Pragmatic randomised controlled trial of guided self-help versus individual cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus for post-traumatic stress disorder (RAPID).

Background: Guided self-help has been shown to be effective for other mental conditions and, if effective for post-traumatic stress disorder, would offer a time-efficient and accessible treatment option, with the potential to reduce waiting times and costs. Objective: To determine if trauma-focused guided self-help is non-inferior to individual, face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder to a single traumatic event. Design: Multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled non-inferiority trial with economic evaluation to determine cost-effectiveness and nested process evaluation to assess fidelity and adherence, dose and factors that influence outcome (including context, acceptability, facilitators and barriers, measured qualitatively). Participants were randomised in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary analysis was intention to treat using multilevel analysis of covariance. Setting: Primary and secondary mental health settings across the United Kingdom's National Health Service. Participants: One hundred and ninety-six adults with a primary diagnosis of mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder were randomised with 82% retention at 16 weeks and 71% at 52 weeks. Nineteen participants and ten therapists were interviewed for the process evaluation. Interventions: Up to 12 face-to-face, manualised, individual cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus sessions, each lasting 60-90 minutes, or to guided self-help using Spring, an eight-step online guided self-help programme based on cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus, with up to five face-to-face meetings of up to 3 hours in total and four brief telephone calls or e-mail contacts between sessions. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome: the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, at 16 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes: included severity of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms at 52 weeks, and functioning, symptoms of depression, symptoms of anxiety, alcohol use and perceived social support at both 16 and 52 weeks post-randomisation. Those assessing outcomes were blinded to group assignment. Results: Non-inferiority was demonstrated at the primary end point of 16 weeks on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition [mean difference 1.01 (one-sided 95% CI -∞ to 3.90, non-inferiority p = 0.012)]. Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, score improvements of over 60% in both groups were maintained at 52 weeks but the non-inferiority results were inconclusive in favour of cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus at this timepoint [mean difference 3.20 (one-sided 95% confidence interval -∞ to 6.00, non-inferiority p = 0.15)]. Guided self-help using Spring was not shown to be more cost-effective than face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus although there was no significant difference in accruing quality-adjusted life-years, incremental quality-adjusted life-years -0.04 (95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.01) and guided self-help using Spring was significantly cheaper to deliver [£277 (95% confidence interval £253 to £301) vs. £729 (95% CI £671 to £788)]. Guided self-help using Spring appeared to be acceptable and well tolerated by participants. No important adverse events or side effects were identified. Limitations: The results are not generalisable to people with post-traumatic stress disorder to more than one traumatic event. Conclusions: Guided self-help using Spring for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder to a single traumatic event appears to be non-inferior to individual face-to-face cognitive-behavioural therapy with a trauma focus and the results suggest it should be considered a first-line treatment for people with this condition. Future work: Work is now needed to determine how best to effectively disseminate and implement guided self-help using Spring at scale. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN13697710. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/192/97) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 26. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Post-traumatic stress disorder is a common, disabling condition that can occur following major traumatic events. Typical symptoms include distressing reliving, avoidance of reminders and feeling a current sense of threat. First-choice treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder are individual, face-to-face talking treatments, of 12­16 hours duration, including cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus. If equally effective treatments could be developed that take less time and can be largely undertaken in a flexible manner at home, this would improve accessibility, reduce waiting times and hence the burden of disease. RAPID was a randomised controlled trial using a web-based programme called Spring. The aim was to determine if trauma-focused guided self-help provided a faster and cheaper treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder than first-choice face-to-face therapy, while being equally effective. Guided self-help using Spring is delivered through eight steps. A therapist provides a 1-hour introductory meeting followed by four further, fortnightly sessions of 30 minutes each and four brief (around 5 minutes) telephone calls or e-mail contacts between sessions. At each session, the therapist reviews progress and guides the client through the programme, offering continued support, monitoring, motivation and problem-solving. One hundred and ninety-six people with post-traumatic stress disorder to a single traumatic event took part in the study. Guided self-help using Spring was found to be equally effective to first-choice face-to-face therapy at reducing post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms at 16 weeks. Very noticeable improvements were maintained at 52 weeks post-randomisation in both groups, when most results were inconclusive but in favour of face-to-face therapy. Guided self-help using Spring was significantly cheaper to deliver and appeared to be well-tolerated. It is noteworthy that not everyone benefitted from guided self-help using Spring, highlighting the importance of considering it on a person-by-person basis, and personalising interventions. But, the RAPID trial has demonstrated that guided self-help using Spring provides a low-intensity treatment option for people with post-traumatic stress disorder that is ready to be implemented in the National Health Service.

