Developing a Conceptually Equivalent Type 2 Diabetes Risk Score for Indian Gujaratis in the UK

Aims. To apply and assess the suitability of a model consisting of commonly used cross-cultural translation methods to achieve a conceptually equivalent Gujarati language version of the Leicester self-assessment type 2 diabetes risk score. Methods. Implementation of the model involved multiple stages, including pretesting of the translated risk score by conducting semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of volunteers. Interviews were conducted on an iterative basis to enable findings to inform translation revisions and to elicit volunteers’ ability to self-complete and understand the risk score. Results. The pretest stage was an essential component involving recruitment of a diverse sample of 18 Gujarati volunteers, many of whom gave detailed suggestions for improving the instructions for the calculation of the risk score and BMI table. Volunteers found the standard and level of Gujarati accessible and helpful in understanding the concept of risk, although many of the volunteers struggled to calculate their BMI. Conclusions. This is the first time that a multicomponent translation model has been applied to the translation of a type 2 diabetes risk score into another language. This project provides an invaluable opportunity to share learning about the transferability of this model for translation of self-completed risk scores in other health conditions

Assessing a 12-month course of oral alendronate for adults with avascular necrosis of the hip: MANTIS RCT with internal pilot

Background People with avascular necrosis of the hip have very limited treatment options currently available to stop the progression of this disease; this often results in the need for a hip replacement. There is some weak evidence that a class of drugs called bisphosphonates may delay the course of the disease, and this trial was commissioned and set up to provide robust evidence regarding the use of bisphosphonates in adults aged ≥ 18 years with this condition. Objectives The aim of the Managing Avascular Necrosis Treatments: an Interventional Study (MANTIS) trial was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 12-month course of alendronate in the treatment of avascular necrosis. Design This was a 66-month, definitive, multisite, two-arm, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, with an internal pilot phase. Setting Eight secondary care NHS hospitals across the UK. Participants Planned trial size – 280 adult patients with avascular necrosis. Intervention Participants in the intervention group received 70 mg of alendronate (an oral bisphosphonate) weekly for 12 months. Main outcomes The main outcomes were Oxford Hip Score at 12 months (short-term outcome) and the time to decision that a hip replacement is required at 36 months (long-term outcome). Results Twenty-one patients were recruited and randomised to receive either the intervention drug, alendronate, or a placebo-matched tablet. Limitations This trial was principally limited by low disease prevalence. Other limitations included the late disease stage at which participants were identified and the rapid progression of the disease. Future work This trial was limited by a low recruitment rate. Avascular necrosis of the hip should be treated as a rare disease. Future trials would need to recruit many more sites and recruit over a longer time period, and, for this reason, a registry may provide a more effective means of collecting data pertaining to this disease. Conclusions The MANTIS trial was terminated at the end of the pilot phase, because it did not meet its go/no-go criteria. The main issue was a poor recruitment rate, owing to a lower than expected disease prevalence and difficulties in identifying the condition at a sufficiently early stage. Those patients who were identified and screened either were too advanced in their disease progression or were already taking medication. We would not recommend that a short-term interventional study is conducted on this condition until its prevalence, geographic foci and natural history and better understood. The difficulty of acquiring this understanding is likely to be a barrier in most health-care markets. One means of developing this understanding would be the introduction of a database/registry for patients suffering from avascular necrosis of the hip. Trial registration The trial is registered as ISRCTN14015902. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 43. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Rationale and design of the Early valve replacement in severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis Trial

