The 'number needed to treat' metric: a further marker of the impact of COVID-19 on malignant melanomas.

We comment on a previous article, describing the number needed to treat metric as a further marker on the impact of COVID-19 on treatment of malignant melanomas.

When your immune system falls out with your heart: an important lesson on antisynthetase myocarditis.

A 57-year-old special Olympics athlete presented with subacute onset dyspnoea. Baseline investigations revealed troponin T rise and an abnormal ECG, which prompted coronary angiography. This was unremarkable, as was his transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). He re-presented 7 months later with progressive dyspnoea associated with significant weight loss, peripheral oedema and intermittent fevers. Examination revealed bilateral fine end-inspiratory crackles, peripheral oedema and fever. Investigations revealed elevated troponin T and raised inflammatory markers. ECG remained unchanged, whereas TTE revealed mild global impairment of left ventricular function. Chest radiography was suggestive of extensive interstitial lung disease, which was confirmed by high resolution CT. Presence of interstitial lung disease and myocarditis raised the suspicion of a systemic inflammatory condition. Subsequently, an autoimmune screen was positive for anti-Jo-1 antibody associated with antisynthetase syndrome. He was treated with high-dose steroids and rituximab with dramatic symptomatic improvement and immediate fall in troponin T level.

Screening uptake rates and the clinical and cost effectiveness of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in primary versus secondary care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The risks associated with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are well recognized, and there is increasing evidence to support treatment of the condition. However, clear guidance on the ideal approach to screening for GDM is lacking. Professional groups continue to debate whether selective screening (based on risk factors) or universal screening is the most appropriate approach. Additionally, there is ongoing debate about what levels of glucose abnormalities during pregnancy respond best to treatment and which maternal and neonatal outcomes benefit most from treatment. Furthermore, the implications of possible screening options on health care costs are not well established. In response to this uncertainty there have been repeated calls for well-designed, randomised trials to determine the efficacy of screening, diagnosis, and management plans for GDM. We describe a randomised controlled trial to investigate screening uptake rates and the clinical and cost effectiveness of screening in primary versus secondary care settings. METHODS/DESIGN: This will be an unblinded, two-group, parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT). The target population includes 784 women presenting for their first antenatal visit at 12 to 18 weeks gestation at two hospitals in the west of Ireland: Galway University Hospital and Mayo General Hospital. Participants will be offered universal screening for GDM at 24 to 28 weeks gestation in either primary care (n=392) or secondary care (n=392) locations. The primary outcome variable is the uptake rate of screening. Secondary outcomes include indicators of clinical effectiveness of screening at each screening site (primary and secondary) including gestational week at time of screening, time to access antenatal diabetes services for women diagnosed with GDM, and pregnancy and neonatal outcomes for women with GDM. In addition, parallel economic and qualitative evaluations will be conducted. The trial will cover the period from the woman's first hospital antenatal visit at 12 to 18 weeks gestation, until the completion of the pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN02232125.