Lack of transparent reporting of trial monitoring approaches in randomised controlled trials: A systematic review of contemporary protocol papers.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring is essential to ensure patient safety and data integrity in clinical trials as per Good Clinical Practice. The Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials Statement and its checklist guides authors to include monitoring in their protocols. We investigated how well monitoring was reported in published 'protocol papers' for contemporary randomised controlled trials. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed to identify eligible protocol papers published in selected journals between 1 January 2020 and 31 May 2020. Protocol papers were classified by whether they reported monitoring and, if so, by the details of monitoring. Data were summarised descriptively. RESULTS: Of 811 protocol papers for randomised controlled trials, 386 (48%; 95% CI: 44%-51%) explicitly reported some monitoring information. Of these, 20% (77/386) reported monitoring information consistent with an on-site monitoring approach, and 39% (152/386) with central monitoring, 26% (101/386) with a mixed approach, while 14% (54/386) did not provide sufficient information to specify an approach. Only 8% (30/386) of randomised controlled trials reported complete details about all of scope, frequency and organisation of monitoring; frequency of monitoring was the least reported. However, 6% (25/386) of papers used the term 'audit' to describe 'monitoring'. DISCUSSION: Monitoring information was reported in only approximately half of the protocol papers. Suboptimal reporting of monitoring hinders the clinical community from having the full information on which to judge the validity of a trial and jeopardises the value of protocol papers and the credibility of the trial itself. Greater efforts are needed to promote the transparent reporting of monitoring to journal editors and authors.

Human papillomavirus infection: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of imiquimod cream (5%) versus podophyllotoxin cream (0.15%), in combination with quadrivalent human papillomavirus or control vaccination in the treatment and prevention of recurrence of anogenital warts (HIPvac trial).

BACKGROUND: Anogenital warts are the second most common sexually transmitted infection diagnosed in sexual health services in England. About 90% of genital warts are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6 or 11, and half of episodes diagnosed are recurrences. The best and most cost-effective treatment for patients with anogenital warts is unknown. The commonly used treatments are self-administered topical agents, podophyllotoxin (0.15% cream) or imiquimod (5% cream), or cryotherapy with liquid nitrogen. Quadrivalent HPV (qHPV) vaccination is effective in preventing infection, and disease, but whether it has any therapeutic effect is not known. METHODS AND DESIGN: To investigate the efficacy of clearance and prevention of recurrence of external anogenital warts by topical treatments, podophyllotoxin 0.15% cream or imiquimod 5% cream, in combination with a three-dose regimen of qHPV or control vaccination. 500 adult patients presenting with external anogenital warts with either a first or subsequent episode of anogenital warts will be entered into this randomised, controlled partially blinded 2 × 2 factorial trial. DISCUSSION: The trial is expected to provide the first high-quality evidence of the comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the two topical treatments in current use, as well as investigate the potential benefit of HPV vaccination, in the management of anogenital warts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered prior to starting recruitment under the following reference numbers: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry - ISRCTN32729817 (registered 25 July 2014); European Union Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT) - 2013-002951-14 (registered 26 June 2013).

Getting our ducks in a row: The need for data utility comparisons of healthcare systems data for clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Better use of healthcare systems data, collected as part of interactions between patients and the healthcare system, could transform planning and conduct of randomised controlled trials. Multiple challenges to widespread use include whether healthcare systems data captures sufficiently well the data traditionally captured on case report forms. "Data Utility Comparison Studies" (DUCkS) assess the utility of healthcare systems data for RCTs by comparison to data collected by the trial. Despite their importance, there are few published UK examples of DUCkS. METHODS-AND-RESULTS: Building from ongoing and selected recent examples of UK-led DUCkS in the literature, we set out experience-based considerations for the conduct of future DUCkS. Developed through informal iterative discussions in many forums, considerations are offered for planning, protocol development, data, analysis and reporting, with comparisons at "patient-level" or "trial-level", depending on the item of interest and trial status. DISCUSSION: DUCkS could be a valuable tool in assessing where healthcare systems data can be used for trials and in which trial teams can play a leading role. There is a pressing need for trials to be more efficient in their delivery and research waste must be reduced. Trials have been making inconsistent use of healthcare systems data, not least because of an absence of evidence of utility. DUCkS can also help to identify challenges in using healthcare systems data, such as linkage (access and timing) and data quality. We encourage trial teams to incorporate and report DUCkS in trials and funders and data providers to support them.