Cost of hepatocellular carcinoma to the national health service in England: a registry-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) incidence in the UK trebled between 1997 and 2017. With increasing numbers requiring treatment, understanding the likely impact on healthcare budgets can inform service planning and commissioning. The aim of this analysis was to use existing registry data to describe the direct healthcare costs of current treatments for HCC and estimate the impact on National Health Service (NHS) budgets. DESIGN: A retrospective data analysis based on the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service cancer registry informed a decision-analytic model for England comparing patients by cirrhosis compensation status and those on palliative or curative treatment pathways. Potential cost drivers were investigated by undertaking a series of one-way sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2016, 15 684 patients were diagnosed with HCC. The median cost per patient over 2 years was £9065 (IQR: £1965 to £20 491), 66% did not receive active therapy. The cost of HCC treatment for England over 5 years was estimated to be £245 million. CONCLUSION: The National Cancer Registration Dataset and linked data sets have enabled a comprehensive analysis of the resource use and costs of secondary and tertiary healthcare for HCC, providing an overview of the economic impact to the NHS England of treating HCC.

Development of a resource-use measure to capture costs of diabetic foot ulcers to the United Kingdom National Health Service, patients and society.

Background: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) add a significant burden to the lives of people with diabetes in the United Kingdom. They can have a considerable impact on a patient's daily life, with treatment requiring frequent changes of dressings and clinic attendances. Nurses and other allied health professionals (AHPs) within the community provide most wound care representing the primary cost driver. Aims: To collaboratively explore key resource use related to the management of DFUs to develop, and pilot, a participant-reported measure to inform economic evaluations. Methods: A literature search and semi-structured interviews determined health and non-health resource use in management of DFUs. A consensus view of the selected items was established in a modified Delphi study and further tested for acceptability and validity in a pilot study. Results: Primary care consultations with a podiatrist or orthotist, district nurse visits, out-of-hours and emergency care, scans and investigations, and consumables provided in clinics were rated as the most important resource use items. Conclusions: This work has informed the development of a measure that captures resource use considered important by the people most affected by DFUs; patients, family members and carers, and the healthcare professionals key to DFU management.

Isolated Pre-existing HLA-DP Donor-Specific Antibodies are Associated With Poorer Outcomes in Renal Transplantation.

Introduction: The importance of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) in renal transplantation has long been recognized, but the significance of human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DP antibodies remains less clear. We performed a retrospective single center study of renal transplants with pre-existing isolated HLA-DP-DSAs to assess clinical outcomes. Methods: Twenty-three patients with isolated HLA-DP-DSAs were compared with 3 control groups as follows: standard immunological risk (calculated reaction frequency [cRF] < 85%, no current or historical DSA, no repeat mismatched antigens with previous transplants, n = 46), highly sensitized (cRF > 85%, n = 27), and patients with HLA-DP antibodies that were not donor-specific (n = 18). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed comparing antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR)-free and graft survival. Factors in the final multivariable models included patient group, % cRF, B-cell flow crossmatch (BFXM) positivity and regrafts. Results: Over a median follow-up of 1197 days, 65% of HLA-DP-DSA patients had ABMR on indication biopsies, and 30% of HLA-DP-DSA patients lost their graft. Pre-existing HLA-DP DSAs remained the single factor associated with ABMR after multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 9.578, P = 0.012). Patients with HLA-DP DSAs had increased microvascular scores (P = 0.0346) and worse transplant glomerulopathy (P = 0.015) on biopsy compared with the standard immunological risk group. Furthermore, flow crossmatch (FXM) positivity did not help inform on the risk of graft failure or ABMR in patients with preformed DP-DSA. Conclusion: Transplants with pre-existing HLA-DP-DSAs should be considered high risk. Routine laboratory tests are unable to further risk stratify these patients. Recipients should be considered for intensified immunosuppression and closely monitored.

