Dietary supplements to reduce symptom severity and duration in people with SARS-CoV-2: a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused morbidity, hospitalisation and mortality worldwide. Despite effective vaccines, there is still a need for effective treatments, especially for people in the community. Dietary supplements have long been used to treat respiratory infections, and preliminary evidence indicates some may be effective in people with COVID-19. We sought to evaluate whether a combination of vitamin C, vitamin D3, vitamin K2 and zinc could improve overall health and decrease symptom burden in outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: Participants were randomised to receive either vitamin C (6 g), vitamin D3 (1000 units), vitamin K2 (240 µg) and zinc acetate (75 mg) or placebo daily for 21 days and were followed for 12 weeks. An additional loading dose of 50 000 units vitamin D3 (or placebo) was given on day one. The primary outcome was participant-reported overall health using the EuroQol Visual Assessment Scale summed over 21 days. Secondary outcomes included health status, symptom severity, symptom duration, delayed return to usual health, frequency of hospitalisation and mortality. RESULTS: 90 patients (46 control, 44 treatment) were randomised. The study was stopped prematurely due to insufficient capacity for recruitment. The mean difference (control-treatment) in cumulative overall health was -37.4 (95% CI -157.2 to 82.3), p=0.53 on a scale of 0-2100. No clinically or statistically significant differences were seen in any secondary outcomes. INTERPRETATION: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19, the dietary supplements vitamin C, vitamin D3, vitamin K2 and zinc acetate showed no clinically or statistically significant effects on the documented measures of health compared with a placebo when given for 21 days. Termination due to feasibility limited our ability to demonstrate the efficacy of these supplements for COVID-19. Further research is needed to determine clinical utility. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04780061.

A phase II dose evaluation pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial of cholecalciferol in critically ill children with vitamin D deficiency (VITdAL-PICU study).

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is highly prevalent in the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) and associated with worse clinical course. Trials in adult ICU demonstrate rapid restoration of vitamin D status using an enteral loading dose is safe and may improve outcomes. There have been no published trials of rapid normalization of VDD in the pediatric ICU. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter placebo-controlled phase II pilot feasibility randomized clinical trial from 2016 to 2017. We randomized 67 critically ill children with VDD from ICUs in Canada, Chile and Austria using a 2:1 randomization ratio to receive a loading dose of enteral cholecalciferol (10,000 IU/kg, maximum of 400,000 IU) or placebo. Participants, care givers, and outcomes assessors were blinded. The primary objective was to determine whether the loading dose normalized vitamin D status (25(OH)D > 75 nmol/L). Secondary objectives were to evaluate for adverse events and assess the feasibility of a phase III trial. RESULTS: Of 67 randomized participants, one was withdrawn and seven received more than one dose of cholecalciferol before the protocol was amended to a single loading dose, leaving 59 participants in the primary analyses (40 treatment, 19 placebo). Thirty-one/38 (81.6%) participants in the treatment arm achieved a plasma 25(OH)D concentration > 75 nmol/L versus 1/18 (5.6%) the placebo arm. The mean 25(OH)D concentration in the treatment arm was 125.9 nmol/L (SD 63.4). There was no evidence of vitamin D toxicity and no major drug or safety protocol violations. The accrual rate was 3.4 patients/month, supporting feasibility of a larger trial. A day 7 blood sample was collected for 84% of patients. A survey administered to 40 participating families showed that health-related quality of life (HRQL) was the most important outcome for families for the main trial (30, 75%). CONCLUSIONS: A single 10,000 IU/kg dose can rapidly and safely normalize plasma 25(OH)D concentrations in critically ill children with VDD, but with significant variability in 25(OH)D concentrations. We established that a phase III multicentre trial is feasible. Using an outcome collected after hospital discharge (HRQL) will require strategies to minimize loss-to-follow-up. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT02452762 Registered 25/05/2015.

