Blood Pressure Intervention and Control in SPRINT.

BACKGROUND: The SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) demonstrated reductions in major cardiovascular disease events and mortality with an intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal intervention. However, a detailed description of the blood pressure intervention, antihypertensive medication usage, blood pressure levels, and rates and predictors of blood pressure control has not been reported previously. METHODS: Hypertensive participants (n=9361) 50 years and older with elevated cardiovascular disease risk were randomized 1:1 to SBP goal <120 mm Hg or SBP goal <140 mm Hg. Guideline-recommended antihypertensive medications and dosing were provided at no cost. Intensive group participants were started on at least 2 medications, and medications were adjusted monthly until SBP goal was achieved, if feasible. Standard group participants were treated to achieve SBP 135 to 139 mm Hg. RESULTS: Baseline blood pressure (median±interquartile range) was 138±19/78±16 mm Hg. For intensive group participants, percent at goal rose from 8.9% at baseline to 52.4% at 6 months and average antihypertensive medications rose from 2.2 to 2.7; SBP was <120 mm Hg in 61.6% and <130 mm Hg in 80.0% at their final visit. For the standard group participants, percent at goal rose from 53.0% at baseline to 68.6% at 6 months, while antihypertensive medications fell from 1.9 to 1.8. From 6 to 36 months, median SBP was stable at 119±14 mm Hg for intensive and 136±15 mm Hg for standard participants, with stable numbers of medications. Few predictors of SBP control were found in multiple regression models. CONCLUSIONS: These results may inform and help replicate the benefits of SPRINT in clinical practice. REGISTRATION: URL: http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Defining optimal treatment for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (OpTION study): A randomized, double-blind comparison of three antibiotic regimens for patients with a first or second recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Although many large, randomized controlled trials (RCT) have been conducted on antibiotic therapy for patients with primary C. difficile infections (CDI), few RCTs have been performed for patients with recurrent CDI (rCDI). In addition, fecal microbial transplant (FMT) is neither FDA-approved or guideline-recommended for patients with pauci-rCDI (first or second recurrences). Therefore, a rigorous RCT of sufficient size was designed to determine the optimal treatment among three antibiotic regimens in current practice for treatment of pauci-rCDI. METHODS: VA Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) #596 is a prospective, double-blind, multi-center clinical trial of veteran patients with pauci-rCDI comparing fidaxomicin (FDX) 200 mg twice daily for 10 days and vancomycin (VAN) 125 mg four times daily for 10 days followed by a 3-week vancomycin taper and pulse (VAN-T/P) regimen to a standard course of VAN 125 mg four times daily for 10 days. The primary endpoint is sustained clinical response at day 59, with sustained response measured as a diarrhea composite outcome (D-COM) that includes symptom resolution during treatment (before day 10) without recurrence of diarrhea or other clinically important outcomes through day 59. DISCUSSION: CSP study 596 is designed to compare three current antibiotic treatments for recurrent CDI that are in clinical practice, but which lack high-quality evidence to support strong guideline recommendations. The design of the study which included a pilot phase initiated at six sites with expansion to 24 sites is described along with protocol modifications based on early trial experience and clinical realities including the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02667418).

Rationale, design and methods of VA-BRAVE: a randomized comparative effectiveness trial of two formulations of buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder in veterans.

BACKGROUND: To address the US opioid epidemic, there is an urgent clinical need to provide persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) with effective medication treatments for OUD (MOUD). Formulations of sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP/NLX) are considered the standard of care for OUD including within the Veterans Healthcare Administration (VHA). However, poor retention on MOUD undermines its effectiveness. Long-acting injectable monthly buprenorphine (INJ-BUP) (e.g., Sublocade®) has the potential to improve retention and therefore reduce opioid use and overdose. Designing and conducting studies for OUD pose unique challenges. The strategies and solutions to some of these considerations in designing Cooperative Studies Program (CSP) 2014, Buprenorphine for Treating Opioid Use Disorder in Veterans (VA-BRAVE), a randomized, 20-site, clinical effectiveness trial comparing INJ-BUP to SL-BUP/NLX conducted within the VHA may provide valuable guidance for others confronted with similar investigation challenges. METHODS: This 52-week, parallel group, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of two current FDA-approved formulations of buprenorphine: (1) daily SL-BUP/NLX vs. (2) monthly (28-day) INJ-BUP for Veterans with moderate to severe OUD (n = 952). The primary outcomes are (1) retention in MOUD and (2) opioid abstinence. Secondary outcomes include measures of other drug use, psychiatric symptoms, medical outcomes including prevalence rates of HIV, hepatitis B and C as well as social outcomes (housing instability, criminal justice involvement), service utilization and cost-effectiveness. Special considerations in conducting a comparative effectiveness trial with this population and during COVID-19 pandemic were also included. DISCUSSION: The evaluation of the extended-release formulation of buprenorphine compared to the standard sublingual formulation in real-world VHA settings is of paramount importance in addressing the opioid epidemic. The extent to which this new treatment facilitates retention, decreases opioid use, and prevents severe sequelae of OUD has not been studied in any long-term trial to date. Positive findings in this trial could lead to widespread adoption of MOUD, and, if proven superior INJ-BUP, by clinicians throughout the VHA and beyond. This treatment has the potential to reduce opioid use among Veterans, improve medical, psychological, and social outcomes, and save lives at justifiable cost. Trial registration Registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04375033.

