Relation between plasma lactate concentration and fat oxidation rates over a wide range of exercise intensities

The classical human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DRB1*03:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:01 alleles are established autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) risk alleles. To study the immune-modifying effect of these alleles, we imputed the genotypes from genome-wide association data in 649 Dutch AIH type-1 patients. We therefore compared the international AIH group (IAIHG) diagnostic scores as well as the underlying clinical characteristics between patients positive and negative for these HLA alleles. Seventy-five percent of the AIH patients were HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01 positive. HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01-positive patients had a higher median IAIHG score than HLA-DRB1*03:01/HLA-DRB1*04:01-negative patients (P<0.001). We did not observe associations between HLA alleles and alanine transaminase levels (HLA-DRB1*03:01: P=0.2; HLA-DRB1*04:01; P=0.5); however, HLA-DRB1*03:01 was independently associated with higher immunoglobulin G levels (P=0.04). The HLA-DRB1*04:01 allele was independently associated with presentation at older age (P=0.03) and a female predominance (P=0.04). HLA-DRB1*03:01-positive patients received immunosuppressive medication and liver transplantation. In conclusion, the HLA-DRB1*03:01 and HLA-DRB1*04:01 alleles are both independently associated with the aggregate diagnostic IAIHG score in type-1 AIH patients, but are not essential for AIH development. HLA-DRB1*03:01 is the strongest genetic modifier of disease severity in AIH

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. METHODS: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-001038-91 . Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial) : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. METHODS: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06890-w

Assessing the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in patients with autoimmune hepatitis (CAMARO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. Methods: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. Discussion: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. Trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. Graphical Abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

Genome-wide association study identifies variants associated with autoimmune hepatitis type 1

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is an uncommon autoimmune liver disease of unknown etiology. We used a genome-wide approach to identify genetic variants that predispose individuals to AIH. METHODS: We performed a genome-wide association study of 649 adults in The Netherlands with AIH type 1 and 13,436 controls. Initial associations were further analyzed in an independent replication panel comprising 451 patients with AIH type 1 in Germany and 4103 controls. We also performed an association analysis in the discovery cohort using imputed genotypes of the major histocompatibility complex region. RESULTS: We associated AIH with a variant in the major histocompatibility complex region at rs2187668 (P = 1.5 x 10(-78)). Analysis of this variant in the discovery cohort identified HLA-DRB1*0301 (P = 5.3 x 10(-49)) as a primary susceptibility genotype and HLA-DRB1*0401 (P = 2.8 x 10(-18)) as a secondary susceptibility genotype. We also associated AIH with variants of SH2B3 (rs3184504, 12q24; P = 7.7 x 10(-8)) and CARD10 (rs6000782, 22q13.1; P = 3.0 x 10(-6)). In addition, strong inflation of association signal was found with single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with other immune-mediated diseases, including primary sclerosing cholangitis and primary biliary cirrhosis, but not with single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with other genetic traits. CONCLUSIONS: In a genome-wide association study, we associated AIH type 1 with variants in the major histocompatibility complex region, and identified variants of SH2B3and CARD10 as likely risk factors. These findings support a complex genetic basis for AIH pathogenesis and indicate that part of the genetic susceptibility overlaps with that for other immune-mediated liver diseases