A randomized control trial of high-dose micronutrient-antioxidant supplementation in healthy persons with untreated HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Although micronutrient and antioxidant supplementation are widely used by persons with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a therapeutic role beyond recommended daily allowances (RDA) remains unproven. An oral high-dose micronutrient and antioxidant supplement (Treatment) was compared to an RDA supplement (Control) for time to progressive immunodeficiency or initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in people living with HIV (PLWH). METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial. PLWH were recruited from Canadian HIV Trials Network sites, and followed quarterly for two years. Eligible participants were asymptomatic, antiretroviral treatment (ART)-naïve, HIV-seropositive adults with a CD4 T lymphocyte count (CD4 count) between 375-750 cells/µL. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to receive Treatment or Control supplements. The primary outcome was a composite of time-to-first of confirmed CD4 count below 350 cells/µL, initiation of ART, AIDS-defining illness or death. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes included CD4 count trajectory from baseline to ART initiation or two years. A Data and Safety Monitoring Board reviewed the study for safety, recruitment and protocol adherence every six months. RESULTS: Of 171 enrolled participants: 66 (38.6%) experienced a primary outcome: 27 reached a CD4 count below 350 cells/µL, and 57 started ART. There was no significant difference in time-to-first outcome between groups (Hazard Ratio = 1.05; 95%CI: 0.65, 1.70), or in time to any component outcome. Using intent-to-treat censoring, mean annualized rates of CD4 count decline were -42.703 cells/µL and -79.763 cells/µL for Treatment and Control groups, with no statistical difference in the mean change between groups (-37.06 cells/µL/52 weeks, 95%CI: (-93.59, 19.47); p = 0.1993). Accrual was stopped at 171 of the 212 intended participants after an interim analysis for futility, although participant follow-up was completed. CONCLUSIONS: In ART-naïve PLWH, high-dose antioxidant, micronutrient supplementation compared to RDA supplementation had no significant effect on disease progression or ART initiation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00798772.

Dietary supplements to reduce symptom severity and duration in people with SARS-CoV-2: study protocol for a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has caused morbidity, hospitalisations and deaths worldwide. Despite four approved vaccines for COVID-19 in Canada, there is still a need for effective treatments, especially for people in the community. Vaccine efficacy is not 100% and long-term efficacy is still unknown. Furthermore, there are challenges to herd immunity including vaccine hesitancy and underlying conditions preventing vaccination. We aim to explore if the nutrients vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin K2 and zinc are an effective treatment option for outpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. The primary outcome is the difference in participant-reported overall health; secondary outcomes include the effect on health status, symptom severity and duration, frequency and length of hospitalisations and mortality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a two-arm, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III randomised controlled trial. 200 patients will be recruited remotely from COVID-19 test centres in Ottawa, Canada associated with The Ottawa Hospital. Overall health will be measured using the EuroQol Visual Assessment Scale; health status will be measured using the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire; symptom severity and duration will be measured using an independently developed questionnaire; analyses will use an area under the curve approach and compare mean scores using unadjusted t tests. Study data will be recorded on electronic case report forms using the Research Electronic Data Capture platform. An independent data safety and monitoring board will perform ongoing review of the study for feasibility and safety. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethical approval from the research ethics boards of the Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine and the Ottawa Health Sciences Network, as well as regulatory approval from the Therapeutic Products Directorate and Natural and Non-Prescription Health Products Directorate of Health Canada. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal with open access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04780061.

