Effect of dietary protein restriction on nutritional status in the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study

Effect of dietary protein restriction on nutritional status in the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study. The safety of dietary protein and phosphorous restriction was evaluated in the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study. In Study A, 585 patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of 25 to 55 ml/min/1.73m2 were randomly assigned to a usual-protein diet (1.3 g/kg/day) or a low-protein diet (0.58 g/kg/day). In Study B, 255 patients with a GFR of 13 to 24 ml/min/1.73m2 were randomly assigned to the low-protein diet or a very-low-protein diet (0.28 g/kg/day), supplemented with a ketoacid-amino acid mixture (0.28 g/kg/day). The low-protein and very-low-protein diets were also low in phosphorus. Mean duration of follow-up was 2.2 years in both studies. Protein and energy intakes were lower in the low-protein and very-low-protein diet groups than in the usual-protein group. Two patients in Study B reached a “stop point” for malnutrition. There was no difference between randomized groups in the rates of death, first hospitalizations, or other “stop points” in either study. Mean values for various indices of nutritional status remained within the normal range during follow-up in each diet group. However, there were small but significant changes from baseline in some nutritional indices, and differences between the randomized groups in some of these changes. In the low-protein and very-low-protein diet groups, serum albumin rose, while serum transferrin, body wt, percent body fat, arm muscle area and urine creatinine excretion declined. Combining patients in both diet groups in each study, a lower achieved protein intake (from food and supplement) was not correlated with a higher rate of death, hospitalization or stop points, or with a progressive decline in any of the indices of nutritional status after controlling for baseline nutritional status and follow-up energy intake. These analyses suggest that the low-protein and very-low-protein diets used in the MDRD Study are safe for periods of two to three years. Nonetheless, both protein and energy intake declined and there were small but significant declines in various indices of nutritional status. These declines are of concern because of the adverse effect of protein calorie malnutrition in patients with end-stage renal disease. Physicians who prescribe low-protein diets must carefully monitor patients' protein and energy intake and nutritional status

Clinical Trials and Medical Care: Defining the Therapeutic Misconception

A key component of informed consent to participate in medical research includes understanding that research is not the same as treatment

Imaging Immune Surveillance of Individual Natural Killer Cells Confined in Microwell Arrays

New markers are constantly emerging that identify smaller and smaller subpopulations of immune cells. However, there is a growing awareness that even within very small populations, there is a marked functional heterogeneity and that measurements at the population level only gives an average estimate of the behaviour of that pool of cells. New techniques to analyze single immune cells over time are needed to overcome this limitation. For that purpose, we have designed and evaluated microwell array systems made from two materials, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) and silicon, for high-resolution imaging of individual natural killer (NK) cell responses. Both materials were suitable for short-term studies (<4 hours) but only silicon wells allowed long-term studies (several days). Time-lapse imaging of NK cell cytotoxicity in these microwell arrays revealed that roughly 30% of the target cells died much more rapidly than the rest upon NK cell encounter. This unexpected heterogeneity may reflect either separate mechanisms of killing or different killing efficiency by individual NK cells. Furthermore, we show that high-resolution imaging of inhibitory synapse formation, defined by clustering of MHC class I at the interface between NK and target cells, is possible in these microwells. We conclude that live cell imaging of NK-target cell interactions in multi-well microstructures are possible. The technique enables novel types of assays and allow data collection at a level of resolution not previously obtained. Furthermore, due to the large number of wells that can be simultaneously imaged, new statistical information is obtained that will lead to a better understanding of the function and regulation of the immune system at the single cell level

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Therapeutic misconception in early phase gene transfer trials

Many subjects in early phase clinical trials expect to benefit in some way from the research intervention. It is understandable that people hope for improvement in their condition, no matter what the evidence. Yet unreasonable expectation of medical benefit may reflect problems with informed consent: Investigators may not disclose clearly that direct medical benefit from an early phase experimental intervention is unlikely or impossible, or subjects may not appreciate the differences between treatment and research. This paper presents findings from recent interviews with researchers and subjects and analysis of consent forms in early phase gene transfer research, a cutting-edge technology often called 'gene therapy'. We use three variables to construct a composite measure of therapeutic misconception TM, tapping misconceptions about the purposes of early phase research and the potential for direct medical benefit in these trials. Our multivariate model demonstrates the importance of both subject- and study-level factors as predictors of this TM index: education, disease type, and communication by study personnel about the likelihood of benefit. We hope that this work will deepen the discussion of how to define and measure TM, and refine the specification of factors that are related to subjects' TM.USA Clinical trials Informed consent Therapeutic misconception Gene transfer research Benefit