An inventory of European data sources for the long-term safety evaluation of methylphenidate.

To compile an inventory of European healthcare databases with potential to study long-term effects of methylphenidate (MPH) in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Potential databases were identified through expert opinion, the website of the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance, and literature search. An online survey was conducted among database providers/coordinators to ascertain the databases' appropriateness for inclusion into the inventory. It included questions about database characteristics, sample size, availability of information on drug exposure, clinical data and accessibility. Forty-two databases from 11 countries were identified and their coordinators invited to participate; responses were obtained for 22 (52.4 %) databases of which 15 record ADHD diagnoses. Eleven had sufficient data on ADHD diagnosis, drug exposure, and at least one type of outcome information (symptoms/clinical events, weight, height, blood pressure, heart rate) to assess MPH safety. These were Aarhus University Prescription Database, Danish National Birth Cohort (Denmark); German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents; Health Search Database Thales, Italian ADHD Register, Lombardy Region ADHD Database (Italy); Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, General Practice Research Database, The Health Improvement Network, QResearch (UK) and IMS Disease Analyzer (UK, Germany, France). Of the 20 databases with no responses, information on seven from publications and/or websites was obtained; Pedianet and the Integrated Primary Care Information database were considered suitable. Many European healthcare databases can be used for multinational long-term safety studies of MPH. Methodological research is underway to investigate the feasibility of their pooling and analysis.

Monitoring metrics over time: Why clinical trialists need to systematically collect site performance metrics.

Background: Over the last decade, there has been an increasing interest in risk-based monitoring (RBM) in clinical trials, resulting in a number of guidelines from regulators and its inclusion in ICH GCP. However, there is a lack of detail on how to approach RBM from a practical perspective, and insufficient understanding of best practice. Purpose: We present a method for clinical trials units to track their metrics within clinical trials using descriptive statistics and visualisations. Research Design: We suggest descriptive statistics and visualisations within a SWAT methodology. Study Sample: We illustrate this method using the metrics from TEMPER, a monitoring study carried out in three trials at the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL. Data Collection: The data collection for TEMPER is described in DOI: 10.1177/1740774518793379. Results: We show the results and discuss a protocol for a Study-Within-A-Trial (SWAT 167) for those wishing to use the method. Conclusions: The potential benefits metric tracking brings to clinical trials include enhanced assessment of sites for potential corrective action, improved evaluation and contextualisation of the influence of metrics and their thresholds, and the establishment of best practice in RBM. The standardisation of the collection of such monitoring data would benefit both individual trials and the clinical trials community.

Healthcare systems data in the context of clinical trials - A comparison of cardiovascular data from a clinical trial dataset with routinely collected data.

BACKGROUND: Routinely-collected healthcare systems data (HSD) are proposed to improve the efficiency of clinical trials. A comparison was undertaken between cardiovascular (CVS) data from a clinical trial database with two HSD resources. METHODS: Protocol-defined and clinically reviewed CVS events (heart failure (HF), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), thromboembolic stroke, venous and arterial thromboembolism) were identified within the trial data. Data (using pre-specified codes) was obtained from NHS Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) HF and myocardial ischaemia audits for trial participants recruited in England between 2010 and 2018 who had provided consent. The primary comparison was trial data versus HES inpatient (APC) main diagnosis (Box-1). Correlations are presented with descriptive statistics and Venn diagrams. Reasons for non-correlation were explored. RESULTS: From 1200 eligible participants, 71 protocol-defined clinically reviewed CVS events were recorded in the trial database. 45 resulted in a hospital admission and therefore could have been recorded by either HES APC/ NICOR. Of these, 27/45 (60%) were recorded by HES inpatient (Box-1) with an additional 30 potential events also identified. HF and ACS were potentially recorded in all 3 datasets; trial data recorded 18, HES APC 29 and NICOR 24 events respectively. 12/18 (67%) of the HF/ACS events in the trial dataset were recorded by NICOR. CONCLUSION: Concordance between datasets was lower than anticipated and the HSD used could not straightforwardly replace current trial practices, nor directly identify protocol-defined CVS events. Further work is required to improve the quality of HSD and consider event definitions when designing clinical trials incorporating HSD.