Diet or additional supplement to increase potassium intake: protocol for an adaptive clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: High blood pressure is the leading cause of cardiovascular disease worldwide. The prevalence of high blood pressure is steadily rising as the population grows amongst older adults with the ageing population. Therapeutical treatments are widely available to decrease blood pressures, in addition to many lifestyle options, such as dietary changes and exercise. There is a marked preference amongst patients, as reiterated by Hypertension Canada, for more research into non-therapeutic methods for controlling blood pressure or to reduce the burden of taking many pills to control high blood pressure. Indeed, effective options do exist, especially with diet, specifically decreasing sodium and increasing potassium intake. Current public health outreach primarily focusses on sodium intake, even though potassium intake remains low in the Western world. Excellent data exist in published research that increasing potassium intake, either via dietary modification or supplements, reduces blood pressure and reduces risk of cardiovascular outcomes such as stroke. However, the advice most often provided by medical professionals is to 'eat more fruits and vegetables' which has little impact on patient outcomes. METHODS: We propose to do a clinical trial in two stages with an adaptive trial design. In the first stage, participants with high blood pressure and proven low potassium intake (measured on the basis of a 24-h urine collection) will get individually tailored dietary advice, reinforced by weekly supportive phone/email support. At 4 weeks, if there has not been a measured increase in potassium intake, participants will be prescribed an additional potassium supplement. Testing will be conducted again at 8 weeks, to confirm the efficacy of the potassium supplement. Final measurements will be planned at 52 weeks to observe and measure the persistence of the effect of diet or additional supplement. Concurrent measurements of sodium intake, blood pressure, participant satisfaction, and safety measures will also be done. DISCUSSION: The results of the study will help determine the most effective method of increasing potassium intake, thus reducing blood pressure and need for blood pressure-lowering medicines, and at the same time potentially increasing participant satisfaction. The current guidelines recommend changes in diet, not a potassium supplement, to increase potassium intake; hence, the two-stage design will only add supplements if the most rigorous dietary advice does not work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03809884 . Registered on January 18, 2019.

Tolerability and SCFA production after resistant starch supplementation in humans: a systematic review of randomized controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: Resistant starches (RSs) have been advocated as a dietary supplement to address microbiota dysbiosis. They are postulated to act through the production of SCFAs. Their clinical tolerability and effect on SCFA production has not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review of RS supplementation as an intervention in adults (healthy individuals and persons with medical conditions) participating in randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was tolerability of RS supplementation, the secondary outcome was SCFA production. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched. Articles were screened, and data extracted, independently and in duplicate. RESULTS: A total of 39 trials met eligibility criteria, including a total of 2263 patients. Twenty-seven (69%) studies evaluated the impact of RS supplementation in healthy subjects whereas 12 (31%) studies included individuals with an underlying medical condition (e.g., obesity, prediabetes). Type 2 RS was most frequently investigated (29 studies). Of 12 studies performed in subjects with health conditions, 11 reported on tolerability. All studies showed that RS supplementation was tolerated; 9 of these studies used type 2 RS with doses of 20-40 g/d for >4 wk. Of 27 studies performed in healthy subjects, 20 reported on tolerability. In 14 studies, RS supplementation was tolerated, and the majority used type 2 RS with a dose between 20 and 40 g/d. Twenty-one (78%) studies reporting SCFAs used type 2 RS with a dose of 20-40 g/d for 1-4 wk. In 16 of 23 studies (70%), SCFA production was increased, in 7 studies there was no change in SCFA concentration before and after RS supplementation, and in 1 study SCFA concentration decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that RS supplementation is tolerated in both healthy subjects and in those with an underlying medical condition. In addition, SCFA production was increased in most of the studies.

Oral magnesium supplements for cancer treatment-induced hypomagnesemia: Results from a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Optimal management of cancer treatment-induced hypomagnesemia (hMg) is not known. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic clinical trials model to compare two commonly used oral Mg replacement strategies. METHODS: Patients with grade 1 to 3 hMg while receiving either platinum-based chemotherapy or epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRI) were randomized to oral magnesium oxide (MgOx) or oral magnesium citrate (MgCit). The trial methodology utilized the integrated consent model. Feasibility would be successful if; accrual rate was ≥5 patients a month and if measures of patient and physician engagement, were > 50%. Secondary endpoints included; comparison of Mg levels, cardiac arrhythmias, and rates of treatment delay/hospitalizations. RESULTS: From July 2016 to December 2017, an average of 1 patient a month was accrued. All 15 eligible and approached patients consented to participate in the study (100% engagement) and 7/15 were randomized to MgOx and 8/15 to MgCit. The percentage of physicians who approached patients for the study was 4 of 6 (66.6% engagement). The mean slope of change in Mg (mmol/L/day) was 0.0022 (95% CI: -0.0001 to 0.0044) for MgOx and 0.0006 (95% CI, -0.0012 to 0.0024) for MgCit (P = .2123). Three patients (20%) required IV magnesium while on the study (2 MgCit and 1 MgOx). Grade 1 diarrhea occurred in 3 patients in the MgCit arm. CONCLUSION: Despite oral magnesium tolerability and meeting most of its feasibility endpoints, this study did not meet its target accrual rate. Alternative designs would be necessary for a definitive efficacy study.

Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of preclinical systematic reviews.

In an effort to better utilize published evidence obtained from animal experiments, systematic reviews of preclinical studies are increasingly more common-along with the methods and tools to appraise them (e.g., SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation [SYRCLE's] risk of bias tool). We performed a cross-sectional study of a sample of recent preclinical systematic reviews (2015-2018) and examined a range of epidemiological characteristics and used a 46-item checklist to assess reporting details. We identified 442 reviews published across 43 countries in 23 different disease domains that used 26 animal species. Reporting of key details to ensure transparency and reproducibility was inconsistent across reviews and within article sections. Items were most completely reported in the title, introduction, and results sections of the reviews, while least reported in the methods and discussion sections. Less than half of reviews reported that a risk of bias assessment for internal and external validity was undertaken, and none reported methods for evaluating construct validity. Our results demonstrate that a considerable number of preclinical systematic reviews investigating diverse topics have been conducted; however, their quality of reporting is inconsistent. Our study provides the justification and evidence to inform the development of guidelines for conducting and reporting preclinical systematic reviews.

Adjuvant melatonin for the prevention of recurrence and mortality following lung cancer resection (AMPLCaRe): A randomized placebo controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite curative intent resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), recurrence leading to mortality remains too common. Melatonin has shown promise for the treatment of patients with lung cancer; however, its effect following cancer resection has not been studied. We evaluated if melatonin taken after complete resection reduces lung cancer recurrence and mortality, or impacts quality of life (QOL), symptomatology or immune function. METHODS: Participants received melatonin (20 mg) or placebo nightly for one year following surgical resection of primary NSCLC. The primary outcome was two-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes included five-year DFS, adverse events, QOL, fatigue, sleep, depression, anxiety, pain, and biomarkers assessing for immune function/inflammation. This study is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov NCT00668707. FINDINGS: 709 patients across eight centres were randomized to melatonin (n = 356) versus placebo (n = 353). At two years, melatonin showed a relative risk of 1·01 (95% CI 0·83-1·22), p = 0·94 for DFS. At five years, melatonin showed a hazard ratio of 0·97 (95% CI 0·86-1·09), p = 0·84 for DFS. When stratified by cancer stage (I/II and III/IV), a hazard reduction of 25% (HR 0·75, 95% CI 0·61-0·92, p = 0·005) in five-year DFS was seen for participants in the treatment arm with advanced cancer (stage III/IV). No meaningful differences were seen in any other outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant melatonin following resection of NSCLC does not affect DFS for patients with resected early stage NSCLC, yet may increase DFS in patients with late stage disease. Further study is needed to confirm this positive result. No beneficial effects were seen in QOL, symptoms, or immune function. FUNDING: This study was funded by the Lotte and John Hecht Memorial Foundation and the Gateway for Cancer Research Foundation.