Guided, internet based, cognitive behavioural therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder: pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (RAPID).

OBJECTIVE: To determine if guided internet based cognitive behavioural therapy with a trauma focus (CBT-TF) is non-inferior to individual face-to-face CBT-TF for mild to moderate post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to one traumatic event. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial (RAPID). SETTING: Primary and secondary mental health settings across the UK's NHS. PARTICIPANTS: 196 adults with a primary diagnosis of mild to moderate PTSD were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to one of two interventions, with 82% retention at 16 weeks and 71% retention at 52 weeks. 19 participants and 10 therapists were purposively sampled and interviewed for evaluation of the process. INTERVENTIONS: Up to 12 face-to-face, manual based, individual CBT-TF sessions, each lasting 60-90 minutes; or guided internet based CBT-TF with an eight step online programme, with up to three hours of contact with a therapist and four brief telephone calls or email contacts between sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) at 16 weeks after randomisation (diagnosis of PTSD based on the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition, DSM-5). Secondary outcomes included severity of PTSD symptoms at 52 weeks, and functioning, symptoms of depression and anxiety, use of alcohol, and perceived social support at 16 and 52 weeks after randomisation. RESULTS: Non-inferiority was found at the primary endpoint of 16 weeks on the CAPS-5 (mean difference 1.01, one sided 95% confidence interval -∞ to 3.90, non-inferiority P=0.012). Improvements in CAPS-5 score of more than 60% in the two groups were maintained at 52 weeks, but the non-inferiority results were inconclusive in favour of face-to-face CBT-TF at this time point (3.20, -∞ to 6.00, P=0.15). Guided internet based CBT-TF was significantly (P<0.001) cheaper than face-to-face CBT-TF and seemed to be acceptable and well tolerated by participants. The main themes of the qualitative analysis were facilitators and barriers to engagement with guided internet based CBT-TF, treatment outcomes, and considerations for its future implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Guided internet based CBT-TF for mild to moderate PTSD to one traumatic event was non-inferior to individual face-to-face CBT-TF and should be considered a first line treatment for people with this condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13697710.

C3d-positive donor-specific antibodies have a role in pretransplant risk stratification of cross-match-positive HLA-incompatible renal transplantation: United Kingdom multicentre study.

Anti-HLA-antibody characteristics aid to risk-stratify patients and improve long-term renal graft outcomes. Complement activation by donor-specific antibody (DSA) is an important characteristic that may determine renal allograft outcome. There is heterogeneity in graft outcomes within the moderate to high immunological risk cases (cross-match-positive). We explored the role of C3d-positive DSAs in sub-stratification of cross-match-positive cases and relate to the graft outcomes. We investigated 139 cross-match-positive living-donor renal transplant recipients from four transplant centres in the United Kingdom. C3d assay was performed on serum samples obtained at pretreatment (predesensitization) and Day 14 post-transplant. C3d-positive DSAs were found in 52 (37%) patients at pretreatment and in 37 (27%) patients at Day 14 post-transplant. Median follow-up of patients was 48 months (IQR 20.47-77.57). In the multivariable analysis, pretreatment C3d-positive DSA was independently associated with reduced overall graft survival, the hazard ratio of 3.29 (95% CI 1.37-7.86). The relative risk of death-censored five-year graft failure was 2.83 (95% CI 1.56-5.13). Patients with both pretreatment and Day 14 C3d-positive DSAs had the worst five-year graft survival at 45.5% compared with 87.2% in both pretreatment and Day 14 C3d-negative DSA patients with the relative risk of death-censored five-year graft failure was 4.26 (95% CI 1.79, 10.09). In this multicentre study, we have demonstrated for the first time the utility of C3d analysis as a distinctive biomarker to sub-stratify the risk of poor graft outcome in cross-match-positive living-donor renal transplantation.

Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs and the Patient-Prescriber Encounter: A Systematic Review.