Persistence of pharmacological treatment into adulthood, in UK primary care, for ADHD patients who started treatment in childhood or adolescence.

BACKGROUND: ADHD guidelines in the UK suggest that children and adults who respond to pharmacological treatment should continue for as long as remains clinically effective, subject to regular review. To what extent patients persist with treatment from childhood and adolescence into adulthood is not clear. This study aims to describe, in UK primary care, the persistence of pharmacological treatment for patients with ADHD who started treatment aged 6-17 years and to estimate the percentage of patients who continued treatment from childhood and adolescence into adulthood. METHODS: The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database was used to identify patients with ADHD who received their first prescription for methylphenidate/ dexamfetamine/atomoxetine, aged 6-17 years. Patients were monitored until their 'censored date' (the earliest of the following dates: date the last prescription coded in the database ended, end of the study period (31st December 2008), date at which they transferred out of their practice, date of death, the last date the practice contributed data to the database). Persistence of treatment into adulthood was estimated using Kaplan Meier analysis. RESULTS: 610 patients had follow-up data into adulthood. 213 patients (93.4% male) started treatment between 6-12 years; median treatment duration 5.9 years. 131 (61.5%) stopped before 18 years, 82 (38.5%) were still on treatment age ≥18 years. 397 patients (86.4% male) started treatment between 13-17 years; median treatment duration was 1.6 years. 227 (57.2%) stopped before 18 years, 170 (42.8%) were still on treatment age ≥18 years. The number of females in both age categories was too small to formally test for differences between genders in persistence of treatment. CONCLUSION: Persistence of treatment into adulthood is lower (~40%) compared with published rates of persistence of the condition (~65% when symptomatic definition of remission used). Due to the limited number of patients with data past 18 years, it is important that ongoing monitoring of prescribing into later adulthood is undertaken, particularly to observe the effects of recommendations in new guidelines.

The epidemiology of pharmacologically treated attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by the symptoms of inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. ADHD was once perceived as a condition of childhood only; however increasing evidence has highlighted the existence of ADHD in older adolescents and adults. Estimates for the prevalence of ADHD in adults range from 2.5-4%. Few data exist on the prescribing trends of the stimulants methylphenidate and dexamfetamine, and the non-stimulant atomoxetine in the UK. The aim of this study was to investigate the annual prevalence and incidence of pharmacologically treated ADHD in children, adolescents and adults in UK primary care. METHODS: The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database was used to identify all patients aged over 6 years with a diagnosis of ADHD/hyperkinetic disorder and a prescription for methylphenidate, dexamfetamine or atomoxetine from 2003-2008. Annual prevalence and incidence of pharmacologically treated ADHD were calculated by age category and sex. RESULTS: The source population comprised 3,529,615 patients (48.9% male). A total of 118,929 prescriptions were recorded for the 4,530 patients in the pharmacologically treated ADHD cohort during the 6-year study. Prevalence (per 1000 persons in the mid-year THIN population) increased within each age category from 2003 to 2008 [6-12 years: from 4.8 (95% CI: 4.5-5.1) to 9.2 (95% CI: 8.8-9.6); 13-17 years: from 3.6 (95% CI: 3.3-3.9) to 7.4 (95% CI: 7.0-7.8); 18-24 years: from 0.3 (95% CI: 0.2-0.3) to 1.1 (95% CI: 1.0-1.3); 25-45 years: from 0.02 (95% CI: 0.01-0.03) to 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06-0.10); >45 years: from 0.01 (95% CI: 0.00-0.01) to 0.02 (95% CI: 0.01-0.03). Whilst male patients aged 6-12 years had the highest prevalence; the relative increase in prescribing was higher amongst female patients of the same age - the increase in prevalence in females aged 6-12 years was 2.1 fold compared to an increase of 1.9 fold for their male counterparts. Prevalence of treated ADHD decreased with increasing age. Incidence (per 1000 persons at risk in the mid-year THIN population) was highest for children aged 6-12 years. CONCLUSIONS: A trend of increasing prescribing prevalence of ADHD drug treatment was observed over the period 2003-2008. Prevalence of prescribing to adult patients increased; however the numbers treated are much lower than published estimates of the prevalence of ADHD. This study has added to the limited knowledge on ADHD prescribing in primary care, particularly in the area of drug treatment in adulthood.

