Community use of oral antibiotics transiently reprofiles the intestinal microbiome in young Bangladeshi children.

Antibiotics may alter the gut microbiome, and this is one of the mechanisms by which antimicrobial resistance may be promoted. Suboptimal antimicrobial stewardship in Asia has been linked to antimicrobial resistance. We aim to examine the relationship between oral antibiotic use and composition and antimicrobial resistance in the gut microbiome in 1093 Bangladeshi infants. We leverage a trial of 8-month-old infants in rural Bangladesh: 61% of children were cumulatively exposed to antibiotics (most commonly cephalosporins and macrolides) over the 12-month study period, including 47% in the first 3 months of the study, usually for fever or respiratory infection. 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing in 11-month-old infants reveals that alpha diversity of the intestinal microbiome is reduced in children who received antibiotics within the previous 7 days; these samples also exhibit enrichment for Enterococcus and Escherichia/Shigella genera. No effect is seen in children who received antibiotics earlier. Using shotgun metagenomics, overall abundance of antimicrobial resistance genes declines over time. Enrichment for an Enterococcus-related antimicrobial resistance gene is observed in children receiving antibiotics within the previous 7 days, but not earlier. Presence of antimicrobial resistance genes is correlated to microbiome composition. In Bangladeshi children, community use of antibiotics transiently reprofiles the gut microbiome.

Can flash glucose monitoring improve glucose management for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with type 2 diabetes? A protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are disproportionately impacted by type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology (such as Abbott Freestyle Libre 2, previously referred to as Flash Glucose Monitoring) offers real-time glucose monitoring that is convenient and easy to use compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). However, this technology's use is neither widespread nor subsidised for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with type 2 diabetes. Building on existing collaborations with a national network of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, this randomised controlled trial aims to assess the effect of CGM compared to SMBG on (i) haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), (ii) achieving blood glucose targets, (iii) reducing hypoglycaemic episodes and (iv) cost-effective healthcare in an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people health setting. METHODS: This is a non-masked, parallel-group, two-arm, individually randomised, controlled trial (ACTRN12621000753853). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults with type 2 diabetes on injectable therapy and HbA1c ≥ 7.5% (n = 350) will be randomised (1:1) to CGM or SMBG for 6 months. The primary outcome is change in HbA1c level from baseline to 6 months. Secondary outcomes include (i) CGM-derived metrics, (ii) frequency of hypoglycaemic episodes, (iii) health-related quality of life and (iv) incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained associated with the CGM compared to SMBG. Clinical trial sites include Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations, Aboriginal Medical Services, primary care centres and tertiary hospitals across urban, rural, regional and remote Australia. DISCUSSION: The trial will assess the effect of CGM compared to SMBG on HbA1c for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with type 2 diabetes in Australia. This trial could have long-term benefits in improving diabetes management and providing evidence for funding of CGM in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621000753853. Registered on 15th June 2021.

Eggsurance? A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for elective egg freezing.

