Exploring the effect on primary endpoints in trials testing targeted therapy interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-epidemiological study on the appropriate use of a core outcome set.

OBJECTIVES: To explore which core domain is best associated with the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response in trials assessing the effect of targeted interventions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A meta-epidemiological study was performed on randomised trials investigating biologics and targeted agents compared with placebo or conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with RA. The main outcome measures were ORs for the ACR 20% response and at least one of the eight core domains according to the existing RA core outcome set (COS) analysed based on standardised mean differences. RESULTS: 115 trials involving 55 422 patients with RA were eligible. The OR for achieving ACR 20% response was 3.19 (95% CI 2.96 to 3.44) for the experimental interventions relative to the comparators. The median number of COS domains reported was 6; 18 trials reported only 1 domain, 17 all 8. Univariable meta-regression analyses indicated that each of the eight core domains was significantly associated with ACR 20% response, yet improvements in physical disability explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. Including only trials reporting on all eight core domains, univariable meta-regression analyses proved improvement in fatigue to explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. CONCLUSIONS: Within this dataset, it is evident that the conclusions concerning our primary objective were significantly influenced by both the amount and characteristics of missing data. Our data suggest that fatigue could be more important for the primary endpoint than previously assumed, but this is based on limited data.

Minor tranquillizers for short-term treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Unspecific symptoms of anxiety and distress are frequently encountered in patients in both general practice and acute psychiatric services. Minor tranquillizers may be a treatment option when non-pharmacological interventions are insufficient or unavailable. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the evidence for short-term (1-4 weeks) pharmacological treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress. We searched the PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and extracted data following a predefined hierarchy of outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). We included 34 randomized trials comprising a total of 7044 patients with adjustment disorders or anxiety spectrum disorders. The network meta-analysis showed that regarding the critical outcome symptoms of anxiety within 1-4 weeks benzodiazepines (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.40), quetiapine (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.90 to - 0.13) and pregabalin (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87 to - 0.28) all performed better than placebo with no statistically significant difference between the drugs. Data on other important outcomes were inconsistently reported. Adverse effects varied, but overall, it was uncertain whether adverse effects differed between interventions. The evidence regarding the risk of dependence was uncertain, but dependence may be a concern in susceptible individuals even with short-term treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was rated as low to very low across outcomes. Despite the limitations in the evidence, the results of this review can inform treatment guidelines, supporting clinicians in the choice of minor tranquillizer in this prevalent and help-seeking, clinically heterogeneous population.

Effect of probiotic supplementation on chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-related diarrhoea in patients with cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

To date, several systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMA) have investigated the effects of probiotics, but the certainty of the evidence for an effect on chemotherapy and radiotherapy-related diarrhoea has not been assessed. We conducted an overview of SRMA, searching MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science from inception up to February 2022. We summarised the findings of eligible SRMA. Subsequently, we included randomised clinical trials (RCT) from the SRMA in meta-analyses, using a quality effects model to calculate the OR and 95 % CI for each outcome. We used 'A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews' and the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the methodological quality of the SRMA and their RCT, respectively. We used the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation'.We included thirteen SRMA, which reported pooled effect sizes for chemotherapy and radiotherapy-related diarrhoea based on a total of eighteen RCT. Our meta-analyses demonstrated statistically significant beneficial effects from probiotics on all outcomes, except stool consistency; diarrhoea (any grade) OR 0·35 (95 % CI 0·22, 0·54), grade ≥ 2 diarrhoea 0·43 (0·25, 0·74), grade ≥ 3 diarrhoea 0·30 (0·15, 0·59), use of medication 0·49 (0·27, 0·88), soft stool 1·10 (0·44, 2·76) and watery stool 0·52 (0·29, 1·29). Probiotics use can reduce the incidence of diarrhoea in cancer patients in chemotherapy and radiotherapy, but the certainty of evidence for significant outcomes was very low and low.

Towards consensus in defining and handling contextual factors within rheumatology trials: an initial qualitative study from an OMERACT working group.