Optimal timing of anticoagulation after acute ischemic stroke with atrial fibrillation (OPTIMAS): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

RATIONALE: Atrial fibrillation causes one-fifth of ischemic strokes, with a high risk of early recurrence. Although long-term anticoagulation is highly effective for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, initiation after stroke is usually delayed by concerns over intracranial hemorrhage risk. Direct oral anticoagulants offer a significantly lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage than other anticoagulants, potentially allowing earlier anticoagulation and prevention of recurrence, but the safety and efficacy of this approach has not been established. AIM: Optimal timing of anticoagulation after acute ischemic stroke with atrial fibrillation (OPTIMAS) will investigate whether early treatment with a direct oral anticoagulant, within four days of stroke onset, is as effective or better than delayed initiation, 7 to 14 days from onset, in atrial fibrillation patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS AND DESIGN: OPTIMAS is a multicenter randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome adjudication. Participants with acute ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation eligible for anticoagulation with a direct oral anticoagulant are randomized 1:1 to early or delayed initiation. As of December 2021, 88 centers in the United Kingdom have opened. STUDY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is a composite of recurrent stroke (ischemic stroke or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage) and systemic arterial embolism within 90 days. Secondary outcomes include major bleeding, functional status, anticoagulant adherence, quality of life, health and social care resource use, and length of hospital stay. SAMPLE SIZE TARGET: A total of 3478 participants assuming event rates of 11.5% in the control arm and 8% in the intervention arm, 90% power and 5% alpha. We will follow a non-inferiority gatekeeper analysis approach with a non-inferiority margin of 2 percentage points. DISCUSSION: OPTIMAS aims to provide high-quality evidence on the safety and efficacy of early direct oral anticoagulant initiation after atrial fibrillation-associated ischemic stroke.Trial registrations: ISRCTN: 17896007; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03759938.

Accessing routinely collected health data to improve clinical trials: recent experience of access.

BACKGROUND: Routinely collected electronic health records (EHRs) have the potential to enhance randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by facilitating recruitment and follow-up. Despite this, current EHR use is minimal in UK RCTs, in part due to ongoing concerns about the utility (reliability, completeness, accuracy) and accessibility of the data. The aim of this manuscript is to document the process, timelines and challenges of the application process to help improve the service both for the applicants and data holders. METHODS: This is a qualitative paper providing a descriptive narrative from one UK clinical trials unit (MRC CTU at UCL) on the experience of two trial teams' application process to access data from three large English national datasets: National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) and NHS Digital to establish themes for discussion. The underpinning reason for applying for the data was to compare EHRs with data collected through case report forms in two RCTs, Add-Aspirin (ISRCTN 74358648) and PATCH (ISRCTN 70406718). RESULTS: The Add-Aspirin trial, which had a pre-planned embedded sub-study to assess EHR, received data from NCRAS 13 months after the first application. In the PATCH trial, the decision to request data was made whilst the trial was recruiting. The study received data after 8 months from NICOR and 15 months for NHS Digital following final application submission. This concluded in May 2020. Prior to application submission, significant time and effort was needed particularly in relation to the PATCH trial where negotiations over consent and data linkage took many years. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience demonstrates that data access can be a prolonged and complex process. This is compounded if multiple data sources are required for the same project. This needs to be factored in when planning to use EHR within RCTs and is best considered prior to conception of the trial. Data holders and researchers are endeavouring to simplify and streamline the application process so that the potential of EHR can be realised for clinical trials.

