The potential of new nicotine and tobacco products as tools for people who smoke to quit combustible cigarettes - a systematic review of common practices and guidance towards a robust study protocol to measure cessation efficacy.

New types of nicotine and tobacco products like electronic cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products or nicotine pouches have been discussed as less harmful alternatives to combustible cigarettes and other toxic forms of tobacco products. Their harm reduction potential lay in the efficient transition away from smoking to those new products. Numerous studies addressing the cessation efficacy of ECs have been published with contradictory outcomes. Yet, a comprehensive Cochrane review concluded with high certainty on the cessation efficacy of ECs. This prompted us to perform a review to identify weaknesses in common study designs and to summarize best practices for the study design on the potential of new nicotine products as cessation aids. 120 articles retrieved from Medline were found to be eligible. Most of the studies in the field were interventional trials while observational studies played a minor role in the evaluation of smoking cessation. Efficacy was predominantly assessed for ECs in 77% of the reports while heated tobacco (17%) and non-combustible products (11%) were less frequently investigated up to now. Measures to determine the efficacy were questionnaire-based assessments as well as use documentation/prevalence and abstinence rates. Studies varied largely in their duration and sample size with medians of 3 months and 156.5 participants, respectively.With the help of this review, we identified several weaknesses in the common study designs. One major limitation in longitudinal trials was the lack of compliance measures suited to verify the use status over longer time periods, relying solely on self-reports. Moreover, the motivation of the participants to quit was rarely defined and a profound familiarization period was not taken into account for the majority of the studies. To what extent such weaknesses influence the outcome of the studies was beyond the scope of this review. We encourage researchers to consider the recommendations which resulted from this review in order to determine the abuse liability and cessation efficacy of the products in a more robust manner. Finally, we like to call attention to the missing data for low- and middle-income countries which would require quitting strategies most urgently to combat the tobacco smoking epidemic.

Examining external control arms in oncology: A scoping review of applications to date.

OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating the comparative efficacy and safety of new cancer therapies. However, enrolling patients in control arms of clinical trials can be challenging for rare cancers, particularly in the context of precision oncology and targeted therapies. External Control Arms (ECAs) are a potential solution to address these challenges in clinical research design. We conducted a scoping review to explore the use of ECAs in oncology. METHODS: We systematically searched four databases, namely MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus. We screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligible articles focusing on patients undergoing therapy for cancer, employing ECAs, and reporting clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 629 articles screened, 23 were included in this review. The earliest included studies were published in 1996, while most studies were published in the past 5 years. 44% (10/23) of ECAs were employed in blood-related cancer studies. Geographically, 30% (7/23) of studies were conducted in the United States, 22% (5/23) in Japan, and 9% (2/23) in South Korea. The primary data sources used to construct the ECAs involved pooled data from previous trials (35%, 8/23), administrative health databases (17%, 4/23) and electronic medical records (17%, 4/23). While 52% (12/23) of the studies employed methods to align treatment and ECAs characteristics, 48% (11/23) lacked explicit strategies. CONCLUSION: ECAs offer a valuable approach in oncology research, particularly when alternative designs are not feasible. However, careful methodological planning and detailed reporting are essential for meaningful and reliable results.

Role of drug-eluting bead bronchial arterial chemoembolisation in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: protocol for a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has a poor prognosis. Transvascular intervention is an important approach for treating NSCLC. Drug-eluting bead bronchial artery chemoembolisation (DEB-BACE) is a technique of using DEBs loaded with chemotherapeutic drugs for BACE. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the effectiveness and safety of DEB-BACE in treating NSCLC and investigate a novel therapeutic strategy for NSCLC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus and Embase databases will be searched in November 2024. A meta-analysis will be conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of DEB-BACE in the treatment of NSCLC. The following keywords will be applied: "Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung", "Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer", "Drug-Eluting Bead Bronchial Arterial Chemoembolization" and "drug-eluting beads". Reports in Chinese or English comparing the efficacy of DEB-BACE with other NSCLC treatment options will be included. Case reports, single-arm studies, conference papers, abstracts without full text and reports published in languages other than English and Chinese will not be considered. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions will be used to independently assess the risk of bias for each included study. In case of significant heterogeneity between studies, possible sources of heterogeneity will be explored through subgroup and sensitivity analysis. For the statistical analysis of the data, RevMan V.5.3 will be used. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This meta-analysis will seek publication in a peer-reviewed journal on completion. Ethical approval is not required for this study as it is a database-based study. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023411392.

Tutorial on Biostatistics: Sample Size and Power Calculation for Ophthalmic Studies With Correlated Binary Eye Outcomes.

Purpose: To describe and demonstrate sample size and power calculation for ophthalmic studies with a binary outcome from one or both eyes. Methods: We describe sample size and power calculation for four commonly used eye designs: (1) one-eye design or person-design: one eye per subject or outcome is at person-level; (2) paired design: two eyes per subject and two eyes are in different treatment groups; (3) two-eye design: two eyes per subject and both eyes are in the same treatment group; and (4) mixture design: mixture of one eye and two eyes per subject. For each design, we demonstrate sample size and power calculations in real ophthalmic studies. Results: Using formulas and commercial or free statistical packages including SAS, STATA, R, and PS, we calculated sample size and power. We demonstrated that different statistical packages require different parameters and provide similar, yet not identical, results. We emphasize that studies using data from two eyes of a subject need to account for the intereye correlation for appropriate sample size and power calculations. We demonstrate the gain in efficiency in designs that include two eyes of a subject compared to one-eye designs. Conclusions: Ophthalmic studies use different eye designs that include one or both eyes in the same or different treatment groups. Appropriate sample size and power calculations depend on the eye design and should account for intereye correlation when two eyes from some or all subjects are included in a study. Calculations can be executed using formulas and commercial or free statistical packages.

Design and modeling of order of addition experiment with component effects.

An order of addition experiment is an experiment to study how the order of addition of components affect the results, with the objective of predicting and determining the optimal order of addition of components. Order of addition experiment are also commonly used in the drug combination therapy, where experimenting with all drugs combinations is unaffordable. To solve this problem, we constructed a new design table, two-level component factorial design table (TLCF), which combine the component orthogonal array design table and the two-level partial factorial design table by matrix product. TLCF can explore the order and dosage effect of components on the results and can greatly reduce the number of experiments. We also prove that the relative D-efficiency of the TLCF can reach 100% and solve an explicit expression for the D-efficiency of the full design. In the simulation experiment, we compare the D-efficiency of the TLCF with the random design table to prove the superiority of TLCF. Finally, we give a treatment plan for the combination of three drugs for glioblastoma based on the TLCF, which provides a new perspective for the precision treatment of patients.

Psychosocial outcomes following emergency laparotomy (POLO) study: a study protocol for a multicentre mixed-methods prospective cohort study assessing the psycho-social outcomes following emergency laparotomy in adults.

INTRODUCTION: Morbidity from an emergency laparotomy (EmLap) is difficult to define and poorly understood. Morbidity is a holistic concept, reliant upon an interplay of bio-psychosocial outcomes that evolve long after discharge. To date, no previous study has explored the psychosocial outcomes following EmLap as a collective, nor their change over time. This study aims to describe the holistic morbidity following EmLap within the first year following surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, mixed-methods prospective 12-month cohort study with two participant populations: patient participants and family caregivers (FCGs). A target of 160 adult patients who undergo EmLap and can give informed consent will be included in the patient participant group. Patient participants will be asked to complete three patient surveys, incorporating validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess bio-psychosocial outcomes (EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ5D-5L), Gastrointestinal Quality Life Index-36, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7, International Trauma Questionnaire, Caregiver Interaction Scale and Fatigue Severity Scale) in the 12 months following surgery. A subgroup of 15 patient participants will be asked to take part in two semistructured interviews at 6 and 12 months. A target of 15 associated family caregivers will be included in the FCG group. FCGs will be asked to take part in a semi-structured interview at 6 months to assess the EmLap impact on the wider support network. The primary outcome will be a change in quality of life (EQ5D-5L) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes will be changes in bio-psychosocial status at 3 and 12 months. Qualitative analysis will allow contextualisation of PROMS and further explore themes of EmLap morbidity. It is anticipated that the results of this study will help inform and develop standards of aftercare for future EmLap patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethical approval (Wales REC7;12/WA/0297) and will be undertaken in accordance with the principles of Good Clinical Practice. We intend to disseminate study results in peer-reviewed journals and medical conferences, as well as a lay report to study participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical Trials.gov NCT05281627.

Examining the involvement of guardians of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in Tanzania as public contributors to inform the design and conduct of the GuardiansCan project: A mixed-methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Public contribution in research can lead to the design and conduct of more feasible and relevant research. However, our understanding of the acceptability and feasibility of public contribution and the evidence base regarding its impact in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. METHODS: In this study protocol, we describe a mixed-method examination of public contribution activities in the GuardiansCan project. The GuardiansCan project aims to respond to Tanzanian guardians' poor adherence to children's follow-up care after treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) with the help of Mobile Health technology. We aim to: (1) involve guardians of children treated for ALL as Guardians Advisory Board (GAB) members in the managing and undertaking, analysis and interpretation, and dissemination phases of the GuardiansCan project; and (2) examine the acceptability, feasibility, and perceived impact of GAB members' contribution to the GuardiansCan project from the perspective of the GAB members and public contribution coordinators. We will recruit six to eight guardians of children treated for ALL to the GAB. We will hold workshops where GAB members contribute to all project phases. Using impact logs, we will record GAB workshop activities and the perceived impact of these activities. We will interview GAB members and public contribution coordinators 6 months after establishing the GAB, and at the end of each study within the project, to examine the acceptability, feasibility, and perceived impact of public contribution activities. DISCUSSION: We expect GAB contribution to increase project quality and relevance, and inform how to best embed public contribution in research in LMICs.

Bayesian sequential monitoring strategies for trials of digestive cancer therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: New therapeutics in oncology have presented challenges to existing paradigms and trial designs in all phases of drug development. As a motivating example, we considered an ongoing phase II trial planned to evaluate the combination of a MET inhibitor and an anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy to treat advanced oesogastric carcinoma. The objective of the paper was to exemplify the planning of an adaptive phase II trial with novel anti-cancer agents, including prolonged observation windows and joint sequential evaluation of efficacy and toxicity. METHODS: We considered various candidate designs and computed decision rules assuming correlations between efficacy and toxicity. Simulations were conducted to evaluate the operating characteristics of all designs. RESULTS: Design approaches allowing continuous accrual, such as the time-to-event Bayesian Optimal Phase II design (TOP), showed good operating characteristics while ensuring a reduced trial duration. All designs were sensitive to the specification of the correlation between efficacy and toxicity during planning, but TOP can take that correlation into account more easily. CONCLUSIONS: While specifying design working hypotheses requires caution, Bayesian approaches such as the TOP design had desirable operating characteristics and allowed incorporating concomittant information, such as toxicity data from concomitant observations in another relevant patient population (e.g., defined by mutational status).

Defining the gaps in transitional care to adulthood for patients in paediatric surgical specialties: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Transitioning patients from their paediatric centres to adulthood is an important subject for many of these patients living with different chronic pathologies. There are few studies that assess its effectiveness in paediatric surgical pathologies. The overall objective of this scoping review is to assess the extent of the literature describing transitional programmes dedicated to young patients living with surgical conditions. The primary question will look to assess what transitional programmes are available for young patients living with surgical conditions either operated or not. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The proposed scoping review will follow guidelines described by the Joanna Briggs Institute manual described by Peters et al in 2020. This protocol will employ the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols checklist. The concept that will be included in this review is the exposure of these patients to a transition of care pathway or care programmes. Patients between the ages of 16 and 30 with a surgical condition will be included. There will be no comparator. No specific outcomes will be assessed, however, the outcomes that will be found from the transition programmes will be reviewed. A knowledge synthesis librarian will search MEDLINE All (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate) and CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost). The literature search will be limited to 2000 onwards publications. No language or age group limitation will be applied. The reference list of all included sources of evidence will be screened for additional studies. Screening of search results and data extraction from included studies will be completed in Covidence by two independent reviewers. We will also use the PAGER (Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations) framework to report and summarise the results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethics approval. Our dissemination strategy includes peer review publication, conference presentation, co-constructed guidelines with stakeholders and policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review is registered on OSF.

U-PRO-CRM: designing patient-centred dose-finding trials with patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) remains the primary objective for the majority of dose-finding oncology trials. Whilst MTD determination often relies upon clinicians to identify dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) experienced by patients during the trial, research suggests that clinicians may underreport patient's adverse events. Therefore, contemporary practice may be exposed to recommending intolerable doses to patients for further investigation in subsequent trials. There is increasing interest in patients self-assessing their own symptoms using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in dose-finding trials. DESIGN: We present Utility-PRO-Continual Reassessment Method (U-PRO-CRM), a novel trial design which simultaneously uses clinician-rated and patient-rated DLTs (Clinician-DLTs and Patient-DLTs, respectively) to make dose (de-)escalation decisions and to recommend an MTD. U-PRO-CRM contains the published PRO-CRM as a special case and provides greater flexibility to trade-off the rate of Patient-DLTs and Clinician-DLTs to find an optimal dose. We present simulation results for U-PRO-CRM. RESULTS: For specified trade-offs between Clinician-DLT and Patient-DLT rate, U-PRO-CRM outperforms the PRO-CRM design by identifying the true MTD more often. In the special case where U-PRO-CRM generalises to PRO-CRM, U-PRO-CRM performs as well as its published counterpart. U-PRO-CRM minimises the number of patients overdosed whilst maintaining a similar proportion of patients allocated to the true MTD. CONCLUSIONS: By using a utility-based dose selection approach, U-PRO-CRM offers the flexibility to define a trade-off between the risk of patient-rated and clinician-rated DLTs for an optimal dose. Patient-centric dose-finding strategies, which integrate PROs, are poised to assume an ever more pivotal role in significantly advancing our understanding of treatment tolerability. This bears significant implications in shaping the future landscape of early-phase trials.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with overweight or obesity: a meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of overweight or obesity among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy is on the rise. The utilisation of robotic assistance has the potential to enhance the feasibility of performing minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in this particular group of patients who are at a higher risk. The objective of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in individuals with overweight or obesity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This investigation will systematically search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that compare robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy with open or laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with overweight or obesity, using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases. The methodological quality of studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. RevMan software (V.5.4.1) will be used for statistical analysis. The OR and weighted mean differences will be calculated separately for dichotomous and continuous data. The selection of a fixed-effects or random-effects model will depend on the level of heterogeneity observed among the included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted based on data in the published literature from publicly available databases. Therefore, ethics approval is not applicable. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023462321.

Global evaluation and outcomes of cholecystectomy: protocol for a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study (GlobalSurg 4).

INTRODUCTION: Cholecystectomy is one of the most common operations performed worldwide. Although laparoscopic surgery has been the 'gold-standard' approach for this operation, there is a paucity of global evidence around the variations of safe provision of cholecystectomy, including low-income and middle-income countries. This international collaborative study will allow contemporaneous data collection on the quality of cholecystectomies using measures covering infrastructure, care processes and outcomes, with the primary aim define the global variation in compliance with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative audit standards. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Global Evaluation of Cholecystectomy Knowledge and Outcomes is a prospective, international, multicentre, observational cohort study delivered by the GlobalSurg Collaborative. Consecutive patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 31 July 2023 and 19 November 2023 will be recruited, with follow-up at 30 days and 1-year postoperatively. The study will be undertaken at any hospital providing emergency or elective surgical services for biliary disease. The primary endpoint of this study is compliance with preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative audit standards. Secondary outcomes include rates of 30-day complications, achievement of critical view of safety and rates of gallbladder cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project will not affect clinical practice and has been classified as clinical audit following research ethics review at University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust. The protocol will be disseminated through the international GlobalSurg and CovidSurg network. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06223061.

ChecKAP: A Checklist for Reporting a Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) Study.

INTRODUCTION: The Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) model is a foundational tool in public health research. KAP surveys play a vital role in this process by gauging a population's current level of knowledge about a specific health issue. Rigorous evaluation is essential for ensuring the validity and reliability of KAP studies. Therefore, in this study, a comprehensive checklist for reporting Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) Studies was developed. METHODOLOGY: This study was conducted using a systematic six-step roadmap. A comprehensive review of available relevant quality assessment tools led to the development of specific new items. An expert panel reviewed the initial draft, and after corrections were made, the second draft was finalized and subjected to psychometric analysis by experts. RESULTS: The development of ChecKAP (Checklist for Reporting Items for Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice) represents a significant contribution to KAP studies. The final tool consists of 46 items across 8 fields: title (1 item), abstract (6 items), keywords (1 item), introduction (6 items), method (11 items), findings (7 items), discussion (15 items), and conclusion (1 item). CONCLUSION: ChecKAP assesses the inherent complexity of KAP research methods and ensures consistent reporting. It fills an important gap in the KAP research literature and serves a dual purpose. First, it acts as a quality assessment tool for reviewers, enabling them to evaluate the methodological rigor and clarity of submitted manuscripts. Second, it serves as a guideline for authors, promoting a more systematic and transparent approach to reporting.

Development of a core data set for describing, measuring and reporting the learning curve in studies of novel invasive procedures: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of novel surgical techniques and procedures remains poorly regulated and standardised. Although the learning curve associated with invasive procedures is a critical part of innovation, it is currently inconsistently defined, measured and reported. This study aims to develop a core data set that can be applied in all studies describing or measuring the learning curve in novel invasive procedures. METHODS: A core data set will be developed using methods adapted from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative. The study will involve three phases: (1) Identification of a comprehensive list of data items through (a) an umbrella review of existing systematic reviews on the learning curve in surgery and (b) qualitative interviews with key stakeholders. (2) Key stakeholders (eg, clinical innovators, clinicians, patients, methodologists, statisticians, journal editors and governance representatives) will complete a Delphi survey to score the importance of each data item, generating a shortened list. (3) Consensus meeting(s) with stakeholders to discuss and agree on the final core data set. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by an Institutional Ethics Committee at the University of Bristol (ref: 111362). Participants will complete written informed consent to participate. Dissemination strategies include scientific meeting presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications, patient engagement events, use of social media platforms, workshops and other events.

Methodological quality of research on perioperative immunomodulatory supplementation in oncological gastrointestinal tract surgery: a meta-research protocol.

INTRODUCTION: One of the topics that show differences of opinion in the scientific field of nutrition is the recommendation by clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) of an immunomodulatory diet with arginine, nucleotides and omega-3 for individuals diagnosed with cancer undergoing major surgery. The quality of the recommendations is directly related to credibility, transparency and rigour in their development, but also to the quality of the studies published and available for inclusion in the recommendation, such as systematic reviews (SRs) and randomised clinical trials. The aim of this study is to evaluate the methodological quality of the recommendation of perioperative immunomodulatory supplementation for individuals with gastrointestinal and head and neck cancer, the CPGs, and the studies that support the recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic search for CPGs. Recommendations for nutritional supplementation with immunomodulatory substrates for individuals undergoing major oncological surgery will be analysed using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence tool. CPGs will be analysed using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II tool. The SRs cited in the recommendations will be analysed using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews II tool and additional questions regarding heterogeneity in reviews. The clinical trials cited in the SRs and in the guideline recommendations (when applicable) will be analysed according to questions regarding heterogeneity in trials. The results will be presented in tables or charts using descriptive analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this study will be disseminated through relevant conferences and peer-reviewed journals. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/X2GYT.