Prevention of post-cardiac surgery vitamin D deficiency in children with congenital heart disease: a pilot feasibility dose evaluation randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of children undergoing cardiac surgery have low vitamin D levels post-operative, which may contribute to greater illness severity and worse clinical outcomes. Prior to the initiation of a large phase III clinical trial focused on clinical outcomes, studies are required to evaluate the feasibility of the study protocol, including whether the proposed dosing regimen can safely prevent post-operative vitamin D deficiency in this high-risk population. METHODS: We conducted a two-arm, double-blind dose evaluation randomized controlled trial in children requiring cardiopulmonary bypass for congenital heart disease. Pre-operatively, participants were randomized to receive cholecalciferol representing usual care (< 1 year = 400 IU/day, > 1 year = 600 IU/day) or a higher dose approximating the Institute of Medicine tolerable upper intake level (< 1 year = 1600 IU/day, > 1 year = 2400 IU/day). The feasibility outcomes were post-operative vitamin D status (primary), vitamin D-related adverse events, accrual rate, study withdrawal rate, blinding, and protocol non-adherence. RESULTS: Forty-six children were randomized, and five withdrew prior to surgery, leaving 41 children (21 high dose, 20 usual care) in the final analysis. The high dose group had higher 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations both intraoperatively (mean difference + 25.9 nmol/L; 95% CI 8.3-43.5) and post-operatively (mean difference + 17.2 nmol/L; 95% CI 5.5-29.0). Fewer participants receiving high-dose supplementation had post-operative serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations under 50 nmol/L, compared with usual care (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.87). Post-operative vitamin D status was associated with the treatment arm and the number of doses received. There were no cases of hypercalcemia, and no significant adverse events related to vitamin D. While only 75% of the target sample size was recruited (limited funding), the consent rate (83%), accrual rate (1.5 per site month), number of withdrawals (11%), and ability to maintain blinding support feasibility of a larger trial. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative daily high-dose supplementation improved vitamin D status pre-operatively and at time of pediatric ICU admission. The protocol for a more definitive trial should limit enrollment of children with at least 30 days between randomization and surgery to allow adequate duration of supplementation or consider a loading dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01838447. Registered on April 24, 2013.

Proportion of Patients in Phase I Oncology Trials Receiving Treatments That Are Ultimately Approved.

BACKGROUND: Phase I oncology trials are often regarded as a therapeutic option for patients. However, such claims have relied on surrogate measures of benefit, such as objective response. METHODS: Using a systematic search of publications, we assessed the therapeutic value of phase I cancer trial participation by determining the probability that patients will receive active doses of treatments that eventually receive FDA approval or a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline recommendation for their indication. ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, American Society of Clinical Oncology reports, NCCN guidelines, and Drugs@FDA were searched between May 1, 2018, and July 31, 2018. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: A total of 1000 phase I oncology trials initiated between 2005 and 2010 and enrolling 32 582 patients were randomly sampled from 3229 eligible trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 386 (1.2%) patients received a treatment that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for their malignancy at a dose delivered in the trial; including NCCN guideline recommendations, the number and proportion are 1168 (3.6%). Meta-regression showed a statistically significantly greater proportion of patients receiving a drug that was ultimately FDA approved in biomarker trials (rate ratio = 4.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.53 to 13.23; P = .006) and single-indication trials (rate ratio = 3.32, 95% CI = 1.21 to 9.15; P = .02); proportions were statistically significantly lower for combination vs monotherapy trials (rate ratio = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.68; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: One in 83 patients in phase I cancer trials received a treatment that was approved for their indication at the doses received. Given published estimates of serious adverse event rates of 10%-19%, this represents low therapeutic value for phase I trial participation.

Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Intervention Development Process for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial: The Thoracic Peri-Operative Integrative Surgical Care Evaluation Trial.

BACKGROUND: Use of complementary therapies is high among people with cancer despite research gaps. The Thoracic Peri-Operative Integrative Surgical Care Evaluation (POISE) Trial will evaluate the impact of an integrative care intervention delivered by naturopathic doctors (NDs) in conjunction with usual care for patients undergoing surgery for lung, gastric, and esophageal cancer. OBJECTIVES: To describe the multistep, multidisciplinary process of defining the integrative care intervention to be used in the Thoracic POISE trial using a principle-based approach that is pragmatic, holistic, safe, feasible, evidence driven, and consensus based. METHODS: An Intervention Development Committee (IDC) made up of a multidisciplinary team of health care providers (NDs, surgeons, oncologists, nurses, dietitians, physiotherapists, pharmacists, and psychologists), researchers, and patients was established to oversee the process. Potential intervention components were identified through a clinical practice survey and expert opinion. Systematic literature reviews were conducted and scores assigned based on the following criteria: usage, safety, goals, feasibility/scalability, and evidence. The IDC selected an intervention to be piloted that consists of a standard palette including core and optional components. Safety, known risks, and interactions with pharmaceuticals were evaluated using industry and professional monographs, a scoping literature review, and consultations with hospital pharmacists. RESULTS: The clinical practice survey and expert opinion identified 28 components for consideration. Following literature reviews, scoring, consensus from the IDC, and safety and interaction considerations, an intervention palette consisting of core and optional components was defined. The intervention options vary based on the patient's phase of treatment and symptom-specific needs. The intervention includes supplements, physical recommendations (exercise), nutritional counseling, and psychological support (audio scripts). CONCLUSION: Through a multistep, multidisciplinary process an integrative care intervention was developed for the Thoracic POISE trial. The intervention will be piloted in a single-arm feasibility study, followed by a single-center randomized controlled trial (RCT), and finally a multicenter RCT.