Comparison of antiepileptic drug prescribing in children in three European countries.

PURPOSE: Antiepileptic drug (AED) use in young people is increasing. However, evidence of its use at a multinational level is limited. This study aims to characterize AED prescribing in the young in three European countries and to assess the capacity of drug safety surveillance. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2001-2005 using primary care databases: PEDIANET (Italy, 0-11 years), IPCI (The Netherlands, 0-18 years), and IMS Disease Analyzer (United Kingdom, 0-18 years). Prescribing prevalence was calculated by country, patient age, and drug type. RESULTS: In 2005, AED prevalence in children (0-11 years) was highest in Italy [3.9 subjects/1,000 person-years (PY)] followed by the United Kingdom (3.0 subjects/1,000 PY) and The Netherlands (2.2 subjects/1,000 PY). Over the study period, prescribing prevalence in 0-11 year olds was stable in all countries. In contrast, a steady rise of AED prevalence was observed in adolescents (12-18 years) in the United Kingdom (p = 0.0003) but not in The Netherlands (p = 0.88). All countries showed a slight increase in prevalence for newer AEDs. Simultaneously, the prevalence of conventional AEDs decreased in The Netherlands and Italy, but not in the United Kingdom. In 2005, lamotrigine use was highest in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, whereas topiramate was favored in Italy. DISCUSSION: In Europe, conventional AEDs are still the main treatment choice for children with epilepsy, and the use of newer AEDs remains low. Our study highlights a lack of research capacity to conduct multinational AED safety studies in children. Further work should explore large databases and other health care settings to meet these research needs.

The prescribing of analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in paediatric primary care in the UK, Italy and the Netherlands.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are commonly prescribed drugs which are frequently used for the treatment of various painful conditions. However, particularly for the paediatric population, there is a lack of information on effectiveness, safety and appropriate formulation resulting in off-label use and undertreatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the prescribing patterns of non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in children and adolescents in three European countries. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the same protocol in three primary care databases: Pedianet (Italy), IPCI (Netherlands) and IMS Disease Analyzer (UK). User prevalence rates were calculated for opioids (N02A) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (M01A) based on ATC therapeutic and chemical levels and stratified by country, age and gender. The prescribing prevalence for NSAIDs was lower in the Netherlands compared to Italy and the UK. Ibuprofen was the most frequently prescribed drug in this group in Italy (20.8 users/1000 PY) and the UK (30.6 users/1000 PY) whereas diclofenac was dominant in the Netherlands (1.7 users/1000 PY). Among opioids, codeine and codeine combinations were most commonly prescribed; only little use was seen for other drugs. There is a great variety of different NSAIDs and opioids prescribed to children in Europe in primary care. This is due to a varying availability of drugs in different countries but also because of differing prescribing attitudes, reimbursement scheme and a lack of data on the effectiveness of individual drugs. Further research into the rationale for prescribing these drugs to children is clearly needed.

Imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin, with and without human papillomavirus vaccine, for anogenital warts: the HIPvac factorial RCT.