Background: Aortic valve replacement in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis is controversial. The Early valve replacement in severe ASYmptomatic Aortic Stenosis (EASY-AS) trial aims to determine whether early aortic valve replacement improves clinical outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness compared to a guideline recommended strategy of ‘watchful waiting’. Methods: In a pragmatic international, open parallel group randomized controlled trial (NCT04204915), 2844 patients with severe aortic stenosis will be randomized 1:1 to either a strategy of early (surgical or transcatheter) aortic valve replacement or aortic valve replacement only if symptoms or impaired left ventricular function develop, or other cardiac surgery becomes nessessary. Exclusion criteria include other severe valvular disease, planned cardiac surgery, ejection fraction &lt;50%, previous aortic valve replacement or life expectancy &lt;2 years. The primary outcome is a composite of cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. The primary analysis will be undertaken when 663 primary events have accrued, providing 90% power to detect a reduction in the primary endpoint from 27.7% to 21.6% (hazard ratio 0.75). Secondary endpoints include disability-free survival, days alive and out of hospital, major adverse cardiovascular events and quality of life. Results: Recruitment commenced in March 2020 and is open in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Serbia. Feasibility requirements were met in July 2022, and the main phase opened in October 2022, with additional international centers in set-up. Conclusions: The EASY-AS trial will establish whether a strategy of early aortic valve replacement in asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis reduces cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization and improves other important outcomes.</p

Association of latent class analysis-derived multimorbidity clusters with adverse health outcomes in patients with multiple long-term conditions: Comparative results across three UK cohorts

Background It remains unclear how to meaningfully classify people living with multimorbidity (multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs)), beyond counting the number of conditions. This paper aims to identify clusters of MLTCs in different age groups and associated risks of adverse health outcomes and service use. Methods Latent class analysis was used to identify MLTCs clusters in different age groups in three cohorts: Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank (SAIL) (n = 1,825,289), UK Biobank (n = 502,363), and the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) (n = 49,186). Incidence rate ratios (IRR) for MLTC clusters were computed for: all-cause mortality, hospitalisations, and general practice (GP) use over 10 years, using <2 MLTCs as reference. Information on health outcomes and service use were extracted for a ten year follow up period (between 01st Jan 2010 and 31st Dec 2019 for UK Biobank and UKHLS, and between 01st Jan 2011 and 31st Dec 2020 for SAIL). Findings Clustering MLTCs produced largely similar results across different age groups and cohorts. MLTC clusters had distinct associations with health outcomes and service use after accounting for LTC counts, in fully adjusted models. The largest associations with mortality, hospitalisations and GP use in SAIL were observed for the “Pain+” cluster in the age-group 18–36 years (mortality IRR = 4.47, hospitalisation IRR = 1.84; GP use IRR = 2.87) and the “Hypertension, Diabetes & Heart disease” cluster in the age-group 37–54 years (mortality IRR = 4.52, hospitalisation IRR = 1.53, GP use IRR = 2.36). In UK Biobank, the “Cancer, Thyroid disease & Rheumatoid arthritis” cluster in the age group 37–54 years had the largest association with mortality (IRR = 2.47). Cardiometabolic clusters across all age groups, pain/mental health clusters in younger groups, and cancer and pulmonary related clusters in older age groups had higher risk for all outcomes. In UKHLS, MLTC clusters were not significantly associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes, except for the hospitalisation in the age-group 18–36 years. Interpretation Personalising care around MLTC clusters that have higher risk of adverse outcomes may have important implications for practice (in relation to secondary prevention), policy (with allocation of health care resources), and research (intervention development and targeting), for people living with MLTCs. Funding This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR; Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity)—NIHR202020)

Very early invasive angiography versus standard of care in higher-risk non-ST elevation myocardial infarction: study protocol for the prospective multicentre randomised controlled RAPID N-STEMI trial

Background: There are a paucity of randomised data on the optimal timing of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in higher-risk patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (N-STEMI). International guideline recommendations for early ICA are primarily based on retrospective subgroup analyses of neutral trials. Aims: The RAPID N-STEMI trial aims to determine whether very early percutaneous revascularisation improves clinical outcomes as compared with a standard of care strategy in higher-risk N-STEMI patients. Methods and analysis: RAPID N-STEMI is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised-controlled, pragmatic strategy trial. Higher-risk N-STEMI patients, as defined by Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events 2.0 score ≥118, or &gt;90 with at least one additional high-risk feature, were randomised to either: very early ICA±revascularisation or standard of care timing of ICA±revascularisation. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with at least one of the following events (all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction and hospital admission for heart failure) at 12 months. Key secondary outcomes include major bleeding and stroke. A hypothesis generating cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) substudy will provide mechanistic data on infarct size, myocardial salvage and residual ischaemia post percutaneous coronary intervention. On 7 April 2021, the sponsor discontinued enrolment due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lower than expected event rates. 425 patients were enrolled, and 61 patients underwent CMR. Ethics and dissemination: The trial has been reviewed and approved by the East of England Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee (18/EE/0222). The study results will be submitted for publication within 6 months of completion. Trial registration number: NCT03707314; Pre-results

Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM): protocol for a randomised feasibility trial

Introduction: Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) is a research programme that seeks to develop and evaluate a comprehensive exercise-based rehabilitation intervention designed for people with multimorbidity, the presence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs). This paper describes the protocol for a randomised trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PERFORM intervention, study design and processes. Methods and analysis: A multicentre, parallel two-group randomised trial with individual 2:1 allocation to the PERFORM exercise-based intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The primary outcome of this feasibility trial will be to assess whether prespecified progression criteria (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence) are met to progress to the full randomised trial. The trial will be conducted across three UK sites and 60 people with MLTCs, defined as two or more LTCs, with at least one having evidence of the beneficial effect of exercise. The PERFORM intervention comprises an 8-week (twice a week for 6 weeks and once a week for 2 weeks) supervised rehabilitation programme of personalised exercise training and self-management education delivered by trained healthcare professionals followed by two maintenance sessions. Trial participants will be recruited over a 4.5-month period, and outcomes assessed at baseline (prerandomisation) and 3 months postrandomisation and include health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, symptom burden, frailty, exercise capacity, physical activity, sleep, cognition and serious adverse events. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention delivery and feasibility of trial processes. An economic evaluation will assess the feasibility of data collection and estimate the costs of the PERFORM intervention. Ethics and dissemination: The trial has been given favourable opinion by the West Midlands, Edgbaston Research Ethics Service (Ref: 23/WM/0057). Participants will be asked to give full, written consent to take part by trained researchers. Findings will be disseminated via journals, presentations and targeted communications to clinicians, commissioners, service users and patients and the public. Trial registration number: ISRCTN68786622. Protocol version 2.0 (16 May 2023)

Connectivity-guided intermittent theta burst versus repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a randomized controlled trial

Disruption in reciprocal connectivity between the right anterior insula and the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is associated with depression and may be a target for neuromodulation. In a five-center, parallel, double-blind, randomized controlled trial we personalized resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging neuronavigated connectivity-guided intermittent theta burst stimulation (cgiTBS) at a site based on effective connectivity from the right anterior insula to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. We tested its efficacy in reducing the primary outcome depression symptoms measured by the GRID Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item over 8, 16 and 26 weeks, compared with structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) neuronavigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) delivered at the standard stimulation site (F3) in patients with ‘treatment-resistant depression’. Participants were randomly assigned to 20 sessions over 4–6 weeks of either cgiTBS (n = 128) or rTMS (n = 127) with resting-state functional MRI at baseline and 16 weeks. Persistent decreases in depressive symptoms were seen over 26 weeks, with no differences between arms on the primary outcome GRID Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item score (intention-to-treat adjusted mean, −0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.87, 1.24, P = 0.689). Two serious adverse events were possibly related to TMS (mania and psychosis). MRI-neuronavigated cgiTBS and rTMS were equally effective in patients with treatment-resistant depression over 26 weeks (trial registration no. ISRCTN19674644)

Connectivity-Guided Theta Burst Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Versus Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Moderate to Severe Depression: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocol and SARS-CoV-2–Induced Changes for a Randomized Double-blind Controlled Trial

Background:Depression is a significant health and economic burden. In approximately one third of patients, depression is resistant to first line treatments and therefore it is essential that alternative treatments are found. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a neuromodulatory treatment involving the application of magnetic pulses to the brain that is approved in the UK and the US in treatment resistant depression. This trial aims to compare the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanism of action between standard treatment repetitive TMS (rTMS) targeted at the F3 EEG site, with a newer treatment – a type of TMS called theta-burst stimulation (TBS) targeted based on measures of functional brain connectivity. This protocol outlines the brain imaging acquisition and analysis for the BRIGhTMIND trial that is used to create personalised TMS targets and answer the proposed mechanistic hypotheses.Objective:The objectives of the imaging arm of the BRIGhTMIND study are to identify functional and neurochemical brain signatures indexing the treatment mechanisms of rTMS and cgiTBS and to identify imaging-based markers predicting response to treatment.Methods:The study is a randomised double-blind controlled trial with 1:1 allocation to either 20 sessions of a) TBS or b) standard rTMS. Multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is acquired per participant at baseline (prior to TMS treatment) with T1-weighted and task-free functional MRI during rest (rsfMRI) utilised to estimate TMS targets. For participants enrolled in the mechanistic substudy additional diffusion-weighted, sequences are acquired at baseline and at post-treatment follow-up 16 weeks after treatment randomisation. Core datasets of T1-weighted and task-free functional MRI during rest (rsfMRI) are acquired for all participants and utilised to estimate TMS targets. Additional sequences of arterial spin labelling, magnetic resonance spectroscopy and diffusion-weighted images are acquired dependent on recruitment site for mechanistic evaluation. Standard rTMS treatment is targeted at the F3 electrode site over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex whilst TBS treatment is guided using the coordinate of peak effective connectivity from the right anterior insula to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Both treatment targets benefit from a level of MRI-guidance but only TBS is provided with precision targeting based on functional brain connectivity.Results:Recruitment began January 2019 and is ongoing. Data collection is expected to continue until January 2023.Conclusions:This trial will determine the impact of precision MRI guidance on rTMS treatment, and furthermore, assess the neural mechanisms underlying this treatment in treatment resistant depressed patients. Clinical Trial: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 19674644; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19674644. Registered 2nd October 2018

Connectivity guided theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation versus repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant moderate to severe depression: study protocol for a randomised double-blind controlled trial (BRIGhTMIND)

Introduction The BRIGhTMIND study aims to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and mechanism of action of connectivity guided intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (cgiTBS) versus standard repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in adults with moderate to severe treatment resistant depression. Methods and analysis The study is a randomised double-blind controlled trial with 1:1 allocation to either 20 sessions of (a) cgiTBS or (b) neuronavigated rTMS not using connectivity guidance. A total of 368 eligible participants with a diagnosis of current unipolar major depressive disorder that is both treatment resistant (defined as scoring 2 or more on the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Staging Score) and moderate to severe (scoring >16 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17)), will be recruited from primary and secondary care settings at four treatment centres in the United Kingdom. The primary outcome is depression response at 16 weeks (50% or greater reduction in HDRS-17 score from baseline). Secondary outcomes include assessments of self-rated depression, anxiety, psychosocial functioning, cognition and quality of life at 8, 16 and 26 weeks post randomisation. Cost effectiveness, patient acceptability, safety, mechanism of action and predictors of response will also be examined

Very early invasive strategy in higher risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the RAPID NSTEMI trial

Objective To investigate whether a very early invasive strategy (IS)±revascularisation improves clinical outcomes compared with standard care IS in higher risk patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). Methods Multicentre, randomised, controlled, pragmatic strategy trial of higher risk patients with NSTE-ACS, defined by Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events 2.0 score of ≥118, or ≥90 with at least one additional high-risk feature. Participants were randomly assigned to very early IS±revascularisation (<90 min from randomisation) or standard care IS±revascularisation (<72 hours). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, new myocardial infarction or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. Results The trial was discontinued early by the funder due to slow recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic. 425 patients were randomised, of whom 413 underwent an IS: 204 to very early IS (median time from randomisation: 1.5 hours (IQR: 0.9–2.0)) and 209 to standard care IS (median: 44.0 hours (IQR: 22.9–72.6)). At 12 months, there was no significant difference in the primary outcome between the early IS (5.9%) and standard IS (6.7%) groups (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.09; p=0.86). The incidence of stroke and major bleeding was similar. The length of hospital stay was reduced with a very early IS (3.9 days (SD 6.5) vs 6.3 days (SD 7.6), p<0.01). Conclusions A strategy of very early IS did not improve clinical outcomes compared with a standard care IS in higher risk patients with NSTE-ACS. However, the primary outcome rate was low and the trial was underpowered to detect such a difference