treatment. Despite excellent rates of SVR12 rates (91.6%), only 21% (545/2,607) of our HIV-HCV co-infected patients are cured. © 2017 d'Arminio Monforte et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Defining Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Preparation for Randomised Controlled Trials: Development of a Conceptual Framework

We describe a framework for defining pilot and feasibility studies focusing on studies conducted in preparation for a randomised controlled trial. To develop the framework, we undertook a Delphi survey; ran an open meeting at a trial methodology conference; conducted a review of definitions outside the health research context; consulted experts at an international consensus meeting; and reviewed 27 empirical pilot or feasibility studies. We initially adopted mutually exclusive definitions of pilot and feasibility studies. However, some Delphi survey respondents and the majority of open meeting attendees disagreed with the idea of mutually exclusive definitions. Their viewpoint was supported by definitions outside the health research context, the use of the terms ‘pilot’ and ‘feasibility’ in the literature, and participants at the international consensus meeting. In our framework, pilot studies are a subset of feasibility studies, rather than the two being mutually exclusive. A feasibility study asks whether something can be done, should we proceed with it, and if so, how. A pilot study asks the same questions but also has a specific design feature: in a pilot study a future study, or part of a future study, is conducted on a smaller scale. We suggest that to facilitate their identification, these studies should be clearly identified using the terms ‘feasibility’ or ‘pilot’ as appropriate. This should include feasibility studies that are largely qualitative; we found these difficult to identify in electronic searches because researchers rarely used the term ‘feasibility’ in the title or abstract of such studies. Investigators should also report appropriate objectives and methods related to feasibility; and give clear confirmation that their study is in preparation for a future randomised controlled trial designed to assess the effect of an intervention

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based pain self-management intervention for patients undergoing total hip replacement: Feasibility study for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Total hip replacement (THR) is a common elective surgical procedure and can be effective for reducing chronic pain. However, waiting times can be considerable. A pain self-management intervention may provide patients with skills to more effectively manage their pain and its impact during their wait for surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based pain self-management course for patients undergoing THR.Methods: Patients listed for a THR at one orthopedic center were posted a study invitation pack. Participants were randomized to attend a pain self-management course plus standard care or standard care only. The lay-led course was delivered by Arthritis Care and consisted of two half-day sessions prior to surgery and one full-day session after surgery. Participants provided outcome and resource-use data using a diary and postal questionnaires prior to surgery and one month, three months and six months after surgery. Brief telephone interviews were conducted with non-participants to explore barriers to participation.Results: Invitations were sent to 385 eligible patients and 88 patients (23%) consented to participate. Interviews with 57 non-participants revealed the most common reasons for non-participation were views about the course and transport difficulties. Of the 43 patients randomized to the intervention group, 28 attended the pre-operative pain self-management sessions and 11 attended the post-operative sessions. Participant satisfaction with the course was high, and feedback highlighted that patients enjoyed the group format. Retention of participants was acceptable (83% of recruited patients completed follow-up) and questionnaire return rates were high (72% to 93%), with the exception of the pre-operative resource-use diary (35% return rate). Resource-use completion rates allowed for an economic evaluation from the health and social care payer perspective.Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of feasibility work prior to a randomized controlled trial to assess recruitment methods and rates, barriers to participation, logistics of scheduling group-based interventions, acceptability of the intervention and piloting resource use questionnaires to improve data available for economic evaluations. This information is of value to researchers and funders in the design and commissioning of future research.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52305381. © 2014 Wylde et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in people at high risk of complications in the community in the UK (PRINCIPLE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordData sharing; Data can be shared with qualifying researchers who submit a proposal with a valuable research question as assessed by a committee formed from the trial management group, including senior statistical and clinical representation. A contract should be signed.Background A previous efficacy trial found benefit from inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in patients not admitted to hospital, but effectiveness in high-risk individuals is unknown. We aimed to establish whether inhaled budesonide reduces time to recovery and COVID-19-related hospital admissions or deaths among people at high risk of complications in the community. Methods PRINCIPLE is a multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial done remotely from a central trial site and at primary care centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 65 years or older or 50 years or older with comorbidities, and unwell for up to 14 days with suspected COVID-19 but not admitted to hospital. Participants were randomly assigned to usual care, usual care plus inhaled budesonide (800 μg twice daily for 14 days), or usual care plus other interventions, and followed up for 28 days. Participants were aware of group assignment. The coprimary endpoints are time to first self-reported recovery and hospital admission or death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. The primary analysis population included all eligible SARS-CoV-2-positive participants randomly assigned to budesonide, usual care, and other interventions, from the start of the platform trial until the budesonide group was closed. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN86534580) and is ongoing. Findings The trial began enrolment on April 2, 2020, with randomisation to budesonide from Nov 27, 2020, until March 31, 2021, when the prespecified time to recovery superiority criterion was met. 4700 participants were randomly assigned to budesonide (n=1073), usual care alone (n=1988), or other treatments (n=1639). The primary analysis model includes 2530 SARS-CoV-2-positive participants, with 787 in the budesonide group, 1069 in the usual care group, and 974 receiving other treatments. There was a benefit in time to first self-reported recovery of an estimated 2·94 days (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] 1·19 to 5·12) in the budesonide group versus the usual care group (11·8 days [95% BCI 10·0 to 14·1] vs 14·7 days [12·3 to 18·0]; hazard ratio 1·21 [95% BCI 1·08 to 1·36]), with a probability of superiority greater than 0·999, meeting the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·99. For the hospital admission or death outcome, the estimated rate was 6·8% (95% BCI 4·1 to 10·2) in the budesonide group versus 8·8% (5·5 to 12·7) in the usual care group (estimated absolute difference 2·0% [95% BCI –0·2 to 4·5]; odds ratio 0·75 [95% BCI 0·55 to 1·03]), with a probability of superiority 0·963, below the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·975. Two participants in the budesonide group and four in the usual care group had serious adverse events (hospital admissions unrelated to COVID-19). Interpretation Inhaled budesonide improves time to recovery, with a chance of also reducing hospital admissions or deaths (although our results did not meet the superiority threshold), in people with COVID-19 in the community who are at higher risk of complications.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)Wellcome Trus