OBJECTIVES: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Initiative established the Contextual Factors Working Group to guide the understanding, identification and handling of contextual factors for clinical trials. In clinical research, different uses of the term 'contextual factors' exist. This study explores the perspectives of researchers (including clinicians) and patients in defining 'contextual factor' and its related terminology, identifying such factors and accounting for them in trials across rheumatology. METHODS: We conducted individual semistructured interviews with researchers (including clinicians) who have experience within the field of contextual factors in clinical trials or other potentially relevant areas, and small focus group interviews with patients with rheumatic conditions. We transcribed the interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 researchers and 7 patients. Researcher's and patient's descriptions of contextual factors were categorised into two broad themes, each comprising two contextual factors types. The 'treatment effect' theme focused on factors explaining variations in treatment effects (A) among patients and (B) among studies. The 'outcome measurement' theme focused on factors that explain (C) variations in the measurement result itself (apart from actual changes/differences in the outcome) and (D) variations in the outcome itself (beside treatment of interest). Methods for identifying and handling contextual factors differed among these themes and types. CONCLUSIONS: Two main themes for contextual factors with four types of contextual factors were identified based on input from researchers and patients. This will guide operationalisation of contextual factors. Further research should refine our findings and establish consensus among relevant stakeholders.

Population characteristics as important contextual factors in rheumatological trials: an exploratory meta-epidemiological study from an OMERACT Working Group.

OBJECTIVES: To explore whether trial population characteristics modify treatment responses across various interventions, comparators and rheumatic conditions. METHODS: In this meta-epidemiological study, we included trials from systematic reviews available from the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group published up to 23 April 2019 in Cochrane Library with meta-analyses of five or more randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from year 2000. From trial reports, we extracted data on 20 population characteristics. For characteristics with sufficient data (ie, available for ≥2/3 of the trials), we performed multilevel meta-epidemiological analyses. RESULTS: We identified 19 eligible systematic reviews contributing 187 RCTs (212 comparisons). Only age and sex were explicitly reported in ≥2/3 of the trials. Using information about the country of the trials led to sufficient data for five further characteristics, that is, 7 out of 20 (35%) protocolised characteristics were analysed. The meta-regressions showed effect modification by economic status, place of residence, and, nearly, from healthcare system (explaining 4.8%, 0.9% and 1.5% of the between-trial variation, respectively). No effect modification was demonstrated from age, sex, patient education/health literacy or predominant religion. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the scarce reporting of most population characteristics, hampering investigation of their impact with meta-research. Our sparse results suggest that place of residence (ie, continent of the trial), economic status (based on World Bank classifications) and healthcare system (based on WHO index for health system performance) may be important in explaining the variation in treatment response across trials. There is an urgent need for consistent reporting of important population characteristics in trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127642.

European Society Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Guidelines for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease 2020.

OBJECTIVES: The ESPGHAN 2012 coeliac disease (CD) diagnostic guidelines aimed to guide physicians in accurately diagnosing CD and permit omission of duodenal biopsies in selected cases. Here, an updated and expanded evidence-based guideline is presented. METHODS: Literature databases and other sources of information were searched for studies that could inform on 10 formulated questions on symptoms, serology, HLA genetics, and histopathology. Eligible articles were assessed using QUADAS2. GRADE provided a basis for statements and recommendations. RESULTS: Various symptoms are suggested for case finding, with limited contribution to diagnostic accuracy. If CD is suspected, measurement of total serum IgA and IgA-antibodies against transglutaminase 2 (TGA-IgA) is superior to other combinations. We recommend against deamidated gliadin peptide antibodies (DGP-IgG/IgA) for initial testing. Only if total IgA is low/undetectable, an IgG-based test is indicated. Patients with positive results should be referred to a paediatric gastroenterologist/specialist. If TGA-IgA is ≥10 times the upper limit of normal (10× ULN) and the family agrees, the no-biopsy diagnosis may be applied, provided endomysial antibodies (EMA-IgA) will test positive in a second blood sample. HLA DQ2-/DQ8 determination and symptoms are not obligatory criteria. In children with positive TGA-IgA <10× ULN at least 4 biopsies from the distal duodenum and at least 1 from the bulb should be taken. Discordant results between TGA-IgA and histopathology may require re-evaluation of biopsies. Patients with no/mild histological changes (Marsh 0/I) but confirmed autoimmunity (TGA-IgA/EMA-IgA+) should be followed closely. CONCLUSIONS: CD diagnosis can be accurately established with or without duodenal biopsies if given recommendations are followed.