We systematically reviewed the research on patients' and prescribers' perceptions of, and self-reported behaviors prompted by, exposure to direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) (For ease of reading we use the term "advertising" to encompass advertising and promotional labeling. Broad use of this term does not imply endorsement by FDA) of prescription drugs that occurs in the context of a clinical encounter. This research offers an important perspective on the broader goal of incorporating patient and prescriber voices in decision-making. Outcomes included patient information seeking, medication adherence, patient requests for DTCA-promoted prescription drugs, prescribing behaviors, and perceptions of the patient-prescriber relationship and interactions. We searched PubMed and other databases from 1982-2017 and identified 38 studies meeting our study criteria. Of these, 24 studies used patient-reported outcomes and 18 used prescriber-reported outcomes (four used both). Studies suggested some potential benefits of exposure to DTCA, including patients' enhanced information-seeking, increased patient requests for appropriate prescriptions (when addressing potential underuse) and patients' perceptions of higher-quality interactions with prescribers. Most prescribers perceived a neutral influence on the quality of their clinical interactions with patients regarding DTCA. Harms included patients receiving prescriptions for drugs that were not appropriate for them or that the patients did not need, and the potential for DTCA to interfere with medication adherence in some populations, such as those with mental illness. The potential benefits of DTCA on the patient-provider encounter must be balanced with the potential for harms.

Pragmatic RAndomised controlled trial of a trauma-focused guided self-help Programme versus InDividual trauma-focused cognitive Behavioural therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder (RAPID): trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: There is good evidence that trauma-focused therapies for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder are effective. However, they are not always feasible to deliver due a shortage of trained therapists and demands on the patient. An online trauma-focused Guided Self-Help (GSH) programme which could overcome these barriers has shown promise in a pilot study. This study will be the first to evaluate GSH against standard face-to-face therapy to assess its suitability for use in the NHS. METHODS: The study is a large-scale multi-centre pragmatic randomised controlled non-inferiority trial, with assessors masked to treatment allocation. One hundred and ninety-two participants will be randomly allocated to receive either face-to-face trauma-focused cognitive behaviour therapy (TFCBT) or trauma-focused online guided self-help (GSH). The primary outcome will be the severity of symptoms of PTSD over the previous week as measured by the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale for DSM5 (CAPS-5) at 16 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcome measures include PTSD symptoms over the previous month as measured by the CAPS-5 at 52 weeks plus the Impact of Event Scale - revised (IES-R), Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Alcohol Use Disorders Test (AUDIT-O), Multidimensional Scale for Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), short Post-Traumatic Cognitions Inventory (PTCI), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and General Self Efficacy Scale (GSES) measured at 16 and 52 weeks post-randomisation. Changes in health-related quality of life will be measured by the EQ-5D and the level of healthcare resource utilisation for health economic analysis will be determined by an amended version of the Client Socio-Demographic and Service Receipt Inventory European Version. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) will be collected at 16 weeks post-randomisation to evaluate treatment satisfaction. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to compare online GSH with usual face-to-face therapy for PTSD. The strengths are that it will test a rigorously developed intervention in a real world setting to inform NHS commissioning. The potential challenges of delivering such a pragmatic study may include participant recruitment, retention and adherence, therapist retention, and fidelity of intervention delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13697710 registered on 20/12/2016.

Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments for Binge-Eating Disorder: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Psychological and pharmacological interventions for binge-eating disorder have previously demonstrated efficacy (compared with placebo or waitlist control); thus, we aimed to expand that literature with a review of comparative effectiveness. We searched MEDLINE,® EMBASE,® Cochrane Library, Academic OneFile, CINAHL® for binge-eating disorder treatment articles and selected studies using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were sufficient for network meta-analysis comparing two pharmacological interventions; psychological interventions were analysed qualitatively. In all, 28 treatment comparisons were included in this review: one pharmacological comparison (second-generation antidepressants versus lisdexamfetamine) and 26 psychological comparisons. Only three statistically significant differences emerged: lisdexamfetamine was better at increasing binge abstinence than second-generation antidepressants; therapist-led cognitive behavioural therapy was better at reducing binge-eating frequency than behavioural weight loss, but behavioural weight loss was better at reducing weight. The majority of other treatment comparisons revealed few significant differences between groups. Thus, patients and clinicians can choose from several effective treatment options. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.