Lithium Treatment in the Prevention of Repeat Suicide-Related Outcomes in Veterans With Major Depression or Bipolar Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Suicide and suicide attempts are persistent and increasing public health problems. Observational studies and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials have suggested that lithium may prevent suicide in patients with bipolar disorder or depression. Objective: To assess whether lithium augmentation of usual care reduces the rate of repeated episodes of suicide-related events (repeated suicide attempts, interrupted attempts, hospitalizations to prevent suicide, and deaths from suicide) in participants with bipolar disorder or depression who have survived a recent event. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial assessed lithium vs placebo augmentation of usual care in veterans with bipolar disorder or depression who had survived a recent suicide-related event. Veterans at 29 VA medical centers who had an episode of suicidal behavior or an inpatient admission to prevent suicide within 6 months were screened between July 1, 2015, and March 31, 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive extended-release lithium carbonate beginning at 600 mg/d or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to the first repeated suicide-related event, including suicide attempts, interrupted attempts, hospitalizations specifically to prevent suicide, and deaths from suicide. Results: The trial was stopped for futility after 519 veterans (mean [SD] age, 42.8 [12.4] years; 437 [84.2%] male) were randomized: 255 to lithium and 264 to placebo. Mean lithium concentrations at 3 months were 0.54 mEq/L for patients with bipolar disorder and 0.46 mEq/L for patients with major depressive disorder. No overall difference in repeated suicide-related events between treatments was found (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.77-1.55). No unanticipated safety concerns were observed. A total of 127 participants (24.5%) had suicide-related outcomes: 65 in the lithium group and 62 in the placebo group. One death occurred in the lithium group and 3 in the placebo group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of lithium to usual Veterans Affairs mental health care did not reduce the incidence of suicide-related events in veterans with major depression or bipolar disorders who experienced a recent suicide event. Therefore, simply adding lithium to existing medication regimens is unlikely to be effective for preventing a broad range of suicide-related events in patients who are actively being treated for mood disorders and substantial comorbidities. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01928446.

Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Study #553: Chemotherapy After Prostatectomy for High-risk Prostate Carcinoma: A Phase III Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program study #553 was designed to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy added to the standard of care (SOC) for patients who are at high risk for relapse after prostatectomy. OBJECTIVE: To test whether addition of chemotherapy to surgery for high-risk prostate cancer improves progression-free survival (PFS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients after prostatectomy were randomized to the SOC group with observation or to the chemotherapy group with docetaxel and prednisone administered every 3 wk for six cycles. Randomization was stratified for prostate-specific antigen, Gleason, tumor stage, and surgical margin status. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints included overall, prostate cancer-specific, and metastasis-free survival, and time to androgen deprivation therapy. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 298 of the planned 636 patients were randomized. The median follow-up was 59.1 mo (0.2-103.7 mo). For the primary endpoint, the two groups did not statistically differ in PFS (median 55.5 mo in the chemotherapy group and 42.2 mo in the SOC group; test adjusted for site via gamma frailty p=0.21; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.11; p=0.18). Prespecified subgroup analyses showed benefit in PFS for patients with tumor stage ≥T3b (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.92; p=0.022) and patients with Gleason score ≤7 (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.99; p=0.046). Secondary endpoint analyses are hampered by low event rates. The most common adverse events (≥grade 3 related or possibly related to chemotherapy) included neutropenia (43%), hyperglycemia (20%), and fatigue (5%), with febrile neutropenia in 2%. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer using docetaxel and prednisone did not lead to statistically significant improvement in PFS for the intention-to-treat population as a whole. The analysis was challenged by lower power due to accrual limitation. Subgroup analyses suggest potential benefit for patients with Gleason grade ≤7 and stage≥pT3b (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00132301). PATIENT SUMMARY: In this randomized trial, we tested whether addition of chemotherapy to surgery for high-risk prostate cancer decreased the risk of prostate-specific antigen rise after surgery. We found no benefit from docetaxel given after radical prostatectomy, although some subgroups of patients may benefit.