Exercise-induced pain changes associate with changes in muscle perfusion in knee osteoarthritis: exploratory outcome analyses of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exercise therapy is recommended for knee osteoarthritis (OA), but the underlying mechanisms of pain relief are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of exercise on muscle perfusion assessed by dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and its association with changes in pain in patients with knee OA. METHODS: Exploratory outcome analyses of a randomised controlled study with per-protocol analyses ( ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01545258) performed at an outpatient clinic at a public hospital in Denmark. We compared 12 weeks of supervised exercise therapy 3 times per week (ET) with a no attention control group (CG). Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) were used to assess group mean differences in changes from baseline to week 12 in knee muscle perfusion quantified by DCE-MRI, patient-reported pain and function using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire, knee extensor and flexor muscle strength tests, and the six-minute walking test (6MWT). Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to determine the correlation between changes in DCE-MRI variables, KOOS, muscle strength, and 6MWT. The potential effect mediation of the DCE-MRI perfusion variables was investigated in a post-hoc mediation analysis. RESULTS: Of 60 participants randomised with knee osteoarthritis, 33 (ET, n = 16, CG, n = 17) adhered to the protocol and had complete DCE-MRI data. At follow-up, there were significant group differences in muscle perfusion changes and clinically relevant group differences in KOOS pain changes (10.7, 95% CI 3.3 to 18.1, P = 0.006) in favor of ET. There were no significant between-group differences on muscle strength and function. The changes in pain and muscle perfusion were significantly correlated (highest Spearman's rho = 0.42, P = 0.014). The mediation analyses were generally not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The pain-reducing effects of a 12-week exercise program are associated with changes in knee muscle perfusion quantified by DCE-MRI in individuals with knee OA, but whether the effects are mediated by muscle perfusion changes remains unclear. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01545258 , first posted March 6, 2012.

Effect of Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Conventional Treat-to-Target Strategies on Disease Activity Remission and Radiographic Progression in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The IMAGINE-RA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Whether using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to guide treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) improves disease activity and slows joint damage progression is unknown. Objective: To determine whether an MRI-guided treat-to-target strategy vs a conventional clinical treat-to-target strategy improves outcomes in patients with RA in clinical remission. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two-year, randomized, multicenter trial conducted at 9 hospitals in Denmark. Two hundred patients with RA in clinical remission (disease activity score in 28 joints-C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP] <3.2 and no swollen joints) were enrolled between April 2012 and June 2015. The final follow-up visit was April 2017. Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to an MRI-guided vs a conventional treat-to-target strategy. In the MRI-guided group, the treatment goal was absence of MRI bone marrow edema combined with clinical remission, defined as DAS28-CRP of 3.2 or less and no swollen joints. In the conventional group, the treatment goal was clinical remission. Main Outcomes and Measures: Co-primary outcomes were proportions of patients achieving DAS28-CRP remission (DAS28-CRP <2.6) and with no radiographic progression (no increase in total van der Heijde-modified Sharp score) at 24 months. Significance testing for the primary outcome was based on 1-sided testing. Secondary outcomes were clinical and MRI measures of disease activity, physical function, and quality of life. Results: Of 200 patients randomized (133 women [67%]; mean [SD] age, 61.6 [10.5] years; median baseline DAS28-CRP, 1.9 [interquartile range, 1.7-2.2]; van der Heijde-modified Sharp score, 18.0 [interquartile range, 7.0-42.5]), 76 patients (76%) in the MRI-guided group and 95 (95%) in the conventional group completed the study. Of these, 64 (85%) vs 83 (88%), respectively, reached the primary clinical end point (risk difference, -4.8% [1-sided 95% CI, -13.6% to + ∞; 1-sided P = .19]) and 49 (66%) vs 58 (62%), respectively, reached the primary radiographic end point (risk difference, 4.7% [1-sided 95% CI, -7.0% to + ∞; 1-sided P = .25). Of 10 key secondary end points, 8 were null and 2 showed statistically significant benefit for the MRI treat-to-target group. Seventeen patients (17%) in the MRI-guided treat-to-target group and 6 patients (6%) in the conventional treat-to-target group experienced serious adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with RA in clinical remission, an MRI-guided treat-to-target strategy compared with a conventional treat-to-target strategy did not result in improved disease activity remission rates or reduce radiographic progression. These findings do not support the use of an MRI-guided strategy for treating patients with RA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01656278.