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, of imiquimod or podophyllotoxin cream, either alone or in combination with the quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) in the treatment and prevention of recurrence of anogenital warts is not known. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the efficacy of imiquimod and podophyllotoxin creams to treat anogenital warts and to assess whether or not the addition of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine increases wart clearance or prevention of recurrence. DESIGN: A randomised, controlled, multicentre, partially blinded factorial trial. Participants were randomised equally to four groups, combining either topical treatment with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by gender, a history of previous warts and human immunodeficiency virus status. There was an accompanying economic evaluation, conducted from the provider perspective over the trial duration. SETTING: The setting was 22 sexual health clinics in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were patients with a first or repeat episode of anogenital warts who had not been treated in the previous 3 months and had not previously received quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to 5% imiquimod cream (Aldara®; Meda Pharmaceuticals, Takeley, UK) for up to 16 weeks or 0.15% podophyllotoxin cream (Warticon®; GlaxoSmithKlein plc, Brentford, UK) for 4 weeks, which was extended to up to 16 weeks if warts persisted. Participants were simultaneously randomised to quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (Gardasil) or saline control at 0, 8 and 24 weeks. Cryotherapy was permitted after week 4 at the discretion of the investigator. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were a combined primary outcome of wart clearance at week 16 and remaining wart free at week 48. Efficacy analysis was by logistic regression with multiple imputation for missing follow-up values; economic evaluation considered the costs per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: A total of 503 participants were enrolled and attended at least one follow-up visit. The mean age was 31 years, 66% of participants were male (24% of males were men who have sex with men), 50% had a previous history of warts and 2% were living with human immunodeficiency virus. For the primary outcome, the adjusted odds ratio for imiquimod cream versus podophyllotoxin cream was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.23), and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo, the adjusted odds ratio was 1.46 (95% confidence interval 0.97 to 2.20). For the components of the primary outcome, the adjusted odds ratio for wart free at week 16 for imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin was 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.14) and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo was 1.30 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.91). The adjusted odds ratio for remaining wart free at 48 weeks (in those who were wart free at week 16) for imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin was 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.78) and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo was 1.39 (95% confidence interval 0.73 to 2.63). Podophyllotoxin plus quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine had inconclusive cost-effectiveness compared with podophyllotoxin alone. LIMITATIONS: Hepatitis A vaccine as control was replaced by a saline placebo in a non-identical syringe, administered by someone outside the research team, for logistical reasons. Sample size was reduced from 1000 to 500 because of slow recruitment and other delays. CONCLUSIONS: A benefit of the vaccine was not demonstrated in this trial. The odds of clearance at week 16 and remaining clear at week 48 were 46% higher with vaccine, and consistent effects were seen for both wart clearance and recurrence separately, but these differences were not statistically significant. Imiquimod and podophyllotoxin creams had similar efficacy for wart clearance, but with a wide confidence interval. The trial results do not support earlier evidence of a lower recurrence with use of imiquimod than with use of podophyllotoxin. Podophyllotoxin without quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine is the most cost-effective strategy at the current vaccine list price. A further larger trial is needed to definitively investigate the effect of the vaccine; studies of the immune response in vaccine recipients are needed to investigate the mechanism of action. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN32729817 and EudraCT 2013-002951-14. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The HIPvac [Human papillomavirus infection: a randomised controlled trial of Imiquimod cream (5%) versus Podophyllotoxin cream (0.15%), in combination with quadrivalent human papillomavirus or control vaccination in the treatment and prevention of recurrence of anogenital warts] trial compared two commonly used creams to treat genital warts: 0.15% podophyllotoxin cream (Warticon^®; GlaxoSmithKlein plc, Brentford, UK) and 5% imiquimod cream (Aldara^®; Meda Pharmaceuticals, Takeley, UK). It also investigated whether or not a vaccine used to prevent human papillomavirus infection, quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (Gardasil^®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA), could help treat warts or prevent them from coming back in patients whose warts had been cleared. The HIPvac trial was a randomised controlled trial involving 503 patients with warts attending sexual health clinics in England and Wales. The creams and the vaccine were well tolerated; there was some soreness where the cream was applied, but no unexpected side effects. When deciding which treatment was better, we looked at whether or not the warts had cleared by 16 weeks after starting treatment and, if cleared, whether or not they returned by 48 weeks. We compared the creams against each other, and the addition of vaccine against no vaccine (a placebo injection). Patients were allowed to have cryotherapy (freezing treatment) as well, if the investigator advised this. We also calculated the value for money of each type of treatment. The two creams were very similar in how well they worked to clear the warts. One difference was that podophyllotoxin cream worked slightly quicker. The number of patients given cryotherapy was about the same for both types of cream. We had expected that recurrence of warts after treatment with imiquimod cream might be less than after treatment with podophyllotoxin cream, but, in fact, the two creams were similar. Quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine did not improve clearance of warts or reduce the chance of recurrence, but the result remains inconclusive. If we had been able to recuit 1000 participants as originally planned, we might have been able to be more certain about whether there was any benefit of vaccination. Further research would be needed to investigate any possible effect. The two creams offered similar value for money in treating warts. Giving patients the vaccine in addition to the cream is not good value for money at its current list price, given the uncertainty about the benefit it offers.