Learning Together; part 2: training costs and health gain - a cost analysis.

Learning Together is a complex educational intervention aimed at improving health outcomes for children and young people. There is an additional cost as two doctors are seeing patients together for a longer appointment than a standard general practice (GP) appointment. Our approach combines the impact of the training clinics on activity in South London in 2014-15 with health gain, using NICE guidance and standards to allow comparison of training options. METHODS: Activity data was collected from Training Practices hosting Learning Together. A computer based model was developed to analyse the costs of the Learning Together intervention compared to usual training in a partial economic evaluation. The results of the model were used to value the health gain required to make the intervention cost effective. RESULTS: Data were returned for 363 patients booked into 61 clinics across 16 Training Practices. Learning Together clinics resulted in an increase in costs of £37 per clinic. Threshold analysis illustrated one child with a common illness like constipation needs to be well for two weeks, in one Practice hosting four training clinics for the clinics to be considered cost effective. CONCLUSION: Learning Together is of minimal training cost. Our threshold analysis produced a rubric that can be used locally to test cost effectiveness at a Practice or Programme level.

Binge-Eating Disorder in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The best treatment options for binge-eating disorder are unclear. PURPOSE: To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of psychological and pharmacologic therapies for adults with binge-eating disorder. DATA SOURCES: English-language publications in EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Academic OneFile, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov through 18 November 2015, and in MEDLINE through 12 May 2016. STUDY SELECTION: 9 waitlist-controlled psychological trials and 25 placebo-controlled trials that evaluated pharmacologic (n = 19) or combination (n = 6) treatment. All were randomized trials with low or medium risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: 2 reviewers independently extracted trial data, assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Therapist-led cognitive behavioral therapy, lisdexamfetamine, and second-generation antidepressants (SGAs) decreased binge-eating frequency and increased binge-eating abstinence (relative risk, 4.95 [95% CI, 3.06 to 8.00], 2.61 [CI, 2.04 to 3.33], and 1.67 [CI, 1.24 to 2.26], respectively). Lisdexamfetamine (mean difference [MD], -6.50 [CI, -8.82 to -4.18]) and SGAs (MD, -3.84 [CI, -6.55 to -1.13]) reduced binge-eating-related obsessions and compulsions, and SGAs reduced symptoms of depression (MD, -1.97 [CI, -3.67 to -0.28]). Headache, gastrointestinal upset, sleep disturbance, and sympathetic nervous system arousal occurred more frequently with lisdexamfetamine than placebo (relative risk range, 1.63 to 4.28). Other forms of cognitive behavioral therapy and topiramate also increased abstinence and reduced binge-eating frequency and related psychopathology. Topiramate reduced weight and increased sympathetic nervous system arousal, and lisdexamfetamine reduced weight and appetite. LIMITATIONS: Most study participants were overweight or obese white women aged 20 to 40 years. Many treatments were examined only in single studies. Outcomes were measured inconsistently across trials and rarely assessed beyond end of treatment. CONCLUSION: Cognitive behavioral therapy, lisdexamfetamine, SGAs, and topiramate reduced binge eating and related psychopathology, and lisdexamfetamine and topiramate reduced weight in adults with binge-eating disorder. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Screening for Speech and Language Delay in Children 5 Years Old and Younger: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: No recommendation exists for or against routine use of brief, formal screening instruments in primary care to detect speech and language delay in children through 5 years of age. This review aimed to update the evidence on screening and treating children for speech and language since the 2006 US Preventive Services Task Force systematic review. METHODS: Medline, the Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists. We included studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of screening tools and randomized controlled trials reporting benefits and harms of treatment of speech and language. Two independent reviewers extracted data, checked accuracy, and assigned quality ratings using predefined criteria. RESULTS: We found no evidence for the impact of screening on speech and language outcomes. In 23 studies evaluating the accuracy of screening tools, sensitivity ranged between 50% and 94%, and specificity ranged between 45% and 96%. Twelve treatment studies improved various outcomes in language, articulation, and stuttering; little evidence emerged for interventions improving other outcomes or for adverse effects of treatment. Risk factors associated with speech and language delay were male gender, family history, and low parental education. A limitation of this review is the lack of well-designed, well-conducted studies addressing whether screening for speech and language delay or disorders improves outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Several screening tools can accurately identify children for diagnostic evaluations and interventions, but evidence is inadequate regarding applicability in primary care settings. Some treatments for young children identified with speech and language delays and disorders may be effective.