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials [on behalf of the PAFS consensus group*]

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a guideline designed to improve the transparency and quality of the reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In this article we present an extension to that statement for randomised pilot and feasibility trials conducted in advance of a future definitive RCT. The checklist applies to any randomised study in which a future definitive RCT, or part of it, is conducted on a smaller scale, regardless of its design (eg, cluster, factorial, crossover) or the terms used by authors to describe the study (eg, pilot, feasibility, trial, study). The extension does not directly apply to internal pilot studies built into the design of a main trial, non-randomised pilot and feasibility studies, or phase II studies, but these studies all have some similarities to randomised pilot and feasibility studies and so many of the principles might also apply. The development of the extension was motivated by the growing number of studies described as feasibility or pilot studies and by research that has identified weaknesses in their reporting and conduct. We followed recommended good practice to develop the extension, including carrying out a Delphi survey, holding a consensus meeting and research team meetings, and piloting the checklist. The aims and objectives of pilot and feasibility randomised studies differ from those of other randomised trials. Consequently, although much of the information to be reported in these trials is similar to those in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effectiveness and efficacy, there are some key differences in the type of information and in the appropriate interpretation of standard CONSORT reporting items. We have retained some of the original CONSORT statement items, but most have been adapted, some removed, and new items added. The new items cover how participants were identified and consent obtained; if applicable, the prespecified criteria used to judge whether or how to proceed with a future definitive RCT; if relevant, other important unintended consequences; implications for progression from pilot to future definitive RCT, including any proposed amendments; and ethical approval or approval by a research review committee confirmed with a reference number. This article includes the 26 item checklist, a separate checklist for the abstract, a template for a CONSORT flowchart for these studies, and an explanation of the changes made and supporting examples. We believe that routine use of this proposed extension to the CONSORT statement will result in improvements in the reporting of pilot trials. Editor’s note: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the BMJ and Pilot and Feasibility Studies journal websites

Interferon-driven alterations of the host’s amino acid metabolism in the pathogenesis of typhoid fever

Enteric fever, caused by Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi, is an important public health problem in resource-limited settings and, despite decades of research, human responses to the infection are poorly understood. In 41 healthy adults experimentally infected with wild-type S. Typhi, we detected significant cytokine responses within 12 h of bacterial ingestion. These early responses did not correlate with subsequent clinical disease outcomes and likely indicate initial host–pathogen interactions in the gut mucosa. In participants developing enteric fever after oral infection, marked transcriptional and cytokine responses during acute disease reflected dominant type I/II interferon signatures, which were significantly associated with bacteremia. Using a murine and macrophage infection model, we validated the pivotal role of this response in the expression of proteins of the host tryptophan metabolism during Salmonella infection. Corresponding alterations in tryptophan catabolites with immunomodulatory properties in serum of participants with typhoid fever confirmed the activity of this pathway, and implicate a central role of host tryptophan metabolism in the pathogenesis of typhoid fever

Prognostic Value of the Fibrosis-4 Index in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type-1 Infected Patients Initiating Antiretroviral Therapy with or without Hepatitis C Virus

Objective: To evaluate the Fibrosis (FIB)-4 index as a predictor of major liver-related events (LRE) and liver-related death (LRD) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type-1 patients initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Design: Retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort study. Setting: Italian HIV care centers participating to the ICONA Foundation cohort. Participants: Treatment-naive patients enrolled in ICONA were selected who: initiated cART, had hepatitis C virus (HCV) serology results, were HBsAg negative, had an available FIB-4 index at cART start and during follow up. Methods: Cox regression models were used to determine the association of FIB4 with the risk of major LRE (gastrointestinal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, hepato-renal syndrome or hepatocellular carcinoma) or LRD. Results: Three-thousand four-hundred seventy-five patients were enrolled: 73.3% were males, 27.2% HCV seropositive. At baseline (time of cART initiation) their median age was 39 years, had a median CD4+ T cell count of 260 cells/uL, and median HIV RNA 4.9 log copies/ mL, 65.9% had a FIB-4 < 1.45, 26.4% 1.45-3.25 and 7.7% > 3.25. Over a follow up of 18,662 person-years, 41 events were observed: 25 major LRE and 16 LRD (incidence rate, IR, 2.2 per 1,000 PYFU [95% confidence interval, CI 1.6-3.0]). IR was higher in HCV seropositives as compared to negatives (5.9 vs 0.5 per 1,000 PYFU). Higher baseline FIB-4 category as compared to < 1.45 (FIB-4 1.45-3.25: HR 3.55, 95% CI 1.09-11.58; FIB-4 > 3.25: HR 4.25, 1.21-14.92) and time-updated FIB-4 (FIB-4 1.45-3.25: HR 3.40, 1.02-11.40; FIB- 4> 3.25: HR 21.24, 6.75-66.84) were independently predictive of major LRE/LRD, after adjusting for HIV- and HCV-related variables, alcohol consumption and type of cART. Conclusions: The FIB-4 index at cART initiation, and its modification over time are risk factors for major LRE or LRD, independently of infection with HCV and could be used to monitor patients on cART