RESUMO
BACKGROUND: We determined the impact of an increased two-stool faecal immunochemical test (FIT) cut-off on colonoscopy positivity and relative sensitivity and specificity in the randomized controlled screening trial screening of Swedish colons conducted in Sweden. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of participants in the FIT arm that performed FIT between March 2014 and 2020 within the study registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02078804, who had a faecal haemoglobin concentration of at least 10 µg/g in at least one of two stool samples and who underwent a colonoscopy (n = 3841). For each increase in cut-off, we computed the positive predictive value (PPV), numbers needed to scope (NNS), sensitivity and specificity for finding colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced neoplasia (AN; advanced adenoma or CRC) relative to cut-off 10 µg/g. RESULTS: The PPV for AN increased from 23.0% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 22.3%-23.6%) at cut-off 10 µg/g to 28.8% (95% CI: 27.8%-29.7%) and 33.1% (95% CI: 31.9%-34.4%) at cut-offs 20 and 40 µg/g, respectively, whereas the NNS to find a CRC correspondingly decreased from 41 to 27 and 19. The PPV for AN was higher in men than women at each cut-off, for example 31.5% (95% CI: 30.1%-32.8%) in men and 25.6% (95% CI: 24.3%-27.0%) in women at 20 µg/g. The relative sensitivity and relative specificity were similar in men and women at each cut-off. CONCLUSION: A low cut-off of around 20-40 µg/g allows detection and removal of many AN compared to 10 µg/g while reducing the number of colonoscopies in both men and women.
Assuntos
Colonoscopia , Neoplasias Colorretais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Sangue Oculto , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Masculino , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Idoso , Suécia , Fezes/química , Hemoglobinas/análise , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Adenoma/diagnóstico , ImunoquímicaRESUMO
The MAGENTA pragmatic parallel groups randomized controlled trial compared graded exercise therapy (GET) with activity management (AM) in treating paediatric myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). Children aged 8-17 years with mild/moderate ME/CFS and presenting to NHS specialist paediatric services were allocated at random to either individualised flexible treatment focussing on physical activity (GET, 123 participants) or on managing cognitive, school and social activity (AM, 118 participants) delivered by NHS therapists. The primary outcome was the self-reported short-form 36 physical function subscale (SF-36-PFS) after 6 months, with higher scores indicating better functioning. After 6 months, data were available for 201 (83%) participants who received a mean of 3.9 (GET) or 4.6 (AM) treatment sessions. Comparing participants with measured outcomes in their allocated groups, the mean SF-36-PFS score changed from 54.8 (standard deviation 23.7) to 55.7 (23.3) for GET and from 55.5 (23.1) to 57.7 (26.0) for AM giving an adjusted difference in means of -2.02 (95% confidence interval -7.75, 2.70). One hundred thirty-five participants completed the mean SF-36-PFS at 12 months, and whilst further improvement was observed, the difference between the study groups remained consistent with chance. The two study groups showed similar changes on most of the secondary outcome measures: Chalder Fatigue, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Depression, proportion of full-time school attended, a visual analogue pain scale, participant-rated change and accelerometer measured physical activity, whether at the 6-month or 12-month assessment. There was an isolated finding of some evidence of an improvement in anxiety in those allocated to GET, as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months, with the 12-month assessment, and the Spence Children's Anxiety scale being aligned with that finding. There was weak evidence of a greater risk of deterioration with GET (27%) than with AM (17%; p = 0.069). At conventional UK cost per QALY thresholds, the probability that GET is more cost-effective than AM ranged from 18 to 21%. Whilst completion of the SF-36-PFS, Chalder Fatigue Scale and EQ-5D-Y was good at the 6-month assessment point, it was less satisfactory for other measures, and for all measures at the 12-month assessment. Conclusion: There was no evidence that GET was more effective or cost-effective than AM in this setting, with very limited improvement in either study group evident by the 6-month or 12-month assessment points. Trial registration: The study protocol was registered at www.isrctn.com (3rd September 2015; ISRCTN 23962803) before the start of enrolment to the initial feasibility phase.
Assuntos
Terapia por Exercício , Síndrome de Fadiga Crônica , Adolescente , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Terapia por Exercício/métodos , Síndrome de Fadiga Crônica/terapia , Síndrome de Fadiga Crônica/psicologia , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415â¯357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12â¯013 and 12â¯958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45â¯084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50â¯336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.