STUDY QUESTION: Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER: The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Elective egg-freezing decisions are complex, with 78% of women reporting high decisional conflict. Decision Aids are used to support complex health decisions. We developed an online Decision Aid for women considering EEF and demonstrated that it was acceptable and useful in Phase 1 testing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A single-blind, two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial was carried out. Target sample size was 286 participants. Randomization was 1:1 to the control (existing website information) or intervention (Decision Aid plus existing website information) group and stratified by Australian state/territory and prior IVF specialist consultation. Participants were recruited between September 2020 and March 2021 with outcomes recorded over 12 months. Data were collected using online surveys and data collection was completed in March 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Females aged ≥18 years, living in Australia, considering EEF, proficient in English, and with internet access were recruited using multiple methods including social media posts, Google advertising, newsletter/noticeboard posts, and fertility clinic promotion. After completing the baseline survey, participants were emailed their allocated website link(s). Follow-up surveys were sent at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Other outcomes included distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale), knowledge about egg freezing and female age-related infertility (study-specific measure), whether a decision was made, preparedness to decide about egg freezing (Preparation for Decision-Making Scale), informed choice (Multi-Dimensional Measure of Informed Choice), and decision regret (Decision Regret Scale). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Overall, 306 participants (mean age 30 years; SD: 5.2) were randomized (intervention n = 150, control n = 156). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were significantly lower at 12 months (mean score difference: -6.99 [95% CI: -12.96, -1.02], P = 0.022) for the intervention versus control group after adjusting for baseline decisional conflict. At 6 months, the intervention group felt significantly more prepared to decide about EEF than the control (mean score difference: 9.22 [95% CI: 2.35, 16.08], P = 0.009). At 12 months, no group differences were observed in distress (mean score difference: 0.61 [95% CI: -3.72, 4.93], P = 0.783), knowledge (mean score difference: 0.23 [95% CI: -0.21, 0.66], P = 0.309), or whether a decision was made (relative risk: 1.21 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.64], P = 0.212). No group differences were found in informed choice (relative risk: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.25], P = 0.983) or decision regret (median score difference: -5.00 [95% CI: -15.30, 5.30], P = 0.337) amongst participants who had decided about EEF by 12 months (intervention n = 48, control n = 45). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Unknown participant uptake and potential sampling bias due to the recruitment methods used and restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some outcomes had small sample sizes limiting the inferences made. The use of study-specific or adapted validated measures may impact the reliability of some results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate a Decision Aid for EEF. The Decision Aid reduced decisional conflict and improved women's preparation for decision making. The tool will be made publicly available and can be tailored for international use. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Decision Aid was developed with funding from the Royal Women's Hospital Foundation and McBain Family Trust. The study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant APP1163202, awarded to M. Hickey, M. Peate, R.J. Norman, and R. Hart (2019-2021). S.S., M.P., D.K., and S.B. were supported by the NHMRC Project Grant APP1163202 to perform this work. R.H. is Medical Director of Fertility Specialists of Western Australia and National Medical Director of City Fertility. He has received grants from MSD, Merck-Serono, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study and is a shareholder of CHA-SMG. R.L. is Director of Women's Health Melbourne (Medical Practice), ANZSREI Executive Secretary (Honorary), RANZCOG CREI Subspecialty Committee Member (Honorary), and a Fertility Specialist at Life Fertility Clinic Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital Public Fertility Service. R.A.A. has received grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. M.H., K.H., and R.J.N. have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001032943. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 August 2020. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 29 September 2020.

Application of the Estimand Framework to Anesthesia Trials.

SUMMARY: Events occurring after randomization, such as use of rescue medication, treatment discontinuation, or death, are common in randomized trials. These events can change either the existence or interpretation of the outcome of interest. However, appropriate handling of these intercurrent events is often unclear. The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) E9(R1) addendum introduced the estimand framework, which aligns trial objectives with the design, conduct, statistical analysis, and interpretation of results. This article describes how the estimand framework can be used in anesthesia trials to precisely define the treatment effect to be estimated, key attributes of an estimand, common intercurrent events in anesthesia trials with strategies for handling them, and use of the estimand framework in a hypothetical anesthesia trial on postoperative delirium. When planning anesthesia trials, clearly defining the estimand is vital to ensure that what is being estimated is clearly understood, is clinically relevant, and helps answer the clinical questions of interest.

Breathing control training for functional seizures: A multi-site, open-label pilot study.

There are no well-validated treatments for functional seizures. While specialist psychotherapy is usually recommended, the evidence for its benefit is qualified, and it can be difficult to obtain. Given the association between hyperventilation and functional seizures we explored an alternative modality, breathing control training, in a multi-site open label pilot trial. Participants with functional seizures over the age of 16 received an hour of breathing training from a respiratory physiotherapist, with a half-hour booster session a month later. Seizure frequency and Nijmegen scores (a measure of hyperventilation) were reported at baseline and follow-up, 3-4 months later. Eighteen subjects were recruited, and 10 completed follow-up. Seven of these 10 had improved seizure frequency, and 3 did not (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p = 0.09), with seizure frequency correlating with Nijmegen score (Spearman's rank correlation = 0.75, p = 0.034). The intervention was well tolerated, with no adverse events reported. These preliminary results support a potentially new approach to treating functional seizures that should prove cost-effective and acceptable, though require confirmation by a randomised controlled trial.

Haemoglobin thresholds to define anaemia from age 6 months to 65 years: estimates from international data sources.