Patient blood management: recommendations rrom the 2018 Frankfurt consensus conference

What is the current evidence base for patient blood management (PBM) in adults, and what international clinical recommendations can be derived for preoperative anemia, red blood cell transfusion thresholds, and PBM implementation strategies? Diagnosis and management of preoperative anemia is crucial, and iron-deficient anemia should be treated with iron supplementation. Red blood cell transfusion thresholds for critically ill, clinically stable patients (hemoglobin concentration <7 g/dL), patients undergoing cardiac surgery (hemoglobin concentration <7.5 g/dL), patients with hip fractures and cardiovascular disease or risk factors (hemoglobin concentration <8 g/dL), and hemodynamically stable patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding (hemoglobin concentration 7-8 g/dL) are relatively well defined, although the quality of evidence is moderate to low. Further high-quality research to support PBM is required for a range of clinical scenarios and implementation of PBM programs.

Feasibility of using a pragmatic trials model to compare two primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis regimens (ciprofloxacin versus G-CSF) in patients receiving docetaxel-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer (REaCT-TC).

PURPOSE: Optimal primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis (i.e. ciprofloxacin or granulocyte-colony stimulating factors [G-CSF]) for patients receiving docetaxel-cyclophosphamide (TC) chemotherapy is unknown. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial to compare these standard-of-care options. METHODS: Early-stage breast cancer patients receiving TC chemotherapy were randomised to either ciprofloxacin or G-CSF. Trial methodology consists of broad eligibility criteria, simply-defined endpoints, integrated consent model incorporating oral consent, and web-based randomisation in the clinic. Primary feasibility endpoints included patient and physician engagement (if > 50% of patients approached agree to participate and if > 50% of physicians approached patients for the study). Secondary clinical endpoints included the following: first occurrence rates of FN, treatment-related hospitalisation, or chemotherapy dose reduction/delay/discontinuation, as well as patient satisfaction with the oral consent process. RESULTS: Of 204 patients approached, 91.2% (186/204) agreed to randomisation. Sixteen of twenty (80%) participating medical oncologists randomised patients. Median patient age was 57.7 (range 31.8-84.1). The 186 patients received 557 cycles of chemotherapy. Overall incidences of first events by patient (n = 186) were as follows: FN (18/186, 21.43%), treatment-related hospitalisation (11/186, 13.10%), chemotherapy reduction (19/186, 22.62%), chemotherapy discontinuation (16/186, 19.05%), and chemotherapy delays (5/186, 5.95%). A total of 37.77% (69/186) of patients and 12.39% (69/557) of chemotherapy cycles had at least one of these first events. Patients were highly satisfied with the oral consent process. CONCLUSION: This study met its feasibility endpoints. This model offers a means of comparing standard-of-care treatments in a practical and cost-efficient manner. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02173262.