Paediatric atypical antipsychotic monitoring safety (PAMS) study: pilot study in children and adolescents in secondary- and tertiary-care settings.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, treatment with antipsychotic medications for children is usually initiated by specialists in secondary care. Recent studies have shown an increase in the prescribing of atypical antipsychotics in children. The severity of possible adverse effects to antipsychotics in adults has lead to awareness of the importance of investigating the potential adverse effects of these agents in children. Additionally, there have been many reports proposing that the newer atypical antipsychotics are associated with many of the same adverse effects seen with the older generation drugs in children. The aim of the Paediatric Atypical Antipsychotic Monitoring Safety (PAMS) study was to determine the feasibility of conducting a prospective targeted pharmacovigilance study to monitor adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with atypical antipsychotic therapy in children seen in secondary- and tertiary-care settings. METHODS: Participants were identified from the clinical members of the UK Paediatric Psychopharmacology Groups in London and the West Midlands. Participating clinicians reported the number of patients (aged

Databases for pediatric medicine research in Europe--assessment and critical appraisal.

PURPOSE: To identify and describe European health care databases that can be used for pediatric pharmacoepidemiological research. METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted among all European databases that were listed on the website of the International Society of Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) and/or known by an expert group. The survey comprised of questions regarding (a) the nature of the database, (b) database size, (c) demographic, clinical and drug related data provided, (d) cost, and (e) accessibility of the database. RESULTS: A total of 25 data sources from 12 European countries were identified and invited to participate in the survey. Responses were obtained from 21 (84%) databases located in 10 different European countries. Seventeen databases were included in the assessment comprising a total of at least 9 million children aged 0-18 years. The majority of databases are based on outpatient data and all keep either prescription or drug dispensing data. Ten databases are based on electronic patient records from primary care physicians and five databases are predominantly claims oriented. Three databases do not belong to either of the above mentioned categories. Almost all of the databases can be used for pediatric drug utilization studies. For drug safety studies it is more appropriate to use electronic patient record databases because of the available clinical information and the potential to obtain additional information. CONCLUSIONS: There are many European healthcare databases providing an enormous potential for pediatric pharmacoepidemiological research. Future research should focus on methods to bring data from different databases together to use the full capacity effectively.

Associations between the LEP -2548G/A Promoter and Baseline Weight and between LEPR Gln223Arg and Lys656Asn Variants and Change in BMI z Scores in Arab Children and Adolescents Treated with Risperidone.

Data on baseline (antipsychotics-naïve) age, weight, and height, and change in these at 3 subsequent follow-up time points up to 313.6 days (95% CI 303.5-323.7) were collected from 181 risperidone-treated children and adolescents (mean age 12.58 years, SD 4.99, range 2.17-17.7) attending a pediatric neurology clinic in Saudi Arabia. Owing to differences in genotypic distributions in the subsamples, results are reported for the white Arab population (n = 144). Age- and gender-normed body mass index (BMI)-standardized z scores (BMI z) were calculated (LMSgrowth program). Linear regression was performed for baseline weight and BMI z, while change in BMI z was assessed using random effects ordered logistic regression. The following single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were analyzed: rs7799039 in the LEP promoter, rs1805094 (previously rs8179183), rs1137100 and rs1137101 in the LEPR, and rs1414334 in HTR2C. We found a nominally significant association between rs7799309 and baseline weight, adjusting for height, age, gender, and diagnosis (A/G, p = 0.035, ß = -3.62 vs. G/G). The rs1137101 (G/G, p = 0.018, odds ratio [OR] = 4.13 vs. A/A) and rs1805094 C allele carriers (p = 0.019, OR = 0.51) showed nominally significant associations with change in BMI z categories. Our data support and replicate previous relevant associations for these variants (including with weight gain when on risperidone), whilst being the first report of such associations in patients of Arab ethnicity.