Do psychotic experiences act as effect modifiers in youths with common mental health problems allocated to transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy versus management as usual? Secondary analyses of the Mind-My-Mind randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychotic experiences (PEs) are common in help-seeking youths with non-psychotic mental health problems, yet the clinical importance of PEs as potential effect modifiers of psychotherapy interventions has been scarcely examined. We examined if PEs were associated with a differential response to transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) aimed at common emotional and behavioural problems. METHODS: We present secondary analyses from the Mind My Mind (MMM) trial that randomized 396, 6-16-year-old youths to either 9-13 sessions of transdiagnostic modular community-based CBT (MMM) or community-based management as usual (MAU). MMM was superior to MAU in reducing parent-reported impact of mental health problems according to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). PEs were assessed by semi-structured screening interviews at baseline. The contrast between subgroups (presence/absence of PEs) was calculated to test if PEs are potential effect modifiers regarding the change in parent-reported SDQ-impact (primary outcome, rated 0[low]-10[high]) and other SDQ-related outcomes. RESULTS: Baseline PEs were present in 74 (19%) of youths. The superior effect of MMM on changes in SDQ-impact from baseline to week 18 was not effect modified by the presence of PEs (PEs[yes] -0.89 [95%CI -1.77;-0.01] vs. PEs[no] -1.10 [95%CI -1.52;-0.68], p-value for interaction .68). For secondary outcomes similar patterns were observed. Limitations Statistical power was limited to show if PEs modified treatment response. Replication and meta-analytic evidence are needed. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effects of MMM transdiagnostic CBT did not differ by PE-status, indicating that youths with emotional and behavioural problems could be offered such psychotherapy irrespective of co-occurring PEs.

Navigating the path of progress: The OMERACT 2023 emerging leaders program.

OBJECTIVES: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Emerging Leaders Program (ELP) aims to cultivate a cohort of skilled leaders within the OMERACT community empowering them with expertise and knowledge to help shape and steer the organization into the future. This publication highlights the significance of the ELP in driving leadership excellence, its impact on OMERACT's evolution, and the outcomes and learnings from the OMERACT 2023 ELP. METHODS: Insights from the 2018 ELP report informed 2023 program improvements. Engagement was measured by attendance and WhatsApp interactions. Positive program aspects, areas for improvement and ideas for enhancing future ELPs were captured via anonymous survey and participant focus groups. RESULTS: Engagement with the ELP was high with 9 participants, 96 % attendance at all workshops, 154 WhatsApp interactions. All program components were highly rated, with the highest being the 'Psychological Safety' and 'Methodology/Process/Politics' workshops. Future enhancements included creating further networking, connection and support activities, practical leadership and methodological skill development opportunities, and a new stream focussing on organisational advancement. CONCLUSIONS: The 2023 OMERACT ELP was well received and successfully addressed areas previously identified as requiring improvement. New educational enhancements were valued, and the importance of fostering psychological safety at all levels was highlighted. The ELP fortifies OMERACT by nurturing a diverse array of skilled leaders who embody OMERACTs core values. Continuing to refine and evolve the ELP over time will help OMERACT sustain its global influence in patient-centered outcome research.

Strategies to promote implementation of core outcomes for medication adherence trials in rheumatology: A report from the OMERACT-Adherence Group.

OBJECTIVES: To identify barriers, facilitators, and strategies for future implementation of the OMERACT-Adherence Core Outcome Set (COS) in medication adherence trials for rheumatic conditions. METHODS: Preliminary Delphi survey findings were discussed at OMERACT 2023, utilising the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2 to identify implementation barriers, facilitators, and solutions. RESULTS: Implementation strategies included simplifying the COS definitions, making it adaptabile for clinical practice and drug trials, adherence trial training workshops, and collaborating with key stakeholders such as payers and other COS developers. CONCLUSION: Ongoing collaboration with individuals and organisations within and beyond rheumatology ensures broader applicability of OMERACT-Adherence COS.

Long-term efficacy of a 2-year MRI treat-to-target strategy on disease activity and radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission: 5-year follow-up of the IMAGINE-RA randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a 2-year MRI treat-to-target strategy targeting the absence of osteitis combined with clinical remission, compared with a conventional treat-to-target strategy targeting clinical remission only (IMAGINE-rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trial) improves clinical and radiographic outcomes over 5 years in patients with RA in clinical remission. METHODS: IMAGINE-more was an observational extension study of the original 2-year IMAGINE-RA randomised trial (NCT01656278). Clinical examinations and radiographs (hands and feet) were obtained yearly. Prespecified coprimary outcomes at year 5 were Disease Activity Score in 28 joints C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) remission rate (DAS28-CRP<2.6) and no radiographic progression (van der Heijde-modified Sharp score (vdHSS) ≤0) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included 5-year changes in radiographic, MRI and clinical measures of disease activity and physical function. RESULTS: In total 131 patients, 86 women (67%), mean age 61.2, disease duration 9.5 years, median baseline DAS28-CRP 1.9 (IQR 1.6-2.2) and vdHSS 16.0 (IQR 7.0-36.0) were included in the study; 59 (59%) patients from the original MRI treat-to-target group and 72 (72%) from the conventional group. At year 5, 47 patients (80%) in the MRI treat-to-target group vs 54 patients (75%) in the conventional treat-to-target group were in DAS28-CRP remission (OR 2.00 (95% CI 0.76 to 5.28); p=0.16) while 14 patients (24%) vs 19 patients (26%) had no radiographic progression (OR 0.70, (95% CI 0.28 to 1.71); p=0.43). CONCLUSION: A 2-year combined MRI and clinical treat-to-target strategy, compared with a conventional clinical treat-to-target strategy alone, had no effect on the long-term probability of achieving DAS28-CRP remission and of avoiding radiographic progression.

Generating a list of potentially important contextual factors covering randomized trials, cohorts, and measurement property studies: An OMERACT initiative.

OBJECTIVES: To generate candidates for contextual factors (CFs) for each CF type (i.e., Effect Modifying Contextual Factors (EM-CFs), Outcome Influencing Contextual Factors (OI-CFs), and Measurement Affecting Contextual Factors (MA-CFs)) considered important within rheumatology. METHODS: We surveyed OMERACT working groups and conducted a Special Interest Group (SIG) session at the OMERACT 2023 meeting, where the results were reviewed, and additional CFs suggested. RESULTS: The working groups suggested 44, 49, and 21 generic EM-CFs, OI-CFs, and MA-CFs, respectively. SIG participants added 49, 44, and 55 factors, respectively. CONCLUSION: Candidate CFs were identified, next step is a consensus-based set of endorsed (important) CFs.

OMERACT Core outcome measurement set for shared decision making in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review to identify candidate instruments.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table. RESULTS: We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table. CONCLUSION: We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.