BACKGROUND: Detection of anaemia is crucial for clinical medicine and public health. Current WHO anaemia definitions are based on statistical thresholds (fifth centiles) set more than 50 years ago. We sought to establish evidence for the statistical haemoglobin thresholds for anaemia that can be applied globally and inform WHO and clinical guidelines. METHODS: In this analysis we identified international data sources from populations in the USA, England, Australia, China, the Netherlands, Canada, Ecuador, and Bangladesh with sufficient clinical and laboratory information collected between 1998 and 2020 to obtain a healthy reference sample. Individuals with clinical or biochemical evidence of a condition that could reduce haemoglobin concentrations were excluded. We estimated haemoglobin thresholds (ie, 5th centiles) for children aged 6-23 months, 24-59 months, 5-11 years, and 12-17 years, and adults aged 18-65 years (including during pregnancy) for individual datasets and pooled across data sources. We also collated findings from three large-scale genetic studies to summarise genetic variants affecting haemoglobin concentrations in different ancestral populations. FINDINGS: We identified eight data sources comprising 18 individual datasets that were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. In pooled analyses, the haemoglobin fifth centile was 104·4 g/L (90% CI 103·5-105·3) in 924 children aged 6-23 months, 110·2 g/L (109·5-110·9) in 1874 children aged 24-59 months, and 114·4 g/L (113·6-115·2) in 1839 children aged 5-11 years. Values diverged by sex in adolescents and adults. In pooled analyses, the fifth centile was 122·2 g/L (90% CI 121·3-123·1) in 1741 female adolescents aged 12-17 years and 128·2 g/L (126·4-130·0) in 1103 male adolescents aged 12-17 years. In pooled analyses of adults aged 18-65 years, the fifth centile was 119·7 g/L (90% CI 119·1-120·3) in 3640 non-pregnant females and 134·9 g/L (134·2-135·6) in 2377 males. Fifth centiles in pregnancy were 110·3 g/L (90% CI 109·5-111·0) in the first trimester (n=772) and 105·9 g/L (104·0-107·7) in the second trimester (n=111), with insufficient data for analysis in the third trimester. There were insufficient data for adults older than 65 years. We did not identify ancestry-specific high prevalence of non-clinically relevant genetic variants that influence haemoglobin concentrations. INTERPRETATION: Our results enable global harmonisation of clinical and public health haemoglobin thresholds for diagnosis of anaemia. Haemoglobin thresholds are similar between sexes until adolescence, after which males have higher thresholds than females. We did not find any evidence that thresholds should differ between people of differering ancestries. FUNDING: World Health Organization and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Predictors of liver disease progression in people living with HIV-HBV co-infection on antiretroviral therapy.

BACKGROUND: In people living with HIV-HBV, liver fibrosis progression can occur even with suppressive antiretroviral therapy (ART). We investigated the relationship between liver fibrosis and biomarkers of inflammation, apoptosis, and microbial translocation. METHODS: In this observational cohort study adults living with HIV-HBV already on effective ART were recruited in Australia and Thailand and followed for 3 years including 6 monthly clinical review and blood tests and annual transient elastography. Differences in clinical and laboratory predictors of liver fibrosis progression were tested followed by regression analysis adjusted for CD4+ T-cells at study entry. A linear mixed model was fitted to longitudinal data to explore changes over time. FINDINGS: 67 participants (85% male, median age 49 y) were followed for 175 person-years. Median duration of ART was 10 years (interquartile range (IQR) 8-16 years). We found 11/59 (19%) participants during 3-years follow-up (6/100 person-years) met the primary endpoint of liver disease progression, defined as increased Metavir stage from baseline to final scan. In regression analysis, progressors compared to non-progressors had higher levels of high mobility group box 1 protein (HGMB1), (median (IQR) 3.7 (2.6-5.0) and 2.4 ng/mL (1.5-3.4) respectively, adjusted relative risk 1.47, 95% CI [1.00, 2.17]) and lower nadir CD4+ T-cell percentage (median 4% (IQR 2-8) and 11% (4-15) respectively (relative risk 0.93, 95% CI [0.88, 0.98]). INTERPRETATION: Progression in liver fibrosis occurs in people with HIV-HBV on suppressive ART. Fibrosis progression was associated with higher HMGB1 and lower percentage nadir CD4+ T-cell count, highlighting the importance of early initiation of HBV-active ART. FUNDING: This work was supported by NHMRC project grant 1101836; NHMRC practitioner fellowship 1138581 and NHMRC program grant 1149990. The funder had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation, writing of this manuscript or decision to submit for publication.

On the horns of a dilemma: choosing total intravenous anaesthesia or volatile anaesthesia for cancer surgery, an enduring controversy.

Two methods for administering general anaesthesia are widely used: propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (propofol-TIVA) and inhalation volatile agent-based anaesthesia. Both modalities, which have been standards of care for several decades, boast a robust safety profile. Nevertheless, the potential differential effects of these anaesthetic techniques on immediate, intermediate, and extended postoperative outcomes remain a subject of inquiry. We discuss a recently published longitudinal analysis stemming from a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing sevoflurane-based inhalation anaesthesia with propofol-TIVA in older patients with cancer, which showed a reduced incidence of emergence and postoperative delirium, comparable postoperative complication rates within 30 days after surgery, and comparable long-term survival rates. We undertake an assessment of the trial's methodological strengths and limitations, contextualise its results within the broader scientific evidence, and explore avenues for resolving the extant controversies in anaesthetic choice for cancer surgery. We aim to pave the way for the incorporation of precision medicine paradigms into the evolving landscape of perioperative care for patients with cancer.