Randomised open-label trial comparing intravenous iron and an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent versus oral iron to treat preoperative anaemia in cardiac surgery (INITIATE trial).

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anaemia is a risk factor for adverse postoperative outcomes after cardiac surgery. Iron deficiency is a frequent cause of low preoperative haemoglobin. An effective treatment for preoperative anaemia associated with iron deficiency has not been determined. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial, enrolling 156 elective cardiac surgery patients who had low preoperative haemoglobin (100-130 g L-1) with iron deficiency (serum ferritin <100 µg L-1 or transferrin saturation <30%) to compare intravenous ferric derisomaltose 1000 mg and darbepoetin 200 µg subcutaneously (intervention group) with oral ferrous sulphate 600 mg daily (control group). The primary outcome was transfusion of at least one unit of allogeneic red cells during surgery and within the following 5 days. Secondary outcomes included the change in haemoglobin concentration between randomisation and surgery, red cell transfusion volume, postoperative blood loss, pre-specified postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and in-hospital death. RESULTS: The odds of red cell transfusion were lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (adjusted odds ratio=0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.75; P=0.008). Of the secondary outcomes, the only significant difference was the increase in haemoglobin between randomisation and surgery, intervention vs control 9.5 g L-1 (95% CI, 6.8-12.2; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a low preoperative haemoglobin and iron deficiency, preoperative treatment with a single dose of ferric derisomaltose and darbepoetin decreased the proportion of participants who received a perioperative blood transfusion as a consequence of a greater increase in haemoglobin compared with treatment with oral ferrous sulphate. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Number: 41421863; EUDRACT number: 2011-003695-36.

A phase IV randomised, open-label pilot study to evaluate switching from protease-inhibitor based regimen to Bictegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide single tablet regimen in Integrase inhibitor-naïve, virologically suppressed HIV-1 infected adults harbouring drug resistance mutations (PIBIK study): study protocol for a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently recommended boosted protease-inhibitor (bPI) regimens may be associated with increased risk of cardiovascular or chronic kidney diseases; in addition, boosted regimens are particularly associated with drug-drug interactions. Since both cardiovascular and renal disease, and polypharmacy, are common in ageing people with HIV, there is a need for alternative efficacious regimens. bPI-based regimens are often the treatment of choice for individuals with pre-treatment or treatment-acquired resistance but it is plausible that carefully selected HIV-positive individuals with drug resistance, who are virologically suppressed on their current bPI regimen, could maintain virological efficacy when switched to bictegravir, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (B/F/TAF) fixed dose combination (FDC). METHODS/DESIGN: A phase IV, investigator-initiated, multicentre, open label pilot, randomised two-arm study to assess the safety and efficacy of switching from bPI regimen to B/F/TAF single tablet regimen in integrase inhibitor-naïve, virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection harbouring drug resistance mutations. Eligible individuals will either continue on their bPI regimen or switch to B/F/TAF FDC. After 24 weeks, all participants in the bPI arm will be switched to B/F/TAF and followed for a further 24 weeks and all participants will be followed for 48 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint is the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at week 24 using pure virologic response whilst the secondary efficacy endpoint is the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL at Week 48. Other secondary outcome measures include between arm comparisons of drug resistance at virological failure, safety and tolerability and patient-reported outcome measures. DISCUSSION: We aim to provide preliminary evidence of the efficacy of switching to B/F/TAF in patients with virological suppression on a bPI-based regimen who harbour select drug resistance mutations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 44453201 , registered 19 June 2019 and EudraCT 2018-004732-30.

Learning Analytics to Assess Beliefs about Science: Evolution of Expertise as Seen through Biological Inquiry.

Epistemological beliefs about science (EBAS) or beliefs about the nature of science knowledge, and how that knowledge is generated during inquiry, are an essential yet difficult to assess component of science literacy. Leveraging learning analytics to capture and analyze student practices in simulated or game-based authentic science activities is a potential avenue for assessing EBAS. Our previous work characterized inquiry practices of experts and novices engaged in simulated authentic science inquiry and suggested that practices may reflect EBAS. Here, we extend our prior qualitative work to quantitatively examine differences in practices and EBAS between non-science majors, biology majors, and biology graduates. We observed that inquiry practices of non-science majors and biology graduates were similar to the novice and expert practices, respectively, in our prior work. However, biology majors sometimes appeared to act like their undergraduate peers (e.g., performing fewer planning actions) but other times were more similar to biology graduates (e.g., performing complex investigations). We noted that cognitive constructs like metacognition were also important for understanding which practices were most likely to be reflective of EBAS. This work advances how to assess EBAS using learning analytics and raises questions regarding the development of cognitive processes like EBAS among aspiring biologists.