Dose-response association between animal protein sources and risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: There are contradictory findings about the relationship between various animal protein sources and the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to understand better the associations between total protein, animal protein, and animal protein sources and the risk of developing GDM. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science encompassing the literature up until August 2022. A random-effects model was used to combine the data. For estimating the dose-response curves, a one-stage linear mixed-effects meta-analysis was conducted. DATA EXTRACTION: Data related to the association between animal protein consumption and the risk of GDM in the general population was extracted from prospective cohort studies. DATA ANALYSIS: It was determined that 17 prospective cohort studies with a total of 49 120 participants met the eligibility criteria. It was concluded with high certainty of evidence that there was a significant association between dietary animal protein intake and GDM risk (1.94, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.65, n = 6). Moreover, a higher intake of total protein, total meat, and red meat was positively and significantly associated with an increased risk of GDM. The pooled relative risks of GDM were 1.50 (95% CI: 1.16, 1.94; n = 3) for a 30 g/d increment in processed meat, 1.68 (95% CI: 1.25, 2.24; n = 2) and 1.94 (95% CI: 1.41, 2.67; n = 4) for a 100 g/d increment in total and red meat, and 1.21 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.33; n = 4) and 1.32 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.52; n = 3) for a 5% increment in total protein and animal protein, respectively. GDM had a positive linear association with total protein, animal protein, total meat consumption, and red meat consumption, based on non-linear dose-response analysis. CONCLUSION: Overall, consuming more animal protein-rich foods can increase the risk of GDM. The results from the current study need to be validated by other, well-designed prospective studies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022352303.

Early vs delayed enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition in hospitalized patients: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials.

We conducted an umbrella review to summarize the existing evidence on the effect of early enteral nutrition (EEN) compared with other approaches, including delayed enteral nutrition (DEN), parenteral nutrition (PN), and oral feeding (OF) on clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. We performed a systematic search up to December 2021, in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science. We included systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMAs) of randomized trials investigating EEN compared with DEN, PN, or OF for any clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. We used "A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR2) and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for assessing the methodological quality of the systematic reviews and their included trial, respectively. The certainty of the evidence was rated using the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. We included 45 eligible SRMAs contributing with a total of 103 randomized controlled trials. The overall meta-analyses showed that patients who received EEN had statistically significant beneficial effects on most outcomes compared with any control (ie, DEN, PN, or OF), including mortality, sepsis, overall complications, infection complications, multiorgan failure, anastomotic leakage, length of hospital stay, time to flatus, and serum albumin levels. No statistically significant beneficial effects were found for risk of pneumonia, noninfectious complications, vomiting, wound infection, as well as number of days of ventilation, intensive care unit days, serum protein, and pre-serum albumin levels. Our results indicate that EEN may be preferred over DEN, PN, and OF because of the beneficial effects on many clinical outcomes.

Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 26 December 2021, for randomised trials of pharmacological interventions for people with hand OA. Two reviewers independently extracted study data and assessed the risk of bias. We calculated the effect sizes for pain (standardised mean differences) using Bayesian random effects models for network meta-analysis (NMA) and pairwise meta-analysis. Based on a pre-specified protocol, we prospectively registered the study at PROSPERO, CRD42021215393. RESULTS: We included 72 trials with 7609 participants. 65 trials (n=5957) were eligible for the quantitative synthesis, investigating 29 pharmacological interventions. Oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and oral glucocorticoids' NMA effect sizes were -0.18 (95% credible interval -0.36 to 0.02) and -0.54 (-0.83 to -0.24), respectively, compared with placebo, and the result was consistent when limiting evidence to the pairwise meta-analysis of trials without high risk of bias. Intra-articular hyaluronate, intra-articular glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine, and topical NSAIDs' NMA effect sizes were 0.22 (-0.08 to 0.51), 0.25 (0.00 to 0.51), -0.01 (-0.19 to 0.18), and -0.14 (-0.33 to 0.08), respectively, compared with placebo. Oral NSAIDs were inferior to oral glucocorticoids with an NMA effect size of 0.36 (0.01 to 0.72). No intervention was superior to placebo when stratifying for thumb and finger OA. CONCLUSION: Oral NSAIDs and glucocorticoids are apparently effective pharmacological interventions in hand OA. Intra-articular therapies and topical NSAIDs were not superior to placebo.

