A randomised, multi-centre trial of total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis in the treatment of patients with end stage ankle osteoarthritis (TARVA): statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: The total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis (TARVA) trial aims to determine which surgical procedure confers the greatest improvement in pain-free function for patients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis. Both procedures are effective but there has not yet been a direct comparison to establish which is superior. This article describes the statistical analysis plan for this trial as an update to the published protocol. It is written prior to the end of patient follow-up, while the outcome of the trial is still unknown. DESIGN AND METHODS: TARVA is a randomised, un-blinded, parallel group trial of total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis. The primary outcome is the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score at 52 weeks post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include measures of pain, social interaction, physical function, quality of life, and range of motion. We describe in detail the statistical aspects of TARVA: the outcome measures, the sample size calculation, general analysis principles including treatment of missing data, the planned descriptive statistics and statistical models, and planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: The TARVA statistical analysis will provide comprehensive and precise information on the relative effectiveness of the two treatments. The plan will be implemented in January 2020 when follow-up for the trial is completed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry number 60672307, ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02128555. Registered 1 May 2014. Recruitment started in January 2015 and ended in January 2019

Total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis for patients aged 50-85 years with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis: the TARVA RCT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and complication rates of total ankle replacement with those of arthrodesis (i.e. ankle fusion) in the treatment of end-stage ankle osteoarthritis. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Patients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis who were aged 50-85 years and were suitable for both procedures were recruited from 17 UK hospitals and randomised using minimisation. The primary outcome was the change in the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain scores between the preoperative baseline and 52 weeks post surgery. RESULTS: Between March 2015 and January 2019, 303 participants were randomised using a minimisation algorithm: 152 to total ankle replacement and 151 to ankle fusion. At 52 weeks, the mean (standard deviation) Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score was 31.4 (30.4) in the total ankle replacement arm (n = 136) and 36.8 (30.6) in the ankle fusion arm (n = 140); the adjusted difference in the change was -5.6 (95% confidence interval -12.5 to 1.4; p = 0.12) in the intention-to-treat analysis. By week 52, one patient in the total ankle replacement arm required revision. Rates of wound-healing issues (13.4% vs. 5.7%) and nerve injuries (4.2% vs. < 1%) were higher and the rate of thromboembolic events was lower (2.9% vs. 4.9%) in the total ankle replacement arm than in the ankle fusion arm. The bone non-union rate (based on plain radiographs) in the ankle fusion arm was 12.1%, but only 7.1% of patients had symptoms. A post hoc analysis of fixed-bearing total ankle replacement showed a statistically significant improvement over ankle fusion in Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score (-11.1, 95% confidence interval -19.3 to -2.9; p = 0.008). We estimate a 69% likelihood that total ankle replacement is cost-effective compared with ankle fusion at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the patient's lifetime. LIMITATIONS: This initial report contains only 52-week data, which must therefore be interpreted with caution. In addition, the pragmatic nature of the study means that there was heterogeneity between surgical implants and techniques. The trial was run across 17 NHS centres to ensure that decision-making streams reflected the standard of care in the NHS as closely as possible. CONCLUSIONS: Both total ankle replacement and ankle fusion improved patients' quality of life at 1 year, and both appear to be safe. When total ankle replacement was compared with ankle fusion overall, we were unable to show a statistically significant difference between the two arms in terms of our primary outcome measure. The total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis (TARVA) trial is inconclusive in terms of superiority of total ankle replacement, as the 95% confidence interval for the adjusted treatment effect includes both a difference of zero and the minimal important difference of 12, but it can rule out the superiority of ankle fusion. A post hoc analysis comparing fixed-bearing total ankle replacement with ankle fusion showed a statistically significant improvement of total ankle replacement over ankle fusion in Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score. Total ankle replacement appears to be cost-effective compared with ankle fusion at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over a patient's lifetime based on long-term economic modelling. FUTURE WORK: We recommend long-term follow-up of this important cohort, in particular radiological and clinical progress. We also recommend studies to explore the sensitivity of clinical scores to detect clinically important differences between arms when both have already achieved a significant improvement from baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN60672307 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02128555. 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. 27, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Uptake and transport of novel amphiphilic polyelectrolyte-insulin nanocomplexes by caco-2 cells - towards oral insulin