Effect of high dose folic acid supplementation in pregnancy on pre-eclampsia (FACT): double blind, phase III, randomised controlled, international, multicentre trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of high dose folic acid supplementation for prevention of pre-eclampsia in women with at least one risk factor: pre-existing hypertension, prepregnancy diabetes (type 1 or 2), twin pregnancy, pre-eclampsia in a previous pregnancy, or body mass index ≥35. DESIGN: Randomised, phase III, double blinded international, multicentre clinical trial. SETTING: 70 obstetrical centres in five countries (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Jamaica, and UK). PARTICIPANTS: 2464 pregnant women with at least one high risk factor for pre-eclampsia were randomised between 2011 and 2015 (1144 to the folic acid group and 1157 to the placebo group); 2301 were included in the intention to treat analyses. INTERVENTION: Eligible women were randomised to receive either daily high dose folic acid (four 1.0 mg oral tablets) or placebo from eight weeks of gestation to the end of week 16 of gestation until delivery. Clinicians, participants, adjudicators, and study staff were masked to study treatment allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was pre-eclampsia, defined as hypertension presenting after 20 weeks' gestation with major proteinuria or HELLP syndrome (haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelets). RESULTS: Pre-eclampsia occurred in 169/1144 (14.8%) women in the folic acid group and 156/1157 (13.5%) in the placebo group (relative risk 1.10, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.34; P=0.37). There was no evidence of differences between the groups for any other adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Supplementation with 4.0 mg/day folic acid beyond the first trimester does not prevent pre-eclampsia in women at high risk for this condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN23781770 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01355159.

Efficacy of iron supplementation on fatigue and physical capacity in non-anaemic iron-deficient adults: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Iron supplementation in iron-deficiency anaemia is standard practice, but the benefits of iron supplementation in iron-deficient non-anaemic (IDNA) individuals remains controversial. Our objective is to identify the effects of iron therapy on fatigue and physical capacity in IDNA adults. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 years) who were iron deficient but non-anaemic. INTERVENTIONS: Oral, intramuscular or intravenous iron supplementation; all therapy doses, frequencies and durations were included. COMPARATORS: Placebo or active therapy. RESULTS: We identified RCTs in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, SportDiscus and CAB Abstracts from inception to 31 October 2016. We searched the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for relevant ongoing trials and performed forward searches of included trials and relevant reviews in Web of Science. We assessed internal validity of included trials using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the external validity using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. From 11 580 citations, we included 18 unique trials and 2 companion papers enrolling 1170 patients. Using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model, iron supplementation was associated with reduced self-reported fatigue (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38; 95% CI -0.52 to -0.23; I2 0%; 4 trials; 714 participants) but was not associated with differences in objective measures of physical capacity, including maximal oxygen consumption (SMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.15 to 0.37; I2 0%; 9 trials; 235 participants) and timed methods of exercise testing. Iron supplementation significantly increased serum haemoglobin concentration (MD 4.01 g/L; 95% CI 1.22 to 6.81; I2 48%; 12 trials; 298 participants) and serum ferritin (MD 9.23 µmol/L; 95% CI 6.48 to 11.97; I2 58%; 14 trials; 616 participants). CONCLUSION: In IDNA adults, iron supplementation is associated with reduced subjective measures of fatigue but not with objective improvements in physical capacity. Given the global prevalence of both iron deficiency and fatigue, patients and practitioners could consider consumption of iron-rich foods or iron supplementation to improve symptoms of fatigue in the absence of documented anaemia. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42014007085.

Study protocol for a phase II dose evaluation randomized controlled trial of cholecalciferol in critically ill children with vitamin D deficiency (VITdAL-PICU study).

BACKGROUND: Clinical research has recently demonstrated that vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is highly prevalent in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) and associated with worse clinical course. Multiple adult ICU trials have suggested that optimization of vitamin D status through high-dose supplementation may reduce mortality and improve other clinically relevant outcomes; however, there have been no trials of rapid normalization in the PICU setting. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of an enteral weight-based cholecalciferol loading dose regimen in critically ill children with VDD. METHODS/DESIGN: The VITdAL-PICU pilot study is designed as a multicenter placebo-controlled phase II dose evaluation pilot randomized controlled trial. We aim to randomize 67 VDD critically ill children using a 2:1 randomization schema to receive loading dose enteral cholecalciferol (10,000 IU/kg, maximum of 400,000 IU) or a placebo solution. Participants, caregivers and outcome assessors will be blinded to allocation. Eligibility criteria include ICU patient, aged 37 weeks to 18 years, expected ICU length of stay more than 48 h, anticipated access to bloodwork at 7 days, and VDD (blood total 25 hydroxyvitamin D < 50 nmol/L). The primary objective is to determine whether the dosing protocol normalizes vitamin D status, defined as a blood total 25(OH)D concentration above 75 nmol/L. Secondary objectives include an examination of the safety of the dosing regimen (e.g. hypercalcemia, hypercalciuria, nephrocalcinosis), measures of vitamin D axis function (e.g. calcitriol levels, immune function), and protocol feasibility (eligibility criteria, protocol deviations, blinding). DISCUSSION: Despite significant observational literature suggesting VDD to be a modifiable risk factor in the PICU setting, there is no robust clinical trial evidence evaluating the benefits of rapid normalization. This phase II clinical trial will evaluate an innovative weight-based dosing regimen intended to rapidly and safely normalize vitamin D levels in critically ill children. Study findings will be used to inform the design of a multicenter phase III trial evaluating the clinical and economic benefits to rapid normalization. Recruitment for this trial was initiated in January 2016 and is expected to continue until November 30, 2017. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02452762.

Inefficiencies and Patient Burdens in the Development of the Targeted Cancer Drug Sorafenib: A Systematic Review.

Failure in cancer drug development exacts heavy burdens on patients and research systems. To investigate inefficiencies and burdens in targeted drug development in cancer, we conducted a systematic review of all prelicensure trials for the anticancer drug, sorafenib (Bayer/Onyx Pharmaceuticals). We searched Embase and MEDLINE databases on October 14, 2014, for prelicensure clinical trials testing sorafenib against cancers. We measured risk by serious adverse event rates, benefit by objective response rates and survival, and trial success by prespecified primary endpoint attainment with acceptable toxicity. The first two clinically useful applications of sorafenib were discovered in the first 2 efficacy trials, after five drug-related deaths (4.6% of 108 total) and 93 total patient-years of involvement (2.4% of 3,928 total). Thereafter, sorafenib was tested in 26 indications and 67 drug combinations, leading to one additional licensure. Drug developers tested 5 indications in over 5 trials each, comprising 56 drug-related deaths (51.8% of 108 total) and 1,155 patient-years (29.4% of 3,928 total) of burden in unsuccessful attempts to discover utility against these malignancies. Overall, 32 Phase II trials (26% of Phase II activity) were duplicative, lacked appropriate follow-up, or were uninformative because of accrual failure, constituting 1,773 patients (15.6% of 11,355 total) participating in prelicensure sorafenib trials. The clinical utility of sorafenib was established early in development, with low burden on patients and resources. However, these early successes were followed by rapid and exhaustive testing against various malignancies and combination regimens, leading to excess patient burden. Our evaluation of sorafenib development suggests many opportunities for reducing costs and unnecessary patient burden in cancer drug development.

Fish-Derived Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The use of natural health products in prostate cancer (PrCa) is high despite a lack of evidence with respect to safety and efficacy. Fish-derived omega-3 fatty acids possess anti-inflammatory effects and preclinical data suggest a protective effect on PrCa incidence and progression; however, human studies have yielded conflicting results. METHODS: A search of OVID MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, Embase, and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) was completed for human interventional or observational data assessing the safety and efficacy of fish-derived omega-3 fatty acids in the incidence and progression of PrCa. RESULTS: Of 1776 citations screened, 54 publications reporting on 44 studies were included for review and analysis: 4 reports of 3 randomized controlled trials, 1 nonrandomized clinical trial, 20 reports of 14 cohort studies, 26 reports of 23 case-control studies, and 3 case-cohort studies. The interventional studies using fish oil supplements in patients with PrCa showed no impact on prostate-specific antigen levels; however, 2 studies showed a decrease in inflammatory or other cancer markers. A small number of mild adverse events were reported and interactions with other interventions were not assessed. Cohort and case-control studies assessing the relationship between dietary fish intake and the risk of PrCa were equivocal. Cohort studies assessing the risk of PrCa mortality suggested an association between higher intake of fish and decreased risk of prostate cancer-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is insufficient to suggest a relationship between fish-derived omega-3 fatty acid and risk of PrCa. An association between higher omega-3 intake and decreased PrCa mortality may be present but more research is needed. More intervention trials or observational studies with precisely measured exposure are needed to assess the impact of fish oil supplements and dietary fish-derived omega-3 fatty acid intake on safety, PrCa incidence, treatment, and progression.