Patient adherence to and tolerability of self-administered interferon β-1a using an electronic autoinjection device: a multicentre, open-label, phase IV study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Achieving good adherence to self-injected treatments for multiple sclerosis can be difficult. Injection devices may help to overcome some of the injection-related barriers to adherence that can be experienced by patients. We sought to assess short-term adherence to, and tolerability of, interferon (IFN) β-1a administered via electronic autoinjection device in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>BRIDGE (RebiSmart to self-inject Rebif serum-free formulation in a multidose cartridge) was a 12-week, multicentre, open-label, single-arm, observational, Phase IV study in which patients self-administered IFN β-1a (titrated to 44 μg), subcutaneously (sc), three times weekly, via electronic autoinjection device. Patients were assessed at baseline and 4-weekly intervals to Week 12 or early termination (ET) for: physical examinations; diary card completion (baseline, Weeks 4, 8 only); neurological examinations (baseline, Week 12/ET only); MS Treatment Concern Questionnaire (MSTCQ; Weeks 4, 8, 12 only); Convenience Questionnaire (Week 12 only); Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); and Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task (PASAT; baseline only). Adherence was defined as administration of ≥ 80% of scheduled injections, recorded by the autoinjection device.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, 88.2% (105/119; intent-to-treat population) of patients were adherent; 67.2% (80/119) administered all scheduled injections. Medical reasons accounted for 35.6% (31/87) of missed injections, forgetfulness for 20.6% (18/87). Adherence did not correlate with baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (<it>P </it>= 0.821) or PASAT (<it>P </it>= 0.952) scores, or pre-study therapy (<it>P </it>= 0.303). No significant changes (baseline-Week 12) in mean HADS depression (<it>P </it>= 0.482) or anxiety (<it>P </it>= 0.156) scores were observed. 'Overall convenience' was the most important reported benefit of the autoinjection device. Device features associated with handling and ease of use were highly rated. Mean MSTCQ scores for 'flu-like' symptoms (<it>P </it>= 0.022) and global side effects (<it>P </it>= 0.002) significantly improved from Week 4-12. Mean MSTCQ scores for pain at injection site and injection pain increased from Week 4-12 (<it>P </it>< 0.001). Adverse events were mild/moderate. No new safety signals were identified.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Convenience and ease of use of the autoinjection device may improve adherence and, therefore, outcomes, in patients with RRMS receiving sc IFN β-1a.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>EU Clinical Trials Register (EU-CTR; <url>http://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu</url>): 2009-013333-24</p

Can we prevent or treat multiple sclerosis by individualised vitamin D supply?

Apart from its principal role in bone metabolism and calcium homeostasis, vitamin D has been attributed additional effects including an immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, and possibly even neuroprotective capacity which implicates a possible role of vitamin D in autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis (MS). Indeed, several lines of evidence including epidemiologic, preclinical, and clinical data suggest that reduced vitamin D levels and/or dysregulation of vitamin D homeostasis is a risk factor for the development of multiple sclerosis on the one hand, and that vitamin D serum levels are inversely associated with disease activity and progression on the other hand. However, these data are not undisputable, and many questions regarding the preventive and therapeutic capacity of vitamin D in multiple sclerosis remain to be answered. In particular, available clinical data derived from interventional trials using vitamin D supplementation as a therapeutic approach in MS are inconclusive and partly contradictory. In this review, we summarise and critically evaluate the existing data on the possible link between vitamin D and multiple sclerosis in light of the crucial question whether optimization of vitamin D status may impact the risk and/or the course of multiple sclerosis

Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Despite current guidelines, intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery remains widespread. Drains were not associated with earlier detection of intraperitoneal collections, but were associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased risk of surgical-site infections.Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P &lt; 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk