Current practices in studies applying the target trial emulation framework: a protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies represent an alternative to estimate real-world causal effects in the absence of available randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Target trial emulation is a framework for the application of RCT design principles to emulate a hypothetical open-label RCT (the hypothetical target trial) using existing observational data as the primary data source as opposed to the prospective recruitment and measurement of randomised units. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the practices of studies applying the target trial emulation framework to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search in Medline (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid, entries from medRxiv are included), PsycINFO (via Ovid), SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, the ISRCTN registry and ClinicalTrials.gov for all study reports and protocols which used the trial emulation framework (without time restriction). We will extract information concerning study design, data source, analysis, results, interpretation and dissemination. Two reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Disagreements between reviewers will be resolved by a third reviewer. A narrative approach will be used to synthesise and report qualitative and quantitative data. Reporting of the review will be informed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidance (PRISMA). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as it is a protocol for a systematic review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

Photodynamic versus white-light-guided resection of first-diagnosis non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: PHOTO RCT.

BACKGROUND: Around 7500 people are diagnosed with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the UK annually. Recurrence following transurethral resection of bladder tumour is common, and the intensive monitoring schedule required after initial treatment has associated costs for patients and the NHS. In photodynamic diagnosis, before transurethral resection of bladder tumour, a photosensitiser that is preferentially absorbed by tumour cells is instilled intravesically. Transurethral resection of bladder tumour is then conducted under blue light, causing the photosensitiser to fluoresce. Photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour offers better diagnostic accuracy than standard white-light-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour, potentially reducing the chance of subsequent recurrence. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour. DESIGN: This was a multicentre, pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group, non-masked, superiority randomised controlled trial. Allocation was by remote web-based service, using a 1 : 1 ratio and a minimisation algorithm balanced by centre and sex. SETTING: The setting was 22 NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥ 16 years with a suspected first diagnosis of high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer, no contraindications to photodynamic diagnosis and written informed consent were eligible. INTERVENTIONS: Photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour and standard white-light cystoscopy transurethral resection of bladder tumour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary clinical outcome measure was the time to recurrence from the date of randomisation to the date of pathologically proven first recurrence (or intercurrent bladder cancer death). The primary health economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 3 years. RESULTS: We enrolled 538 participants from 22 UK hospitals between 11 November 2014 and 6 February 2018. Of these, 269 were allocated to photodynamic diagnosis and 269 were allocated to white light. A total of 112 participants were excluded from the analysis because of ineligibility (n = 5), lack of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer diagnosis following transurethral resection of bladder tumour (n = 89) or early cystectomy (n = 18). In total, 209 photodynamic diagnosis and 217 white-light participants were included in the clinical end-point analysis population. All randomised participants were included in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Over a median follow-up period of 21 months for the photodynamic diagnosis group and 22 months for the white-light group, there were 86 recurrences (3-year recurrence-free survival rate 57.8%, 95% confidence interval 50.7% to 64.2%) in the photodynamic diagnosis group and 84 recurrences (3-year recurrence-free survival rate 61.6%, 95% confidence interval 54.7% to 67.8%) in the white-light group (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.28; p = 0.70). Adverse event frequency was low and similar in both groups [12 (5.7%) in the photodynamic diagnosis group vs. 12 (5.5%) in the white-light group]. At 3 years, the total cost was £12,881 for photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour and £12,005 for white light. There was no evidence of differences in the use of health services or total cost at 3 years. At 3 years, the quality-adjusted life-years gain was 2.094 in the photodynamic diagnosis transurethral resection of bladder tumour group and 2.087 in the white light group. The probability that photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour was cost-effective was never > 30% over the range of society's cost-effectiveness thresholds. LIMITATIONS: Fewer patients than anticipated were correctly diagnosed with intermediate- to high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer before transurethral resection of bladder tumour and the ratio of intermediate- to high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer was higher than expected, reducing the number of observed recurrences and the statistical power. CONCLUSIONS: Photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour did not reduce recurrences, nor was it likely to be cost-effective compared with white light at 3 years. Photodynamic diagnosis-guided transurethral resection of bladder tumour is not supported in the management of primary intermediate- to high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. FUTURE WORK: Further work should include the modelling of appropriate surveillance schedules and exploring predictive and prognostic biomarkers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN84013636. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Around 7500 people are diagnosed with early-stage bladder cancer in the UK each year. Early bladder cancer is contained within the bladder and has not yet invaded the bladder's muscle wall or spread elsewhere in the body. The cancer will return (recur) in around half of people after initial treatment and they have to attend hospital for regular check-ups, with costs to both them and the NHS. The first step in treating early bladder cancer is surgery to remove the tumour. This surgery is normally performed under white light. Photodynamic diagnosis is a new technique in which a liquid is put into the patient's bladder before surgery and a blue light is used during the operation. This causes the bladder cancer to fluoresce so that it can be seen more easily by the surgeon. The Photodynamic versus white-light-guided resection of first diagnosis non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer ( PHOTO ) trial aimed to find out whether or not using photodynamic diagnosis at initial surgery would reduce how often the cancer recurred and whether or not this could reduce the cost of treating early bladder cancer. A total of 538 people with early bladder cancer who had a medium to high chance of their cancer returning after treatment were enrolled in the PHOTO trial. They were included in one of two treatment groups, at random: 269 had photodynamic surgery and 269 had standard white-light surgery. People in both groups were monitored regularly for any recurrences, with further treatment as appropriate. After 3 years, 4 out of 10 people in each group had a recurrence of their bladder cancer. We found no difference between the treatment groups in the number of people with recurrences. We found no evidence of a benefit to patients, and the total costs of photodynamic surgery were higher than those of standard white light. We therefore recommend that it is no longer used in the treatment of this group of patients.

Day case laparoscopic cholecystectomy at Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery has promoted the case for safe, affordable surgical care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In 2017, Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (KCMC) in Tanzania introduced a day case laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DCLC) service, the first of its kind in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We aimed to evaluate this novel service in terms of safety, feasibility and acceptability by patients and staff. METHODS: This study used mixed methods and was split into two stages. In stage 1, we reviewed records of all laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs) comparing day cases and admissions. These patients were followed up with a telephone questionnaire to investigate complication rates and receive service feedback. Stage 2 consisted of semi-structured interviews with staff exploring the challenges KCMC faced in implementing DCLC. RESULTS: 147 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were completed: 109 were planned for DCLC, 82 (75.2%) of which were successful, whilst 27 (24.8%) patients were admitted. No variables significantly predicted unplanned admission, the commonest causes for which were pain and nausea. In the DCLC group there was 1 readmission. 62 patients answered the follow up questionnaire, 60 (97%) of which were satisfied with the service. Stage 2 interviews suggested staff to be motivated for DCLC but revealed poor organisation of the day case pathway. CONCLUSION: High rates of DCLC combined with low rates of complications and readmission suggests DCLC is feasible at KCMC. However, staff interviews alluded to administrative problems preventing KCMC from reaching its full DCLC potential. A dedicated day case surgery unit would address most of these problems.

COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: To describe epidemiological data on cases of COVID-19 and the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in the United Kingdom (UK), and the subsequent policy and technological response to the pandemic, including impact on healthcare, business and the economy. METHODS: Epidemiological, business and economic data were extracted from official government sources covering the period 31st January to 13th August 2020; healthcare system data up to end of June 2019. RESULTS: UK-wide COVID-19 cases and deaths were 313,798 and 46,706 respectively (472 cases and 70 deaths per 100,000 population) by 12th August. There were regional variations in England, with London and North West (756 and 666 cases per 100,000 population respectively) disproportionately affected compared with other regions. As of 11th August, 13,618,470 tests had been conducted in the UK. Increased risk of mortality was associated with age (≥60 years), gender (male) and BAME groups. Since onset of the pandemic, emergency department attendance, primary care utilisation and cancer referrals and inpatient/outpatient referrals have declined; emergency ambulance and NHS111 calls increased. Business sectors most impacted are the arts, entertainment and recreation, followed by accommodation and food services. Government interventions aimed at curtailing the business and economic impact have been implemented, but applications for state benefits have increased. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of COVID-19 on the UK population, health system and economy has been profound. More data are needed to implement the optimal policy and technological responses to preventing further spikes in COVID-19 cases, and to inform strategic planning to manage future pandemics.

A web-based intervention (RESTORE) to support self-management of cancer-related fatigue following primary cancer treatment: a multi-centre proof of concept randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a frequent and distressing symptom experienced after cancer treatment. RESTORE is the first web-based resource designed to enhance self-efficacy to manage CRF following curative-intent treatment. The aim of this study is to test the proof of concept and inform the design of an effectiveness trial. METHODS: A multi-centre parallel-group two-armed (1:1) exploratory randomised controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative process evaluation was employed in the study. Participants (≥18 years; ≤5 years post treatment with moderate to severe fatigue) were recruited and randomly assigned to RESTORE or a leaflet. Feasibility and acceptability were measured by recruitment, attrition, intervention adherence, completion of outcome measures and process evaluation. Change in self-efficacy to manage CRF was also explored. Outcome measures were completed at baseline (T0), 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2). Data were analysed using mixed-effects linear regression and directed content analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three people participated in the trial and 19 in the process evaluation. The intervention was feasible (39 % of eligible patients consented) and acceptable (attrition rate 36 %). There was evidence of higher fatigue self-efficacy at T1 in the intervention group vs comparator (mean difference 0.51 [-0.08 to 1.11]), though the difference in groups decreased by 12 weeks. Time since diagnosis influenced perceived usefulness of the intervention. Modifications were suggested. CONCLUSION: Proof of concept was achieved. The RESTORE intervention should be subject to a definitive trial with some adjustments. Provision of an effective supportive resource would empower cancer survivors to manage CRF after treatment completion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67521059.

The effectiveness of acupressure for the control and management of chemotherapy-related acute and delayed nausea: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Both positive and negative results have been reported in the literature from the use of acupressure at the P6 point, providing evidence of highly suggestive but not conclusive results. OBJECTIVES: To clarify whether acupressure is effective in the management of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting. METHODS: A randomized, three-group, sham-controlled trial was designed. Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy were randomized to receive standardized antiemetics and acupressure wristbands, sham acupressure wristbands, or antiemetics alone. Primary outcome assessment (nausea) was carried out daily for seven days per chemotherapy cycle over four cycles. Secondary outcomes included vomiting, psychological distress, and quality of life. RESULTS: Five hundred patients were randomized. Primary outcome analysis (nausea in Cycle 1) revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups, although nausea levels in the proportion of patients using wristbands (both real and sham) were somewhat lower than those in the proportion of patients using antiemetics-only group. Adjusting for gender, age, and emetic risk of chemotherapy, the odds ratio of lower nausea experience was 1.18 and 1.42 for the acupressure and sham acupressure groups, respectively. A gender interaction effect was evident (P = 0.002). No significant differences were detected in relation to vomiting, anxiety, and quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSION: No clear recommendations can be made about the use of acupressure wristbands in the management of chemotherapy-related nausea and vomiting as results did not reach statistical significance. However, the study provided evidence of encouraging signals in relation to improved nausea experience and warrants further consideration in both practice and further clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with the ISRCT register, number ISRCTN87604299.

Lessons learnt recruiting to a multi-site UK cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being after colorectal cancer (CREW study).

BACKGROUND: The UK leads the world in recruitment of patients to cancer clinical trials, with a six-fold increase in recruitment during 2001-2010. However, there are large variations across cancer centres. This paper details recruitment to a large multi-centre prospective cohort study and discusses lessons learnt to enhance recruitment. METHODS: During CREW (ColoREctal Wellbeing) cohort study set up and recruitment, data were systematically collected on all centres that applied to participate, time from study approval to first participant recruited and the percentage of eligible patients recruited into the study. RESULTS: 30 participating NHS cancer centres were selected through an open competition via the cancer networks. Time from study approval to first participant recruited took a median 124 days (min 53, max 290). Of 1350 eligible people in the study time frame, 78% (n = 1056) were recruited into the study, varying from 30-100% eligible across centres. Recruitment of 1056 participants took 17 months. CONCLUSION: In partnership with the National Cancer Research Network, this successful study prioritised relationship building and education. Key points for effective recruitment: pre-screening and selection of centres; nurses as PIs; attendance at study days; frequent communication and a reduced level of consent to enhance uptake amongst underrepresented groups.

"Until the trial is complete you can't really say whether it helped you or not, can you?": exploring cancer patients' perceptions of taking part in a trial of acupressure wristbands.

BACKGROUND: Nested qualitative studies within clinical trials provide data on patients' experiences of receiving trial interventions and can inform and improve trial designs. The present study explored patients' experiences of participating in a randomised controlled trial of acupressure wristbands for chemotherapy related nausea. METHODS: A randomised three-group sham-controlled trial was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of acupressure wristbands in the management of chemotherapy-related nausea. A convenience sample of 26 patients volunteered to participate in a qualitative study to explore their experiences of using acupressure wristbands, and taking part in the clinical trial. Participants were recruited from each of the three UK geographical sites from which the trial was conducted: Manchester, Liverpool and Plymouth. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with the participants in their own homes or other location convenient for participating patients. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework methodology. RESULTS: The main motivational factors influencing participants to take part in the trial were a desire to 'give something back' and limit their own experience of nausea. Participants were largely satisfied with the organisation and running of the acupressure wristband trial. Many participants experienced positive outcomes as a result of taking part in the trial. Lapses in memory, or poor health as a result of their chemotherapy treatment, led to some participants failing to complete trial paperwork on designated days. Two sham wristband participants reported wearing the bands inappropriately resulting in pressure being applied to the acupoint. Almost all of the participants interviewed had only experienced mild nausea or vomiting during the trial. Participants were pragmatic on the extent to which the wristbands were responsible for this lack of nausea and vomiting during the trial. However, many participants, including some patients receiving sham acupressure, believed the wristbands to have had a positive impact on their nausea and vomiting; there was a perception that the wristbands were, at least in part, responsible for the lack of nausea and vomiting they had experienced. CONCLUSIONS: Participants perceive acupressure wristbands as reducing the level of nausea and vomiting experienced during chemotherapy treatment. Reports that some participants wore wristbands inappropriately, and/or delayed completion of trial paperwork could represent confounding variables and have implications for the trial results, and the design of clinical trials within the field of cancer.