“The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com”. Copyright SpringerPurpose: The influence of polymer architecture on cellular uptake and transport across Caco-2 cells of novel amphiphilic polyelectrolyte-insulin nanocomplexes was investigated. Method: Polyallylamine (PAA) (15 kDa) was grafted with palmitoyl chains (Pa) and subsequently modified with quaternary ammonium moieties (QPa). These two amphiphilic polyelectrolytes (APs) were tagged with rhodamine and their uptake by Caco-2 cells or their polyelectrolyte complexes (PECs) with fluorescein isothiocyanate-insulin (FITC-insulin) uptake were investigated using fluorescence microscopy. The integrity of the monolayer was determined by measurement of transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER). Insulin transport through Caco-2 monolayers was determined during TEER experiments. Result: Pa and insulin were co-localised in the cell membranes while QPa complexes were found within the cytoplasm. QPa complex uptake was not affected by calcium, cytochalasin D or nocodazole. Uptake was reduced by co-incubation with sodium azide, an active transport inhibitor. Both polymers opened tight junctions reversibly where the TEER values fell by up to 35 % within 30 minutes incubation with Caco-2 cells. Insulin transport through monolayers increased when QPa was used (0.27 ngmL-1 of insulin in basal compartment) compared to Pa (0.14 ngmL-1 of insulin in basal compartment) after 2 hours. Conclusion: These APs have been shown to be taken up by Caco-2 cells and reversibly open tight cell junctions. Further work is required to optimise these formulations with a view to maximising their potential to facilitate oral delivery of insulin.Peer reviewe

Healthcare professionals' views of the use of oral morphine and transmucosal diamorphine in the management of paediatric breakthrough pain and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial: A focus group study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain but the oral route is not always available and absorption is slow. Transmucosal diamorphine is administered by buccal, sublingual or intranasal routes, and rapidly absorbed. AIM: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals in the UK caring for children with life-limiting conditions concerning the assessment and management of breakthrough pain; prescribing and administration of transmucosal diamorphine compared with oral morphine; and the feasibility of a comparative clinical trial. DESIGN/ PARTICIPANTS: Three focus groups, analysed using a Framework approach. Doctors, nurses and pharmacists (n = 28), caring for children with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliative care, participated. RESULTS: Oral morphine is frequently used for breakthrough pain across all settings; with transmucosal diamorphine largely limited to use in hospices or given by community nurses, predominantly buccally. Perceived advantages of oral morphine included confidence in its use with no requirement for specific training; disadvantages included tolerability issues, slow onset, unpredictable response and unsuitability for patients with gastrointestinal failure. Perceived advantages of transmucosal diamorphine were quick onset and easy administration; barriers included lack of licensed preparations and prescribing guidance with fears over accountability of prescribers, and potential issues with availability, preparation and palatability. Factors potentially affecting recruitment to a trial were patient suitability and onerousness for families, trial design and logistics, staff time and clinician engagement. CONCLUSIONS: There were perceived advantages to transmucosal diamorphine, but there is a need for access to a safe preparation. A clinical trial would be feasible provided barriers were overcome

Pain assessment tools in paediatric palliative care: A systematic review of psychometric properties and recommendations for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Assessing pain in infants, children and young people with life-limiting conditions remains a challenge due to diverse patient conditions, types of pain and often a reduced ability or inability of patients to communicate verbally. AIM: To systematically identify pain assessment tools that are currently used in paediatric palliative care and examine their psychometric properties and feasibility and make recommendations for clinical practice. DESIGN: A systematic literature review and evaluation of psychometric properties of pain assessment tools of original peer-reviewed research published from inception of data sources to April 2021. DATA SOURCES: PsycINFO via ProQuest, Web of Science Core, Medline via Ovid, EMBASE, BIOSIS and CINAHL were searched from inception to April 2021. Hand searches of reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews were performed. RESULTS: From 1168 articles identified, 201 papers were selected for full-text assessment. Thirty-four articles met the eligibility criteria and we examined the psychometric properties of 22 pain assessment tools. Overall, the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) had high cross-cultural validity, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and responsiveness; while the Faces, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale and Paediatric Pain Profile (PPP) had high internal consistency, criterion validity, reliability and responsiveness. The number of studies per psychometric property of each pain assessment tool was limited and the methodological quality of included studies was low. CONCLUSION: Balancing aspects of feasibility and psychometric properties, the FPS-R is recommended for self-assessment, and the FLACC scale/FLACC Revised and PPP are the recommended observational tools in their respective age groups

