Inconsistencies in fertility preservation for young people with cancer in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utilisation of and funding structure for fertility preservation for children diagnosed with cancer in the UK. DESIGN: Survey of paediatric oncologists/haematologists. Questionnaires were sent electronically with reminder notifications to non-responders. SETTING: UK Paediatric Oncology Principal Treatment Centres (PTCs). PARTICIPANTS: Paediatric oncologists/haematologists with an interest in the effects of treatment on fertility representing the 20 PTCs across the UK. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Referral practices, sources and length of funding for storage of gametes or gonadal tissue for children diagnosed with cancer in the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: Responses were received from 18 PTCs (90%) with responses to 98.3% of questions. All centres had referred patients for fertility preservation: ovarian tissue collection/storage 100% (n=18 centres), sperm banking 100% (n=17; one centre was excluded due to the age range of their patients), testicular tissue storage 83% (n=15), mature oocyte collection 35% (n=6; one centre was excluded due to the age range of their patients). All centres with knowledge of their funding source reported sperm cryopreservation was NHS funded. Only 60% (n=9) centres reported the same for mature oocyte storage. Of the centres aware of their funding source, half reported that ovarian and testicular tissue storage was funded by charitable sources; this increased in England compared with the rest of the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Inequality exists in provision of fertility preservation for children with cancer across the UK. There is lack of formalised government funding to support international guidelines, with resultant geographical variation in care. Centralised funding of fertility preservation for children and young adults is needed alongside establishment of a national advisory panel to support all PTCs.

Asthma and other recurrent wheezing disorders in children (acute).

INTRODUCTION: Acute childhood asthma is a common clinical emergency presenting across a range of ages and with a range of severities. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute asthma in children? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). RESULTS: We found 35 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: beta2 agonists (high-dose nebulised, metered-dose inhaler plus spacer device versus nebuliser, intravenous), corticosteroids (systemic, high-dose inhaled), ipratropium bromide (single- or multiple-dose inhaled), magnesium sulphate, oxygen, and theophylline or aminophylline.

Asthma and other recurrent wheezing disorders in children (chronic).

INTRODUCTION: Childhood asthma is the most common chronic paediatric illness. There is no cure for asthma but good treatment to palliate symptoms is available. Asthma is more common in children with a personal or family history of atopy, increased severity and frequency of wheezing episodes, and presence of variable airway obstruction or bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Precipitating factors for symptoms and acute episodes include infection, house dust mites, allergens from pet animals, exposure to tobacco smoke, and exercise. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of single-agent prophylaxis in children taking as-needed inhaled beta(2) agonists for asthma? What are the effects of additional prophylactic treatments in childhood asthma inadequately controlled by standard-dose inhaled corticosteroids? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). RESULTS: We found 48 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: beta(2) agonists (long-acting), corticosteroids (inhaled standard or higher doses), leukotriene receptor antagonists (oral), omalizumab, and theophylline (oral).