A Lay Health Worker Intervention to Increase Uptake and Completion of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Assessing Fidelity of Intervention Delivery

“This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease on 17 Aug 2020, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2020.1797658

Virtual Touch (TM) Quantification to Diagnose and Monitor Liver Fibrosis in Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

King’s Technology Evaluation Centre is funded by NICE to act as an External Assessment Centre for the Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme. The NHS has a financial interest in the guidance issued by NICE as a result of this work and two authors are NHS employees (Prof. Keevil and Dr. Lewis

A Multicenter Prospective Study to Investigate the Diagnostic Accuracy of the SeHCAT Test in Measuring Bile Acid Malabsorption: Research Protocol

BACKGROUND: Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is one possible explanation for chronic diarrhea. BAM may be idiopathic, or result from ileal resection or inflammation including Crohn’s disease, or may be secondary to other conditions, including cholecystectomy, peptic ulcer surgery, and chronic pancreatitis. No “gold standard” exists for clinical diagnosis of BAM, but response to treatment with a bile acid sequestrant (BAS) is often accepted as confirmation. The SeHCAT (tauroselcholic [selenium-75] acid) test uses a radiolabeled synthetic bile acid and provides a diagnostic test for BAM, but its performance against “trial of treatment” is unknown. Fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF-19) and 7-alpha-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) also offer potential new biomarkers of BAM. OBJECTIVE: This protocol describes a multicenter prospective study to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of SeHCAT and 2 biomarkers in predicting BAM as assessed by trial of treatment. METHODS: Participating gastroenterology centers should have a minimum workload of 30 SeHCAT patients per annum. Patients should not be pregnant, on medication that could confound follow-up, or have any severe comorbidity. All eligible patients attending a gastrointestinal appointment will be invited to participate. On attending the SeHCAT test, blood and fecal samples will be collected for analysis of FGF-19 by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and for C4 and fractionated bile acids by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. A capsule containing radiolabeled SeHCAT will be administered orally and a scan performed to measure SeHCAT activity. Patients will return on day 7 to undergo a second scan to measure percentage SeHCAT retention. The test result will be concealed from clinicians and patients. BAS will be dispensed to all patients, with a follow-up gastroenterologist appointment at 2 weeks for clinical assessment of treatment response and adherence. Patients responding positively will continue treatment for a further 2 weeks and all patients will have a final follow-up at 8 weeks. The diagnostic accuracy of the SeHCAT test and biomarkers will be analyzed at different thresholds using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, likelihood ratios, and area under the curve in a sample of 600 patients. Multivariable logistic regression models will be used to assess the association between presence of BAM and continuous SeHCAT retention levels after adjustment for confounders. RESULTS: Funding is being sought to conduct this research. CONCLUSIONS: The SeHCAT test for diagnosis of BAM has been in common use in the United Kingdom for more than 30 years and an evidence-based assessment of its accuracy is overdue. The proposed study has some challenges. Some forms of BAS treatment are unpleasant due to the texture and taste of the resin powder, which may negatively affect recruitment and treatment adherence. Trial of treatment is not as “golden” a standard as would be ideal, and itself warrants further study

Multicentre prospective survey of SeHCAT provision and practice in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: A clinical diagnosis of bile acid malabsorption (BAM) can be confirmed using SeHCAT (tauroselcholic ((75)selenium) acid), a radiolabelled synthetic bile acid. However, while BAM can be the cause of chronic diarrhoea, it is often overlooked as a potential diagnosis. Therefore, we investigated the use of SeHCAT for diagnosis of BAM in UK hospitals. DESIGN: A multicentre survey was conducted capturing centre and patient-level information detailing patient care-pathways, clinical history, SeHCAT results, treatment with bile acid sequestrants (BAS), and follow-up in clinics. Eligible data from 38 centres and 1036 patients were entered into a validated management system. RESULTS: SeHCAT protocol varied between centres, with no standardised patient positioning, and differing referral systems. Surveyed patients had a mean age of 50 years and predominantly women (65%). The mean SeHCAT retention score for all patients was 19% (95% CI 17.8% to 20.3%). However, this differed with suspected BAM type: type 1: 9% (95% CI 6.3% to 11.4%), type 2: 21% (95% CI 19.2% to 23.0%) and type 3: 22% (95% CI 19.6% to 24.2%). Centre-defined ‘abnormal’ and ‘borderline’ results represented over 50% of the survey population. BAS treatment was prescribed to only 73% of patients with abnormal results. CONCLUSIONS: The study identified a lack of consistent cut-off/threshold values, with differing centre criteria for defining an ‘abnormal’ SeHCAT result. BAS prescription was not related in a simple way to the SeHCAT result, nor to the centre-defined result, highlighting a lack of clear patient care-pathways. There is a clear need for a future diagnostic accuracy study and a better understanding of optimal management pathways

The geko™ Electro-Stimulation Device for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis:A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

The geko™ device is a single-use, battery-powered, neuromuscular electrostimulation device that aims to reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) selected the geko™ device for evaluation, and invited the manufacturer, Firstkind Ltd, to submit clinical and economic evidence. King’s Technology Evaluation Centre, an External Assessment Centre (EAC) commissioned by the NICE, independently assessed the evidence submitted. The sponsor submitted evidence related to the geko™ device and, in addition, included studies of other related devices as further clinical evidence to support a link between increased blood flow and VTE prophylaxis. The EAC assessed this evidence, conducted its own systematic review and concluded that there is currently limited direct evidence that geko™ prevents VTE. The sponsor’s cost model is based on the assumption that patients with an underlying VTE risk and subsequently treated with geko™ will experience a reduction in their baseline risk. The EAC assessed this cost model but questioned the validity of some model assumptions. Using the EACs revised cost model, the cost savings for geko™ prophylaxis against a ‘no prophylaxis’ strategy were estimated as £197 per patient. Following a second public consultation, taking into account a change in the original draft recommendations, the NICE medical technologies guidance MTG19 was issued in June 2014. This recommended the adoption of the geko™ for use in people with a high risk of VTE and when other mechanical/pharmacological methods of prophylaxis are impractical or contraindicated in selected patients within the National Health Service in England