Impact of nationwide enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care (PACAP-1): a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 225263.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. Best practices for the use of chemotherapy, enzyme replacement therapy, and biliary drainage have been identified but their implementation in daily clinical practice is often suboptimal. We hypothesized that a nationwide program to enhance implementation of these best practices in pancreatic cancer care would improve survival and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: PACAP-1 is a nationwide multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled superiority trial. In a per-center stepwise and randomized manner, best practices in pancreatic cancer care regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and metal biliary stents are implemented in all 17 Dutch pancreatic centers and their regional referral networks during a 6-week initiation period. Per pancreatic center, one multidisciplinary team functions as reference for the other centers in the network. Key best practices were identified from the literature, 3 years of data from existing nationwide registries within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP), and national expert meetings. The best practices follow the Dutch guideline on pancreatic cancer and the current state of the literature, and can be executed within daily clinical practice. The implementation process includes monitoring, return visits, and provider feedback in combination with education and reminders. Patient outcomes and compliance are monitored within the PACAP registries. Primary outcome is 1-year overall survival (for all disease stages). Secondary outcomes include quality of life, 3- and 5-year overall survival, and guideline compliance. An improvement of 10% in 1-year overall survival is considered clinically relevant. A 25-month study duration was chosen, which provides 80% statistical power for a mortality reduction of 10.0% in the 17 pancreatic cancer centers, with a required sample size of 2142 patients, corresponding to a 6.6% mortality reduction and 4769 patients nationwide. DISCUSSION: The PACAP-1 trial is designed to evaluate whether a nationwide program for enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care can improve 1-year overall survival and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03513705. Trial opened for accrual on 22th May 2018

Association between Clinical Frailty Scale score and hospital mortality in adult patients with COVID-19 (COMET): an international, multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the scarcity of resources has necessitated triage of critical care for patients with the disease. In patients aged 65 years and older, triage decisions are regularly based on degree of frailty measured by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). However, the CFS could also be useful in patients younger than 65 years. We aimed to examine the association between CFS score and hospital mortality and between CFS score and admission to intensive care in adult patients of all ages with COVID-19 across Europe. Methods: This analysis was part of the COVID Medication (COMET) study, an international, multicentre, retrospective observational cohort study in 63 hospitals in 11 countries in Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and older, had been admitted to hospital, and either tested positive by PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or were judged to have a high clinical likelihood of having SARS-CoV-2 infection by the local COVID-19 expert team. CFS was used to assess level of frailty: fit (CFS1–3), mildly frail (CFS4–5), or frail (CFS6–9). The primary outcome was hospital mortality. The secondary outcome was admission to intensive care. Data were analysed using a multivariable binary logistic regression model adjusted for covariates (age, sex, number of drugs prescribed, and type of drug class as a proxy for comorbidities). Findings: Between March 30 and July 15, 2020, 2434 patients (median age 68 years [IQR 55–77]; 1480 [61%] men, 954 [30%] women) had CFS scores available and were included in the analyses. In the total sample and in patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients and mildly frail patients had a significantly higher risk of hospital mortality than fit patients (total sample: CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 odds ratio [OR] 2·71 [95% CI 2·04–3·60], p<0·0001 and CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 1·54 [1·16–2·06], p=0·0030; age ≥65 years: CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 OR 2·90 [2·12–3·97], p<0·0001 and CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 1·64 [1·20–2·25], p=0·0020). In patients younger than 65 years, an increased hospital mortality risk was only observed in frail patients (CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 OR 2·22 [1·08–4·57], p=0·030; CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 1·08 [0·48–2·39], p=0·86). Frail patients had a higher incidence of admission to intensive care than fit patients (CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 OR 1·54 [1·21–1·97], p=0·0010), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 0·71 [0·55–0·92], p=0·0090). Among patients younger than 65 years, frail patients had an increased incidence of admission to intensive care (CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 OR 2·96 [1·98–4·43], p<0·0001), whereas mildly frail patients had no significant difference in incidence compared with fit patients (CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 0·93 [0·63–1·38], p=0·72). Among patients aged 65 years and older, frail patients had no significant difference in the incidence of admission to intensive care compared with fit patients (CFS6–9 vs CFS1–3 OR 1·27 [0·92–1·75], p=0·14), whereas mildly frail patients had a lower incidence than fit patients (CFS4–5 vs CFS1–3 OR 0·66 [0·47–0·93], p=0·018). Interpretation: The results of this study suggest that CFS score is a suitable risk marker for hospital mortality in adult patients with COVID-19. However, treatment decisions based on the CFS in patients younger than 65 years should be made with caution. Funding: LOEY Foundation