Riluzole does not ameliorate disease caused by cytoplasmic TDP-43 in a mouse model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease commonly treated with riluzole, a small molecule that may act via modulation of glutamatergic neurotransmission. However, riluzole only modestly extends lifespan for people living with ALS, and its precise mechanisms of action remain unclear. Most ALS cases are characterised by accumulation of cytoplasmic TAR DNA binding protein of 43 kDa (TDP-43), and understanding the effects of riluzole in models that closely recapitulate TDP-43 pathology may provide insights for development of improved therapeutics. We therefore investigated the effects of riluzole in female transgenic mice that inducibly express nuclear localisation sequence (NLS)-deficient human TDP-43 in neurons (NEFH-tTA/tetO-hTDP-43ΔNLS, 'rNLS8', mice). Riluzole treatment from the first day of hTDP-43ΔNLS expression did not alter disease onset, weight loss or performance on multiple motor behavioural tasks. Riluzole treatment also did not alter TDP-43 protein levels, solubility or phosphorylation. Although we identified a significant decrease in GluA2 and GluA3 proteins in the cortex of rNLS8 mice, riluzole did not ameliorate this disease-associated molecular phenotype. Likewise, riluzole did not alter the disease-associated atrophy of hindlimb muscle in rNLS8 mice. Finally, riluzole treatment beginning after disease onset in rNLS8 mice similarly had no effect on progression of late-stage disease or animal survival. Together, we demonstrate specific glutamatergic receptor alterations and muscle fibre-type changes reminiscent of ALS in female rNLS8 mice, but riluzole had no effect on these or any other disease phenotypes. Future targeting of pathways related to accumulation of TDP-43 pathology may be needed to develop better treatments for ALS.

A dynamic systems view of clinical genomics: a rich picture of the landscape in Australia using a complexity science lens.

BACKGROUND: Clinical genomics represents a paradigm shifting change to health service delivery and practice across many conditions and life-stages. Introducing this complex technology into an already complex health system is a significant challenge that cannot be managed in a reductionist way. To build robust and sustainable, high quality delivery systems we need to step back and view the interconnected landscape of policymakers, funders, managers, multidisciplinary teams of clinicians, patients and their families, and health care, research, education, and philanthropic institutions as a dynamic whole. This study holistically mapped the landscape of clinical genomics within Australia by developing a complex graphic: a rich picture. Using complex systems theory, we then identified key features, challenges and leverage points of implementing clinical genomics. METHODS: We used a multi-stage, exploratory, qualitative approach. We extracted data from grey literature, empirical literature, and data collected by the Australian Genomic Health Alliance. Nine key informants working in clinical genomics critiqued early drafts of the picture, and validated the final version. RESULTS: The final graphic depicts 24 stakeholder groups relevant to implementation of genomics into Australia. Clinical genomics lies at the intersection of four nested systems, with interplay between government, professional bodies and patient advocacy groups. Barriers and uncertainties are also shown. Analysis using complexity theory showed far-reaching interdependencies around funding, and identified unintended consequences. CONCLUSION: The rich picture of the clinical genomic landscape in Australia is the first to show key stakeholders, agencies and processes and their interdependencies. Participants who critiqued our results were instantly intrigued and engaged by the graphics, searching for their place in the whole and often commenting on insights they gained from seeing the influences and impacts of other stakeholder groups on their own work. Funding patterns showed unintended consequences of increased burdens for clinicians and inequity of access for patients. Showing the system as a dynamic whole is the only way to understand key drivers and barriers to largescale interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Development of an implementation and evaluation strategy for the Australian 'Zero Childhood Cancer' (Zero) Program: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Effective implementation of a research Program requires an actionable plan to guide execution. To assess the actionability and success of that plan, both scientific and implementation elements must be taken into account. The aim of this study is to assess the 'Zero Childhood Cancer Personalised Medicine Program' (the Zero Program), an Australian first-ever and most comprehensive personalised medicine programme for children with high-risk or relapsed cancer, in terms of its structure, process and implementational effect. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will assess Program delivery mechanisms. The development of the implementation and evaluation strategy will concentrate on the work of the Zero Program as a complex whole. This includes the structure of collaborative links across stakeholder groups involved in Program development and delivery, changes to collaborative relationships over time and the impact of group working on Program outcomes. We are applying a mixed-methods design including: a rapid ethnography (observations of stakeholder interactions and informal conversations), Program professionals' completion of a rapid health implementation proforma and a social network analysis. Formative evaluations of the implementation science effects, applying feedback techniques, for example, Formative Evaluation Feedback Loops and the Zero Program professionals' feedback, will determine where Program tailoring may be needed. A repeat of the social network analysis downstream will examine network changes over time, followed by an expert panel using the expert recommendations for implementing change to assess the integration of implementation strategies into the Program structure. A summative evaluation of the Program will bring the research elements together, leading to comprehensive data triangulation and determining the sustainability and implementational effects of Program delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study has been granted by Hunter New England Research Ethics Committee, New South Wales, Australia (approval ref: 2019/ETH12025). Knowledge translation will be achieved through publications, reports and conference presentations to healthcare professionals, patients, families and researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03336931; Pre-results.

The rise of rapid implementation: a worked example of solving an existing problem with a new method by combining concept analysis with a systematic integrative review.

BACKGROUND: The concept of rapid implementation has emerged in the literature recently, but without a precise definition. Further exploration is required to distinguish the concept's unique meanings and significance from the perspective of implementation science. The study clarifies the concept of rapid implementation and identifies its attributes, antecedents, and consequences. We present a theoretical definition of rapid implementation to clarify its unique meaning and characteristics. METHODS: Rodgers evolutionary concept analysis method, combined with a systematic integrative review, were used to clarify the concept of rapid implementation. A comprehensive search of four databases, including EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and WEB OF SCIENCE was conducted, as well as relevant journals and reference lists of retrieved studies. After searching databases, 2442 papers were identified from 1963 to 2019; 24 articles were found to fit the inclusion criteria to capture data on rapid implementation from across healthcare settings in four countries. Data analysis was carried out using descriptive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The results locate the introduction of rapid implementation, informed by implementation science. Guidance for further conceptualisation to bridge the gap between research and practice and redefine rigour, adapting methods used (current approaches, procedures and frameworks), and challenging clinical trial design (efficacy-effectiveness-implementation pipeline) is provided. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible that we are on the cusp of a paradigm shift within implementation brought about by the need for faster results into practice and policy. Researchers can benefit from a deeper understanding of the rapid implementation concept to guide future implementation of rapid actionable results in clinical practice.