Effects of the Committee on Safety of Medicines advice on antidepressant prescribing to children and adolescents in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Psychotropic medication prescribing for children and adolescents rose significantly between 2000 and 2002, including antidepressant prescribing. In 2003, the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) advised against using venlafaxine or any selective serotonin receptor inhibitor (SSRI), with the exception of fluoxetine, for childhood and adolescent depression. The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence and incidence of children and adolescents who were prescribed antidepressants in UK primary care, before and after the CSM advice on antidepressant prescribing. We also compared paediatric antidepressant prescribing trends from Mediplus data with national antidepressant prescribing trends in England from the Prescription Pricing Authority (PPA). METHODS: The Disease Analyzer-Mediplus database contains anonymised primary care records for about 3 million patients. Eligible patients were aged or=1 antidepressant prescription between 2000 and 2004. Antidepressants were grouped according to the CSM advice and the British National Formulary. Prevalence and incidence were calculated. The prevalences of 2000, 2002 and 2004 were compared using a Chi-squared test. PPA data on antidepressant prescribing rates were compared with paediatric antidepressant prescribing rates from Mediplus. RESULTS: 5,718 children and adolescents received a total of 25,542 prescriptions between 2000 and 2004. The median number of prescriptions per patient was two (interquartile range 1-5). Common indications included depression and anxiety. Antidepressant prevalence increased from 2000 to 2002 (from 5.4 to 6.6 patients per 1,000 people), with a rise in the number of patients prescribed venlafaxine and SSRIs. However, between 2002 and 2004 there was a decrease in antidepressant prevalence (from 6.6 to 5.7 per 1,000). The prevalence of CSM-contraindicated antidepressants (citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline and venlafaxine) declined by a third (from 3.1 to 2.0 per 1,000), but there was no change in fluoxetine prevalence (from 2.1 to 2.3 per 1,000). The number of patients prescribed tricyclic antidepressants dropped marginally (from 2.0 to 1.7 per 1,000). Incidences followed the same trends as the prevalences, but there was a 48% reduction in the incidence of CSM-contraindicated antidepressants between 2002 and 2004. National antidepressant prescribing trends increased; paediatric prescribing trends were similar to national trends between 2000 and 2003; however, there was a 27% reduction in the paediatric prescribing rate of CSM-contraindicated antidepressants between 2002 and 2004. CONCLUSION: Since 2003, fewer children and adolescents have been prescribed antidepressants in primary care. However, fluoxetine and non-SSRI antidepressant prevalences have not risen, implying that they are not prescribed as alternative treatments. This study shows that the CSM advice has had a significant effect in reversing the rising prevalence of antidepressant prescribing to children and adolescents in primary care.

Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in children and adolescents.

Depression is a serious condition, associated with considerable morbidity and mortality; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were commonly used in its treatment in child and adolescent psychiatry until recently. In the wake of the recent UK Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) advice, we conducted a rapid review of current available information on SSRIs and suicidality (suicidal ideation, self-harm and suicide attempt) in children and adolescents from clinical trials and epidemiological studies. There is insufficient safety information from the randomised controlled trials to confirm a definite association between SSRIs and suicidality. Furthermore, analysis of suicide and antidepressant prescribing trends in three countries and a large case-control study do not support the hypothesis that there is a link between use of SSRIs and death caused by suicide. Regulatory agencies and the media should have strict guidelines for the management of information relating to the treatment of this condition so that clinicians can make properly informed decisions. We suggest clinical guidelines for managing depression in children and adolescents. SSRIs should not be considered for use as first-line treatment in mild or moderate depression of childhood, where psychological interventions such as cognitive behaviour therapy or interpersonal therapy are the mainstay. SSRIs should be considered when there is severe depression that does not respond to psychological interventions; when the child is suicidal and is admitted as an inpatient, is severely depressed or has bipolar depression despite adequate doses of mood-stabilisation agents; or when the child or family prefers pharmacotherapy to psychological interventions and gives informed consent. Local bodies of clinicians or peer groups should agree protocols and acceptable guidelines, taking into consideration the type of patients being assessed, the availability of nonpharmacological intervention, and the benefit-risk ratio of the pharmacological intervention. It is important that parents (and patients when possible) be given accurate information regarding the current controversy over SSRI prescribing. More research into the use of SSRIs in childhood depression is urgently required.