Communication and dissemination strategies to facilitate the use of health-related evidence.

OBJECTIVES: This review examined how to best communicate and disseminate evidence, including uncertain evidence, to inform health care decisions. The review focused on three primary objectives--comparing the effectiveness of: (1) communicating evidence in various contents and formats that increase the likelihood that target audiences will both understand and use the information (KQ 1); (2) a variety of approaches for disseminating evidence from those who develop it to those who are expected to use it (KQ 2); and (3) various ways of communicating uncertainty-associated health-related evidence to different target audiences (KQ 3). A secondary objective was to examine how the effectiveness of communication and dissemination strategies varies across target audiences, including evidence translators, health educators, patients, and clinicians. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE®, the Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Trials Registry, PsycINFO®, and the Web of Science. We used a variety of medical subject headings (MeSH terms) and major headings, and used free-text and title and abstract text-word searches. The search was limited to studies on humans published from 2000 to March 15, 2013, for communication and dissemination, given the prior systematic reviews, and from 1966 to March 15, 2013, for communicating uncertainty. REVIEW METHODS: We used standard Evidence-based Practice Center methods of dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and abstractions, and quality ratings and group consensus to resolve disagreements. We used group consensus to grade strength of evidence. RESULTS: The search identified 4,152 articles (after removing duplicates) for all three KQs. After dual review at the title/abstract stage and full-text review stage, we retained 61 articles that directly (i.e., head to head) compared strategies to communicate and disseminate evidence. Across the KQs, many of the comparisons yielded insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions. For KQ 1, we found that investigators frequently blend more than one communication strategy in interventions. For KQ 2, we found that, compared with single dissemination strategies, multicomponent dissemination strategies are more effective at enhancing clinician behavior, particularly for guideline adherence. Key findings for KQ 3 indicate that evidence on communicating overall strength of recommendation and precision was insufficient, but certain ways of communicating directness and net benefit may be helpful in reducing uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of comparative research evidence to inform communication and dissemination of evidence, including uncertain evidence, impedes timely clinician, patient, and policymaker awareness, uptake, and use of evidence to improve the quality of care. Expanding investment in communication, dissemination, and implementation research is critical to the identification of strategies to accelerate the translation of comparative effectiveness research into community and clinical practice and the direct benefit of patient care.

HSF1 modulation of Hsp70 mRNA polyadenylation via interaction with symplekin.

Induction of heat shock protein (HSP) gene expression by stress is initiated by binding of HSF1 to HSP gene promoters to increase their transcription. The cytoprotective functions of these HSPs are essential for cell survival, and thus it is critical that inducible HSP gene expression be executed rapidly and efficiently. Here we report an interaction between heat shock factor 1 (HSF1) and symplekin, a protein known to form a complex with the polyadenylation factors CstF and CPSF. HSF1-symplekin complexes are detected only after stress treatment, and these two proteins co-localize in punctate nuclear structures in stressed cells. HSF1 also complexes in a stress-induced manner with the 3' processing factor CstF-64. Interfering with HSF1-symplekin interaction by overexpressing a non-DNA-binding mutant HSF1 protein significantly decreases Hsp70 mRNA polyadenylation in stressed cells, supporting the functional role for HSF1 in promoting 3' processing of this transcript. Importantly, this was also found to result in a significant loss of Hsp70 protein induction and increased cell death in response to stress exposure. These results indicate that the HSF1-symplekin interaction functions as a mechanism for recruiting polyadenylation factors to HSP genes to enhance the efficiency/kinetics of production of mature Hsp mRNA transcripts to achieve the critical cellular need for rapid HSP expression after stress. Thus, HSF1 regulates HSP gene expression at not one but two different steps of the expression pathway, functioning both as a transcription factor and a polyadenylation stimulatory factor.