Effect modification of an effective transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral psychotherapy in youths with common mental health problems: Secondary analyses of the randomized mind-my-mind trial.

Mind My Mind (MMM) cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) manualized treatment is effective in the management of common emotional and behavioral mental health problems in youth, yet not all individuals respond satisfactorily to treatment. This study explored potential effect modifiers, i.e., baseline factors associated with a differential treatment effect. We conducted secondary effect modifier analyses with MMM trial data, which involved randomization of 396 youths aged 6-16 years to either MMM CBT treatment (9-13 sessions) or management as usual in local community settings. We examined sociodemographic- (sex, age, family composition, ethnicity, parental education, and income) and clinical variables (mental disorders and duration of mental health problems) as potential effect modifiers of the a) change in parent-rated impact of mental health problems measured by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) or b) response (reduction of ≥1 on SDQ-impact). In intention-to-treat analyses, superior treatment (net) benefits from the MMM intervention were found among youths who met criteria for any mental disorder at baseline (-1.25 [95%CI: -1.67;-0.82]) compared to youths that did not meet diagnostic criteria (-0.22 [95%CI:-1.09;0.65]). Comorbidity vs no comorbidity (-1.84 [95%CI:-2.58;-1.10] vs -0.72 [95%CI:-1.15;-0.29]) and longer duration of untreated mental health problems, i.e., more vs less than 6 months (-1.16 [95%CI:-1.55;-0.78] vs 0.43 [95%CI:-1.01;1.86]) were also associated with superior treatment benefits. The sociodemographic factors were not associated with differential treatment effects in the intention-to-treat analyses. These findings suggest that community-based programs like the MMM are well-suited for youths with substantial mental health problems. Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT03535805.

Fracture risk reduction and safety by osteoporosis treatment compared with placebo or active comparator in postmenopausal women: systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To review the comparative effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments, including the bone anabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, on reducing the risk of fractures in postmenopausal women, and to characterise the effect of antiosteoporosis drug treatments on the risk of fractures according to baseline risk factors. DESIGN: Systematic review, network meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised clinical trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify randomised controlled trials published between 1 January 1996 and 24 November 2021 that examined the effect of bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo or active comparator. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials that included non-Asian postmenopausal women with no restriction on age, when interventions looked at bone quality in a broad perspective. The primary outcome was clinical fractures. Secondary outcomes were vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and major osteoporotic fractures, all cause mortality, adverse events, and serious cardiovascular adverse events. RESULTS: The results were based on 69 trials (>80 000 patients). For clinical fractures, synthesis of the results showed a protective effect of bisphosphonates, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab compared with placebo. Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, bisphosphonates were less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 2.00). Compared with parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and romosozumab, denosumab was less effective in reducing clinical fractures (odds ratio 1.85, 1.18 to 2.92 for denosumab v parathyroid hormone receptor agonists and 1.56, 1.02 to 2.39 for denosumab v romosozumab). An effect of all treatments on vertebral fractures compared with placebo was found. In the active treatment comparisons, denosumab, parathyroid hormone receptor agonists, and romosozumab were more effective than oral bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures. The effect of all treatments was unaffected by baseline risk indicators, except for antiresorptive treatments that showed a greater reduction of clinical fractures compared with placebo with increasing mean age (number of studies=17; ß=0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 0.99). No harm outcomes were seen. The certainty in the effect estimates was moderate to low for all individual outcomes, mainly because of limitations in reporting, nominally indicating a serious risk of bias and imprecision. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicated a benefit of a range of treatments for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women for clinical and vertebral fractures. Bone anabolic treatments were more effective than bisphosphonates in the prevention of clinical and vertebral fractures, irrespective of baseline risk indicators. Hence this analysis provided no clinical evidence for restricting the use of anabolic treatment to patients with a very high risk of fractures. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019128391.