Independent home use of a brain-computer interface by people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability and usefulness of an EEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI) for patients with advanced amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) who used it independently at home for up to 18 months. METHODS: Of 42 patients consented, 39 (93%) met the study criteria, and 37 (88%) were assessed for use of the Wadsworth BCI. Nine (21%) could not use the BCI. Of the other 28, 27 (men, age 28-79 years) (64%) had the BCI placed in their homes, and they and their caregivers were trained to use it. Use data were collected by Internet. Periodic visits evaluated BCI benefit and burden and quality of life. RESULTS: Over subsequent months, 12 (29% of the original 42) left the study because of death or rapid disease progression and 6 (14%) left because of decreased interest. Fourteen (33%) completed training and used the BCI independently, mainly for communication. Technical problems were rare. Patient and caregiver ratings indicated that BCI benefit exceeded burden. Quality of life remained stable. Of those not lost to the disease, half completed the study; all but 1 patient kept the BCI for further use. CONCLUSION: The Wadsworth BCI home system can function reliably and usefully when operated by patients in their homes. BCIs that support communication are at present most suitable for people who are severely disabled but are otherwise in stable health. Improvements in BCI convenience and performance, including some now underway, should increase the number of people who find them useful and the extent to which they are used.

Chemoprevention of Basal and Squamous Cell Carcinoma With a Single Course of Fluorouracil, 5%, Cream: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Keratinocyte carcinoma (ie, cutaneous basal and squamous cell carcinoma) is the most common cancer in the United States. Objective: To determine whether topical fluorouracil could prevent surgically treated keratinocyte carcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Veterans Affairs Keratinocyte Carcinoma Chemoprevention Trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of topical fluorouracil for chemoprevention of keratinocyte carcinoma. Participants were recruited from May 2009 to September 2011 from 12 Veterans Affairs medical centers and followed until June 30, 2013. Participants were veterans (n = 932) with a history of at least 2 keratinocyte carcinomas in the past 5 years; almost all were white males and the median age was 70 years. Interventions: Application of fluorouracil, 5%, (n = 468) or vehicle control cream (n = 464) to the face and ears twice daily for 2 to 4 weeks upon randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surgically treated keratinocyte, basal cell, and squamous cell carcinoma risk on the face and ears in the first year after enrollment; and time to first surgically treated keratinocyte, basal cell, and squamous cell carcinoma. The a priori hypothesis was that fluorouracil would be effective in preventing these cancers. Results: Of 932 participants (916 men [98%]; 926 white [99%]; median age, 70 years), 299 developed a basal cell carcinoma end point (95 in year 1) and 108 developed a squamous cell carcinoma end point (25 in year 1) over 4 years (median follow-up, 2.8 years). Over the entire study, there was no difference between treatment groups in time to first keratinocyte, basal cell, or squamous cell carcinoma. During the first year, however, 5 participants (1%) in the fluorouracil group developed a squamous cell carcinoma vs 20 (4%) in the control group, a 75% (95% CI, 35%-91%) risk reduction (P = .002). The 11% reduction in basal cell carcinoma risk during year 1 (45 [10%] in the fluorouracil group vs 50 [11%] in the control group) was not statistically significant (95% CI, 39% reduction to 31% increase), nor was there a significant effect on keratinocyte carcinoma risk. However, a reduction in keratinocyte carcinomas treated with Mohs surgery was observed. Conclusions and Relevance: A conventional course of fluorouracil to the face and ears substantially reduces surgery for squamous cell carcinoma for 1 year without significantly affecting the corresponding risk for basal cell carcinoma. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00847912.

Baseline blood pressure control in Hispanics: characteristics of Hispanics in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial.

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) tested whether a systolic blood pressure (SBP) value <120 mm Hg reduces adverse clinical outcomes compared with the goal of <140 mm Hg. Here the authors describe the baseline characteristics of Hispanic participants in SPRINT. Nondiabetic hypertensive patients 50 years and older with SBP 130-180 mm Hg taking zero to four blood pressure (BP) medications were enrolled from the mainland United States and Puerto Rico. Cross-sectional, bivariate analysis was employed comparing sociodemographic and clinical factors in Hispanics vs non-Hispanics. Multivariable logistic regression models restricted to Hispanics were used to identify factors associated with achieved BP control (SBP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <90 mm Hg) at baseline. Eleven percent (n=984) of SPRINT participants were Hispanic; 56% (n=549) of Hispanics were living in Puerto Rico and the remainder were living on the US mainland. Hispanics overall were younger, more often female, less likely to live alone, and more likely to have lower education and be uninsured, although just as likely to be employed compared with non-Hispanics. BP control was not different between Hispanics vs non-Hispanics at baseline. However, a significantly higher percentage of Hispanics on the US mainland (compared with Hispanics in Puerto Rico) had controlled BP. BP control was independently associated with cardiovascular disease history and functional status among Hispanics, specifically those living in Puerto Rico, whereas functional status was the only independent predictor of BP control identified among mainland Hispanics. These findings highlight the diversity of the SPRINT population. It remains to be seen whether factors identified among Hispanics impact intervention goals and subsequent clinical outcomes.