Assuntos
Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias da Próstata , Idoso , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Seguimentos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Gradação de Tumores , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangue , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/mortalidade , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , País de Gales/epidemiologia , Ultrassonografia , Biópsia Guiada por ImagemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pakistan has one of the highest burdens of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection globally. To achieve the World Health Organization's goals for HCV elimination, there is a need for substantial scale-up in testing, treatment, and a reduction in new infections. Data on the population impact of scaling up treatment is not available in Pakistan, nor is there reliable data on the incidence of infection/reinfection. This project will fill this gap by providing important empirical data on the incidence of infection (primary and reinfection) in Pakistan. Then, by using this data in epidemic models, the study will determine whether response rates achieved with affordable therapies (sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir) will be sufficient to eliminate HCV in Pakistan. METHODS: This prospective multi-centre cohort study will screen 25,000 individuals for HCV antibody (Ab) and RNA (if Ab-positive) at various centers in Pakistan- Karachi (Sindh) and Punjab, providing estimates of the disease prevalence. HCV positive patients will be treated with sofosbuvir and daclatasvir for 12-weeks, (extended to 24-weeks in those with cirrhosis) and the proportion responding to this first-line treatment estimated. Patients who test HCV Ab negative will be recalled 12 months later to test for new HCV infections, providing estimates of the incidence rate. Patients diagnosed with HCV (~ 4,000) will be treated and tested for Sustained Virological Response (SVR). Questionnaires to assess risk factors, productivity, health care usage and quality of life will be completed at both the initial screening and at 12-month follow-up, allowing mathematical modelling and economic analysis to assess the current treatment strategies. Viral resistance will be analysed and patients who have successfully completed treatment will be retested 12 months later to estimate the rate of re-infection. CONCLUSION: The HepFREEPak study will provide evidence on the efficacy of available and widely used treatment options in Pakistan. It will also provide data on the incidence rate of primary infections and re-infections. Data on incidence risk factors will allow us to model and incorporate heterogeneity of risk and how that affects screening and treatment strategies. These data will identify any gaps in current test-and-treat programs to achieve HCV elimination in Pakistan. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04943588) on June 29, 2021.
Assuntos
Hepatite C Crônica , Hepatite C , Humanos , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Hepacivirus/genética , Hepatite C/diagnóstico , Hepatite C/tratamento farmacológico , Hepatite C/epidemiologia , Hepatite C Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto , Paquistão/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Reinfecção/tratamento farmacológico , Sofosbuvir/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are prescribed for over 50% of respiratory tract infections in primary care, despite good evidence of there being no benefit to the patient, and evidence of over prescribing driving microbial resistance. The high treatment rates are attributed to uncertainty regarding microbiological cause and clinical prognosis. Point-of-care-tests have been proposed as potential antibiotic stewardship tools, with some providing microbiological results in 15 minutes. However, there is little research on their impact on antibiotic use and clinical outcomes in primary care. METHODS: This is a multi-centre, individually randomised controlled trial with mixed-methods investigation of microbial, behavioural and antibiotic mechanisms on outcomes in patients aged 12 months and over presenting to primary care in the UK with a suspected respiratory tract infection, where the clinician and/or patient thinks antibiotic treatment may be, or is, necessary. Once consented, all participants are asked to provide a combined nose and throat swab sample and randomised to have a rapid microbiological point-of-care-test or no point-of-care-test. For intervention patients, clinicians review the result of the test, before contacting the patient to finalise treatment. Treatment decisions are made as per usual care in control group patients. The primary outcome is whether an antibiotic is prescribed at this point. All swab samples are sent to the central laboratory for further testing. Patients are asked to complete a diary to record the severity and duration of symptoms until resolution or day 28, and questionnaires at 2 months about their beliefs and intention to consult for similar future illnesses. Primary care medical records are also reviewed at 6-months to collect further infection consultations, antibiotic prescribing and hospital admissions. The trial aims to recruit 514 patients to achieve 90% power with 5% significance to detect a 15% absolute reduction in antibiotic prescribing. Qualitative interviews are being conducted with approximately 20 clinicians and 30 participants to understand any changes in beliefs and behaviour resulting from the point-of-care-test and generate attributes for clinician and patient discrete choice experiments. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence of efficacy, acceptability and mechanisms of action of a rapid microbiological point-of-care test on antibiotic prescribing and patient symptoms in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16039192, prospectively registered on 08/11/2022.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Testes Imediatos , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Infecções Respiratórias , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Gestão de Antimicrobianos/métodos , Sistemas Automatizados de Assistência Junto ao Leito , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Infecções Respiratórias/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Respiratórias/microbiologia , Infecções Respiratórias/diagnóstico , Estudos Multicêntricos como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are readily transmitted in care homes. Airborne transmission of pathogens causing respiratory tract illness is largely unmitigated. Portable high-efficiency-particulate-air (HEPA) filtration units capture microbial particles from the air, but it is unclear whether this is sufficient to reduce infections in care home residents. The Air Filtration to prevent symptomatic winter Respiratory Infections (including COVID-19) in care homes (AFRI-c) randomized controlled trial will determine whether using HEPA filtration units reduces respiratory infection episodes in care home residents. METHODS: AFRI-c is a cluster randomized controlled trial that will be delivered in residential care homes for older people in England. Ninety-one care homes will be randomised to take part for one winter period. The intervention care homes will receive HEPA filtration units for use in communal areas and private bedrooms. Normal infection control measures will continue in all care homes. Anonymised daily data on symptoms will be collected for up to 30 residents. Ten to 12 of these residents will be invited to consent to a primary care medical notes review and (in intervention homes) to having an air filter switched on in their private room. The primary outcome will be number of symptomatic winter respiratory infection episodes. Secondary outcomes include specific clinical measures of infection, number of falls / near falls, number of laboratory confirmed infections, hospitalisations, staff sickness and cost-effectiveness. A mixed methods process evaluation will assess intervention acceptability and implementation. DISCUSSION: The results of AFRI-c will provide vital information about whether portable HEPA filtration units reduce symptomatic winter respiratory infections in older care home residents. Findings about effectiveness, fidelity, acceptability and cost-effectiveness will support stakeholders to determine the use of HEPA filtration units as part of infection control policies.