RESTORE: an exploratory trial of an online intervention to enhance self-efficacy to manage problems associated with cancer-related fatigue following primary cancer treatment: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are over 25 million people worldwide living with or beyond cancer and this number is increasing. Cancer survivors face a range of problems following primary treatment. One of the most frequently reported and distressing symptoms experienced by cancer survivors is fatigue. There is growing support for survivors who are experiencing problems after cancer treatment to engage in supported self-management. To date there is some evidence of effective interventions to manage fatigue in this population; however, to our knowledge there are no online resources that draw on this information to support self-management of fatigue. This paper describes the protocol for an exploratory randomized controlled trial of an online intervention to support self-management of cancer-related fatigue after primary cancer treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a parallel-group two-armed (1:1) exploratory randomized controlled trial including 125 cancer survivors experiencing fatigue (scoring ≥4 on a unidimensional 11-point numeric rating scale for fatigue intensity) within five years of primary treatment completion with curative intent. Participants will be recruited from 13 NHS Trusts across the UK and randomized to either the online intervention (RESTORE), or a leaflet comparator (Macmillan Cancer Backup, Coping with Fatigue). The primary outcome is a change in Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management (as measured by the Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management Instrument). Secondary outcomes include impact on perception and experience of fatigue (measured by the Brief Fatigue Inventory), and quality of life (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General and the Personal Wellbeing Index). Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, 6 weeks (completion of intervention), and 3 months. Process evaluation (including telephone interviews with recruiting staff and participants) will determine acceptability of the intervention and trial processes. DISCUSSION: Data from this trial will be used to refine the intervention and contribute to the design of an effectiveness trial. This intervention will be expanded to address other cancer-related problems important to cancer survivors following primary cancer treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67521059.

Chair massage for patients and carers: a pilot service in an outpatient setting of a cancer care hospital.

PURPOSE: To gather patient and carer evaluations of a 20 min chair massage treatment provided one afternoon a week in an outpatient waiting area. METHOD: Information gathered over a year included documented evaluation of chair massage, pre- and post-treatment well-being scores (visual analogue scale). RESULTS: Both patients (n=224) and carers (n=185) positively evaluated the treatment. Key benefits reported included: relaxation, comfort, time out/treat, distraction, and relief of anxiety. There were significant changes in self-reported well-being score (p=<0.001), but no significant changes between scores for males and females. The changes in well-being scores on occasions (n=3) did not match the positive feedback. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the service was appreciated by patients and carers. The project was continued for a further year with internal funding. Further research is warranted to ascertain the added and longer-term value of this intervention.

What do evaluation instruments tell us about the quality of complementary medicine information on the internet?

BACKGROUND: Developers of health information websites aimed at consumers need methods to assess whether their website is of "high quality." Due to the nature of complementary medicine, website information is diverse and may be of poor quality. Various methods have been used to assess the quality of websites, the two main approaches being (1) to compare the content against some gold standard, and (2) to rate various aspects of the site using an assessment tool. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to review available evaluation instruments to assess their performance when used by a researcher to evaluate websites containing information on complementary medicine and breast cancer. In particular, we wanted to see if instruments used the same criteria, agreed on the ranking of websites, were easy to use by a researcher, and if use of a single tool was sufficient to assess website quality. METHODS: Bibliographic databases, search engines, and citation searches were used to identify evaluation instruments. Instruments were included that enabled users with no subject knowledge to make an objective assessment of a website containing health information. The elements of each instrument were compared to nine main criteria defined by a previous study. Google was used to search for complementary medicine and breast cancer sites. The first six results and a purposive six from different origins (charities, sponsored, commercial) were chosen. Each website was assessed using each tool, and the percentage of criteria successfully met was recorded. The ranking of the websites by each tool was compared. The use of the instruments by others was estimated by citation analysis and Google searching. RESULTS: A total of 39 instruments were identified, 12 of which met the inclusion criteria; the instruments contained between 4 and 43 questions. When applied to 12 websites, there was agreement of the rank order of the sites with 10 of the instruments. Instruments varied in the range of criteria they assessed and in their ease of use. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the content of websites against a gold standard is time consuming and only feasible for very specific advice. Evaluation instruments offer gateway providers a method to assess websites. The checklist approach has face validity when results are compared to the actual content of "good" and "bad" websites. Although instruments differed in the range of items assessed, there was fair agreement between most available instruments. Some were easier to use than others, but these were not necessarily the instruments most widely used to date. Combining some of the better features of instruments to provide fewer, easy-to-use methods would be beneficial to gateway providers.