An economic analysis of robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke is a leading cause of disability. Rehabilitation robotics have been developed to aid in recovery after a stroke. This study determined the additional cost of robot-assisted therapy and tested its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We estimated the intervention costs and tracked participants' healthcare costs. We collected quality of life using the Stroke Impact Scale and the Health Utilities Index. We analyzed the cost data at 36 weeks postrandomization using multivariate regression models controlling for site, presence of a prior stroke, and Veterans Affairs costs in the year before randomization. RESULTS: A total of 127 participants were randomized to usual care plus robot therapy (n=49), usual care plus intensive comparison therapy (n=50), or usual care alone (n=28). The average cost of delivering robot therapy and intensive comparison therapy was $5152 and $7382, respectively (P<0.001), and both were significantly more expensive than usual care alone (no additional intervention costs). At 36 weeks postrandomization, the total costs were comparable for the 3 groups ($17 831 for robot therapy, $19 746 for intensive comparison therapy, and $19 098 for usual care). Changes in quality of life were modest and not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: The added cost of delivering robot or intensive comparison therapy was recuperated by lower healthcare use costs compared with those in the usual care group. However, uncertainty remains about the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted rehabilitation compared with traditional rehabilitation. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00372411.

Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Effective rehabilitative therapies are needed for patients with long-term deficits after stroke. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving 127 patients with moderate-to-severe upper-limb impairment 6 months or more after a stroke, we randomly assigned 49 patients to receive intensive robot-assisted therapy, 50 to receive intensive comparison therapy, and 28 to receive usual care. Therapy consisted of 36 1-hour sessions over a period of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in motor function, as measured on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery after Stroke, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were scores on the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. Secondary analyses assessed the treatment effect at 36 weeks. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the mean Fugl-Meyer score for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy was better than that for patients receiving usual care (difference, 2.17 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.23 to 4.58) and worse than that for patients receiving intensive comparison therapy (difference, -0.14 points; 95% CI, -2.94 to 2.65), but the differences were not significant. The results on the Stroke Impact Scale were significantly better for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy than for those receiving usual care (difference, 7.64 points; 95% CI, 2.03 to 13.24). No other treatment comparisons were significant at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses showed that at 36 weeks, robot-assisted therapy significantly improved the Fugl-Meyer score (difference, 2.88 points; 95% CI, 0.57 to 5.18) and the time on the Wolf Motor Function Test (difference, -8.10 seconds; 95% CI, -13.61 to -2.60) as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with long-term upper-limb deficits after stroke, robot-assisted therapy did not significantly improve motor function at 12 weeks, as compared with usual care or intensive therapy. In secondary analyses, robot-assisted therapy improved outcomes over 36 weeks as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00372411.)

Multicenter randomized trial of robot-assisted rehabilitation for chronic stroke: methods and entry characteristics for VA ROBOTICS.

BACKGROUND: Chronic upper extremity impairment due to stroke has significant medical, psychosocial, and financial consequences, but few studies have examined the effectiveness of rehabilitation therapy during the chronic stroke period. OBJECTIVE: . To test the safety and efficacy of the MIT-Manus robotic device for chronic upper extremity impairment following stroke. METHODS: . The VA Cooperative Studies Program initiated a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in November 2006 (VA ROBOTICS). Participants with upper extremity impairment >/=6 months poststroke were randomized to robot-assisted therapy (RT), intensive comparison therapy (ICT), or usual care (UC). RT and ICT consisted of three 1-hour treatment sessions per week for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was change in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity motor function score at 12 weeks relative to baseline. Secondary outcomes included the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. RESULTS: . A total of 127 participants were randomized: 49 to RT, 50 to ICT, and 28 to UC. The majority of participants were male (96%), with a mean age of 65 years. The primary stroke type was ischemic (85%), and 58% of strokes occurred in the anterior circulation. Twenty percent of the participants reported a stroke in addition to their index stroke. The average time from the index stroke to enrollment was 56 months (range, 6 months to 24 years). The mean Fugl-Meyer score at entry was 18.9. CONCLUSIONS: . VA ROBOTICS demonstrates the feasibility of conducting multicenter clinical trials to rigorously test new rehabilitative devices before their introduction to clinical practice. The results are expected in early 2010.