Assuntos
Filtros de Ar , COVID-19 , Infecções Respiratórias , Estações do Ano , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/transmissão , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Infecções Respiratórias/prevenção & controle , Infecções Respiratórias/epidemiologia , Idoso , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Casas de SaúdeRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Traumatic pneumothoraces are present in one of five victims of severe trauma. Current guidelines advise chest drain insertion for most traumatic pneumothoraces, although very small pneumothoraces can be managed with observation at the treating clinician's discretion. There remains a large proportion of patients in whom there is clinical uncertainty as to whether an immediate chest drain is required, with no robust evidence to inform practice. Chest drains carry a high risk of complications such as bleeding and infection. The default to invasive treatment may be causing potentially avoidable pain, distress and complications. We are evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an initial conservative approach to the management of patients with traumatic pneumothoraces. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CoMiTED (Conservative Management in Traumatic Pneumothoraces in the Emergency Department) trial is a multicentre, pragmatic parallel group, individually randomised controlled non-inferiority trial to establish whether initial conservative management of significant traumatic pneumothoraces is non-inferior to invasive management in terms of subsequent emergency pleural interventions, complications, pain, breathlessness and quality of life. We aim to recruit 750 patients from at least 40 UK National Health Service hospitals. Patients allocated to the control (invasive management) group will have a chest drain inserted in the emergency department. For those in the intervention (initial conservative management) group, the treating clinician will be advised to manage the participant without chest drain insertion and undertake observation. The primary outcome is a binary measure of the need for one or more subsequent emergency pleural interventions within 30 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include complications, cost-effectiveness, patient-reported quality of life and patient and clinician views of the two treatment options; participants are followed up for 6 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial received approval from the Wales Research Ethics Committee 4 (reference: 22/WA/0118) and the Health Research Authority. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN35574247.
Assuntos
Tubos Torácicos , Tratamento Conservador , Drenagem , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Pneumotórax , Humanos , Tratamento Conservador/métodos , Pneumotórax/terapia , Pneumotórax/etiologia , Drenagem/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Análise Custo-Benefício , Estudos de Equivalência como Asunto , Reino Unido , Traumatismos Torácicos/terapia , Traumatismos Torácicos/complicações , Estudos Multicêntricos como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Long-term patient-reported outcomes are needed to inform treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes of 1643 randomly assigned participants in the ProtecT (Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment) trial were evaluated to assess the functional and quality-of-life impacts of prostatectomy, radiotherapy with neoadjuvant androgen deprivation, and active monitoring. This article focuses on the outcomes of the randomly assigned participants from 7 to 12 years using mixed effects linear and logistic models. RESULTS: Response rates exceeded 80% for most measures. Among the randomized groups over 7 to 12 years, generic quality-of-life scores were similar. Among those in the prostatectomy group, urinary leakage requiring pads occurred in 18 to 24% of patients over 7 to 12 years, compared with 9 to 11% in the active monitoring group and 3 to 8% in the radiotherapy group. In the prostatectomy group, 18% reported erections sufficient for intercourse at 7 years, compared with 30% in the active monitoring and 27% in the radiotherapy groups; all converged to low levels of potency by year 12. Nocturia (voiding at least twice per night) occurred in 34% in the prostatectomy group compared with 48% in the radiotherapy group and 47% in the active monitoring group at 12 years. Fecal leakage affected 12% in the radiotherapy group compared with 6% in the other groups by year 12. The active monitoring group experienced gradual age-related declines in sexual and urinary function, avoiding radical treatment effects unless they changed management. CONCLUSIONS: ProtecT provides robust evidence about continued impacts of treatments in the long term. These data allow patients newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and their clinicians to assess the trade-offs between treatment harms and benefits and enable better informed and prudent treatment decisions. (Funded by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme projects 96/20/06 and 96/20/99; ISRCTN number, ISRCTN20141297; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02044172.)