Protocol for a systematic review with prospective individual patient data meta-analysis in EGFR-mutant NSCLC with brain metastases to assess the effect of SRS+osimertinib compared to osimertinib alone: the STARLET Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene are a heterogeneous population who often develop brain metastases (BM). The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic brain metastases is unclear given the activity of newer-generation targeted therapies in the central nervous system. We present a protocol for an individual patient data (IPD) prospective meta-analysis to evaluate whether the addition of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) before osimertinib treatment will lead to better control of intracranial metastatic disease. This is a clinically relevant question that will inform practice. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials will be eligible if they include participants with BM arising from EGFR-mutant NSCLC and suitable to receive osimertinib both in the first-line and second-line settings (P); comparisons of SRS followed by osimertinib versus osimertinib alone (I, C) and intracranial disease control included as an endpoint (O). Systematic searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsychInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform's Search Portal will be undertaken. An IPD meta-analysis will be performed using methodologies recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. The primary outcome is intracranial progression-free survival, as determined by response assessment in neuro-oncology-BM criteria. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, time to whole brain radiotherapy, quality of life, and adverse events of special interest. Effect differences will be explored among prespecified subgroups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by each trial's ethics committee. Results will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, policymakers and patients, and will be disseminated via publications, presentations and media releases. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022330532.

Improving health system responses when patients are harmed: a protocol for a multistage mixed-methods study.

INTRODUCTION: At least 10% of hospital admissions in high-income countries, including Australia, are associated with patient safety incidents, which contribute to patient harm ('adverse events'). When a patient is seriously harmed, an investigation or review is undertaken to reduce the risk of further incidents occurring. Despite 20 years of investigations into adverse events in healthcare, few evaluations provide evidence of their quality and effectiveness in reducing preventable harm.This study aims to develop consistent, informed and robust best practice guidance, at state and national levels, that will improve the response, learning and health system improvements arising from adverse events. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The setting will be healthcare organisations in Australian public health systems in the states of New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. We will apply a multistage mixed-methods research design with evaluation and in-situ feasibility testing. This will include literature reviews (stage 1), an assessment of the quality of 300 adverse event investigation reports from participating hospitals (stage 2), and a policy/procedure document review from participating hospitals (stage 3) as well as focus groups and interviews on perspectives and experiences of investigations with healthcare staff and consumers (stage 4). After triangulating results from stages 1-4, we will then codesign tools and guidance for the conduct of investigations with staff and consumers (stage 5) and conduct feasibility testing on the guidance (stage 6). Participants will include healthcare safety systems policymakers and staff (n=120-255) who commission, undertake or review investigations and consumers (n=20-32) who have been impacted by adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH02007 and 2023/ETH02341).The research findings will be incorporated into best practice guidance, published in international and national journals and disseminated through conferences.

Clinical implications of the family history in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature and a new cross-sectional/prospective study design (FAHIC: lung).

Compared to other malignancies, few studies have investigated the role of family history of cancer (FHC) in patients with lung cancer, yielding largely heterogeneous results. We performed a systematic literature review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching the PubMed and Scopus databases from their inception to November 25, 2023, to identify studies reporting on the role of FHC in patients with lung cancer. A total of 53 articles were included, most with a retrospective design and encompassing a variety of geographical areas and ethnicities.Thirty studies (56.6%) assessed patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), while 17 studies (32.1%) assessed patients with mixed histologies. Overall, the rates of FHC ranged from 8.3 to 68.9%, and the rates of family history of lung cancer ranged from 2 to 46.8%. Twenty-seven studies investigated FHC as a potential risk factor for lung cancer, with more than half reporting an increased risk for subjects with FHC. Five studies reported on the potential role of FHC in determining clinical outcomes, and twelve studies examined the relationship between FHC and germline mutations. Notably, only one study reported a significantly increased rate of germline mutations, including ATM, BRCA2, and TP53, for patients with a family history of lung cancer compared to those without, but both groups had a low prevalence of mutations (< 1%).The FAHIC-Lung (NCT06196424) is the first cross-sectional/prospective study specifically developed to identify FHC patterns and within-family clusters of other risk factors, including smoking, to guide patients with NSCLC to systematic genetic counseling. Acknowledging the largely heterogeneous results of our systematic review and considering the clinical implications of detecting pathogenic germline variants (PGVs), the FAHIC-lung study aims to identify patients potentially enriched with PGVs/likely PGVs to direct them to germline screening outside of the research setting.