Albumin Counteracts Immune-Suppressive Effects of Lipid Mediators in Patients With Advanced Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with acute decompensation and acute-on-chronic liver failure (AD/ACLF) have immune dysfunction, which increases their risk for infections; however, there are no effective treatments to restore their immune function. We investigated whether the potentially immune-restorative effects of albumin are mediated by its effects on prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and other lipids. METHODS: We analyzed bloods samples from 45 of 79 patients with AD/ACLF and serum levels of albumin less than 30 g/L for whom infusion of 20% human albumin solution (HAS) increased serum levels of albumin 30 g/L or more in a feasibility study of effects of 20% HAS. Immune function was determined by comparison of macrophage function following addition of plasma samples. We also used samples from 12 healthy individuals. We measured binding of plasma proteins to PGE2 and serum levels of endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide) and cytokines; using 10 patients' samples, we investigated the effects of PGE2 inhibitors. We performed a comprehensive lipid metabolomic analysis using samples from 10 different patients, before and after HAS administration. RESULTS: At baseline, AD/ACLF patient plasma induced significantly lower production of tumor necrosis factor by healthy macrophages than plasma from healthy individuals (P < .0001). Plasma from patients after HAS infusion induced significantly higher levels of tumor necrosis factor production by macrophages (19.5 ± 4.8 ng/mL) compared with plasma collected before treatment (17.7 ± 4.5 ng/mL; P = .0013). There was a significantly lower proportion of plasma protein (albumin) binding to PGE2 from patients with AD/ACLF plasma (mean, 61.9%) compared with plasma from control subjects (77.1%; P = .0012). AD/ACLF plasma protein binding to PGE2 increased following HAS treatment compared with baseline (mean increase, 8.7%; P < .0001). Circulating levels of PGE2, lipopolysaccharide, and inflammatory or anti-inflammatory cytokines were higher in patients with AD/ACLF than healthy volunteers. Unexpectedly, HAS infusion had no effect on mediator levels. Principal component analysis of baseline levels of lipids that induce or resolve inflammation identified 2 distinct groups of patients that differed according to baseline plasma level of lipopolysaccharide. Sample analyses after HAS treatment indicated that albumin regulates circulating levels of lipid mediators, but this effect was distinct in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of blood samples from patients with AD/ACLF participating in a feasibility study of 20% HAS infusions has shown that infusions to raise serum albumin above 30 g/L reversed plasma-mediated immune dysfunction by binding and inactivating PGE2. We also describe a method to classify the inflammatory response in AD/ACLF, based on lipid profile, which could improve identification of patients most likely to respond to HAS treatment. A randomized controlled trial is needed to determine whether these effects of HAS reduce infections in AD/ACLF. Trial registered with European Medicines Agency (EudraCT 2014-002300-24) and adopted by NIHR (ISRCTN14174793).Health Innovation Challenge fund (Wellcome Trust and Department of Health) award number 164699. This publication presents independent research commissioned by the Health Innovation Challenge Fund, a parallel funding partnership between the Department of Health and Wellcome Trust

Ex Vivo Treatment with a Novel Synthetic Aminoglycoside NB54 in Primary Fibroblasts from Rett Syndrome Patients Suppresses MECP2 Nonsense Mutations

BACKGROUND: Nonsense mutations in the X-linked methyl CpG-binding protein 2 (MECP2) comprise a significant proportion of causative MECP2 mutations in Rett syndrome (RTT). Naturally occurring aminoglycosides, such as gentamicin, have been shown to enable partial suppression of nonsense mutations related to several human genetic disorders, however, their clinical applicability has been compromised by parallel findings of severe toxic effects. Recently developed synthetic NB aminoglycosides have demonstrated significantly improved effects compared to gentamicin evident in substantially higher suppression and reduced acute toxicity in vitro. RESULTS: We performed comparative study of suppression effects of the novel NB54 and gentamicin on three MECP2 nonsense mutations (R294X, R270X and R168X) common in RTT, using ex vivo treatment of primary fibroblasts from RTT patients harboring these mutations and testing for the C-terminal containing full-length MeCP2. We observed that NB54 induces dose-dependent suppression of MECP2 nonsense mutations more efficiently than gentamicin, which was evident at concentrations as low as 50 µg/ml. NB54 read-through activity was mutation specific, with maximal full-length MeCP2 recovery in R168X (38%), R270X (27%) and R294X (18%). In addition, the recovered MeCP2 was translocated to the cell nucleus and moreover led to parallel increase in one of the most important MeCP2 downstream effectors, the brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that NB54 may induce restoration of the potentially functional MeCP2 in primary RTT fibroblasts and encourage further studies of NB54 and other rationally designed aminoglycoside derivatives as potential therapeutic agents for nonsense MECP2 mutations in RTT

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences