Opportunistic Treatment of Hepatitis C Infection Among Hospitalized People Who Inject Drugs (OPPORTUNI-C): A Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of opportunistic treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among hospitalized people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: We performed a pragmatic, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial recruiting HCV RNA positive individuals admitted for inpatient care in departments of internal medicine, addiction medicine, and psychiatry at three hospitals in Oslo, Norway. Seven departments were sequentially randomized to change from control conditions (standard of care referral to outpatient care) to intervention conditions (immediate treatment initiation). The primary outcome was treatment completion, defined as dispensing the final package of the prescribed treatment within six months after enrolment. RESULTS: A total of 200 HCV RNA positive individuals were enrolled between 1 October 2019 and 31 December 2021 (mean age 47.4 years, 72.5% male, 60.5% injected past 3 months, 20.4% cirrhosis). Treatment completion was accomplished by 67 of 98 (68.4% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 58.2-77.4]) during intervention conditions and by 36 of 102 (35.3% [95% CI: 26.1-45.4]) during control conditions (risk difference 33.1% [95% CI: 20.0-46.2]; risk ratio 1.9 [95% CI: 1.4-2.6]). The intervention was superior in terms of treatment completion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.8 [95% CI: 1.8-12.8]; P = .002) and time to treatment initiation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 4.0 [95% CI: 2.5-6.3]; P < .001). Sustained virologic response was documented in 60 of 98 (61.2% [95% CI: 50.8-70.9]) during intervention and in 66 of 102 (64.7% [95% CI: 54.6-73.9]) during control conditions. CONCLUSIONS: An opportunistic test-and-treat approach to HCV infection was superior to standard of care among hospitalized PWID. The model of care should be considered for broader implementation. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04220645.

Early food intervention and skin emollients to prevent food allergy in young children (PreventADALL): a factorial, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention of food allergy by early introduction of allergenic foods seems promising. We aimed to determine whether early food introduction or the application of regular skin emollients in infants from a general population reduced the risk of food allergy. METHODS: This 2 × 2 factorial, cluster-randomised trial was done at Oslo University Hospital and Østfold Hospital Trust, Oslo, Norway, and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Infants of women recruited antenatally at the routine 18-week ultrasound examination were cluster-randomised at birth to the following groups: (1) no intervention group; (2) the skin intervention group (skin emollients; bath additives and facial cream; from age 2 weeks to <9 months, both at least four times per week); (3) the food intervention group (early complementary feeding of peanut, cow's milk, wheat, and egg from age 3 months); or (4) combined intervention group (skin and food interventions). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) using computer-generated randomisation based on clusters of 92 geographical areas and eight 3-month time blocks. Study personnel performing clinical assessments were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was allergy to any interventional food at 36 months of age. The primary efficacy analysis was done by intention-to-treat analysis, which included all participants who were randomly assigned, apart from three individuals who withdrew their consent. This was a study performed within ORAACLE (the Oslo Research Group of Asthma and Allergy in Childhood; the Lung and Environment). This study is registered as ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02449850. FINDINGS: We recruited 2697 women with 2701 pregnancies, from whom 2397 newborn infants were enrolled between April 14, 2015, and April 11, 2017. Of these infants, 597 were randomly assigned to the no intervention group, 575 to the skin intervention group, 642 to the food intervention group, and 583 to the combined intervention group. One participant in each of the no intervention, food intervention, and skin intervention groups withdrew consent and were therefore not included in any analyses. Food allergy was diagnosed in 44 children; 14 (2·3%) of 596 infants in the non-intervention group, 17 (3·0%) of 574 infants in the skin intervention group, six (0·9%) of 641 infants in the food intervention group, and seven (1·2%) of 583 infants in the combined intervention group. Peanut allergy was diagnosed in 32 children, egg allergy in 12 children, and milk allergy in four children. None had allergy to wheat. Prevalence of food allergy was reduced in the food intervention group compared with the no food intervention group (risk difference -1·6% [95% CI -2·7 to -0·5]; odds ratio [OR] 0·4 [95% CI 0·2 to 0·8]), but not compared with the skin intervention group (0·4% [95% CI -0·6 to 1· 5%]; OR 1·3 [0·7 to 2·3]), with no significant interaction effect (p=1·0). Preventing food allergy in one child required early exposure to allergenic foods in 63 children. No serious adverse events were observed. INTERPRETATION: Exposure to allergenic foods from 3 months of age reduced food allergy at 36 months in a general population. Our results support that early introduction of common allergenic foods is a safe and effective strategy to prevent food allergy. FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at end of paper (see Acknowledgments).

Effect of tapered versus stable treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors on disease flares in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission: a randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) require treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) to reach remission. It is debated whether tapering of TNFi to discontinuation should be considered in sustained remission. The aim of ARCTIC REWIND TNFi was to assess the effect of tapering TNFi to withdrawal compared with stable treatment on the risk of disease activity flares in patients with RA in remission ≥1 year. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial was undertaken at nine Norwegian rheumatology departments. Patients with RA in remission ≥12 months on stable TNFi therapy were allocated by computer-based block-randomisation to tapering to discontinuation of TNFi or stable TNFi. Conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic co-medication was unchanged. The primary endpoint was disease flare during the 12-month study period (non-inferiority margin 20%), assessed in the per-protocol population. RESULTS: Between June 2013 and January 2019, 99 patients were enrolled and 92 received the allocated treatment strategy. Eighty-four patients were included in the per-protocol population. In the tapering TNFi group, 27/43 (63%) experienced a flare during 12 months, compared with 2/41 (5%) in the stable TNFi group; risk difference (95% CI) 58% (42% to 74%). The tapering strategy was not non-inferior to continued stable treatment. The number of total/serious adverse events was 49/3 in the tapering group, 57/2 in the stable group. CONCLUSION: In patients with RA in remission for more than 1 year while using TNFi, an increase in flare rate was reported in those who tapered TNFi to discontinuation. However, most regained remission after reinstatement of full-dose treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT: 2012-005275-14 and clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01881308.

Certolizumab pegol, abatacept, tocilizumab or active conventional treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis: 48-week clinical and radiographic results of the investigator-initiated randomised controlled NORD-STAR trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal first-line treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is debated. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of active conventional therapy with each of three biological treatments with different modes of action. METHODS: Investigator-initiated, randomised, blinded-assessor study. Patients with treatment-naïve early RA with moderate-severe disease activity were randomised 1:1:1:1 to methotrexate combined with (1) active conventional therapy: oral prednisolone (tapered quickly, discontinued at week 36) or sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine and intra-articular glucocorticoid injections in swollen joints; (2) certolizumab pegol; (3) abatacept or (4) tocilizumab. Coprimary endpoints were week 48 Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission (CDAI ≤2.8) and change in radiographic van der Heijde-modified Sharp Score, estimated using logistic regression and analysis of covariance, adjusted for sex, anticitrullinated protein antibody status and country. Bonferroni's and Dunnet's procedures adjusted for multiple testing (significance level: 0.025). RESULTS: Eight hundred and twelve patients were randomised. Adjusted CDAI remission rates at week 48 were: 59.3% (abatacept), 52.3% (certolizumab), 51.9% (tocilizumab) and 39.2% (active conventional therapy). Compared with active conventional therapy, CDAI remission rates were significantly higher for abatacept (adjusted difference +20.1%, p<0.001) and certolizumab (+13.1%, p=0.021), but not for tocilizumab (+12.7%, p=0.030). Key secondary clinical outcomes were consistently better in biological groups. Radiographic progression was low, without group differences.The proportions of patients with serious adverse events were abatacept, 8.3%; certolizumab, 12.4%; tocilizumab, 9.2%; and active conventional therapy, 10.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with active conventional therapy, clinical remission rates were superior for abatacept and certolizumab pegol, but not for tocilizumab. Radiographic progression was low and similar between treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01491815.

Implementation of a centralized pharmacovigilance system in academic pan-European clinical trials: Experience from EU-Response and conect4children consortia.

Setting-up a high quality, compliant and efficient pharmacovigilance (PV) system in multi-country clinical trials can be more challenging for academic sponsors than for companies. To ensure the safety of all participants in academic studies and that the PV system fulfils all regulations, we set up a centralized PV system that allows sponsors to delegate work on PV. This initiative was put in practice by our Inserm-ANRS MIE PV department in two distinct multinational European consortia with 19 participating countries: conect4children (c4c) for paediatrics research and EU-Response for Covid-19 platform trials. The centralized PV system consists of some key procedures to harmonize the complex safety processes, creation of a local safety officer (LSO) network and centralization of all safety activities. The key procedures described the safety management plan for each trial and how tasks were shared and delegated between all stakeholders. Processing of serious adverse events (SAEs) in a unique database guaranteed the full control of the safety data and continuous evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio. The LSO network participated in efficient regulatory compliance across multiple countries. In total, there were 1312 SAEs in EU-Response and 83 SAEs in c4c in the four trials. We present here the lessons learnt from our experience in four clinical trials. We managed heterogeneous European local requirements and implemented efficient communication with all trial teams. Our approach builds capacity for PV that can be used by multiple academic sponsors.

Risk factors for anti-drug antibody formation to infliximab: Secondary analyses of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anti-drug antibodies (ADAb) frequently form early in the treatment course of infliximab and other tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, leading to treatment failure and adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for ADAb in the early phase of infliximab treatment. METHODS: Patients (n = 410) with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases who initiated infliximab treatment were included in the 38-week Norwegian Drug Monitoring Trial (NOR-DRUM) A and randomised 1:1 to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) or standard therapy. Serum levels of infliximab and ADAb were measured at each infusion. Possible risk factors for ADAb formation were assessed using logistic regression, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: ADAb were detected in 78 (19%) patients. A diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (odds ratio [OR], 1.9 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-3.6]) and lifetime smoking (OR, 2.0 [CI 1.1-3.6]) were baseline risk factors, while baseline use of concomitant immunosuppressors (OR, 0.4 [CI 0.2-0.8]) and a diagnosis of spondyloarthritis (SpA) (OR, 0.4 [CI 0.2-0.8]) reduced the risk of ADAb. Higher disease activity during follow-up (OR, 1.1 [CI 1.0-1.1]) and "drug holidays" of more than 11 weeks (OR, 4.1 [CI 1.2-13.8]) increased the risk of ADAb, whereas higher infliximab doses (OR, 0.1 [CI 0.0-0.3) and higher serum infliximab concentrations (OR, 0.7 [CI 0.6-0.8]) reduced the risk of immunogenicity. CONCLUSION: Several risk factors for ADAb formation during early-phase infliximab treatment were identified. This knowledge provides a basis for treatment strategies to mitigate the formation of ADAb and identify patients in whom these measures are of particular importance.

Respiratory dysfunction three months after severe COVID-19 is associated with gut microbiota alterations.

BACKGROUND: Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is primarily a respiratory infection, mounting evidence suggests that the gastrointestinal tract is involved in the disease, with gut barrier dysfunction and gut microbiota alterations being related to disease severity. Whether these alterations persist and are related to long-term respiratory dysfunction remains unknown. METHODS: Plasma was collected during hospital admission and after 3 months from the NOR-Solidarity trial (n = 181) and analyzed for markers of gut barrier dysfunction and inflammation. At the 3-month follow-up, pulmonary function was assessed by measuring the diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO ). Rectal swabs for gut microbiota analyses were collected (n = 97) and analyzed by sequencing the 16S rRNA gene. RESULTS: Gut microbiota diversity was reduced in COVID-19 patients with respiratory dysfunction, defined as DLCO below the lower limit of normal 3 months after hospitalization. These patients also had an altered global gut microbiota composition, with reduced relative abundance of 20 bacterial taxa and increased abundance of five taxa, including Veillonella, potentially linked to fibrosis. During hospitalization, increased plasma levels of lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) were strongly associated with respiratory failure, defined as pO2 /fiO2 (P/F ratio) <26.6 kPa. LBP levels remained elevated during and after hospitalization and were associated with low-grade inflammation and respiratory dysfunction after 3 months. CONCLUSION: Respiratory dysfunction after COVID-19 is associated with altered gut microbiota and persistently elevated LBP levels. Our results should be regarded as hypothesis generating, pointing to a potential gut-lung axis that should be further investigated in relation to long-term pulmonary dysfunction and long COVID.

Evaluation of the Effects of Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine on Viral Clearance in COVID-19 : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: New treatment modalities are urgently needed for patients with COVID-19. The World Health Organization (WHO) Solidarity trial showed no effect of remdesivir or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) on mortality, but the antiviral effects of these drugs are not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of remdesivir and HCQ on all-cause, in-hospital mortality; the degree of respiratory failure and inflammation; and viral clearance in the oropharynx. DESIGN: NOR-Solidarity is an independent, add-on, randomized controlled trial to the WHO Solidarity trial that included biobanking and 3 months of clinical follow-up (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04321616). SETTING: 23 hospitals in Norway. PATIENTS: Eligible patients were adults hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERVENTION: Between 28 March and 4 October 2020, a total of 185 patients were randomly assigned and 181 were included in the full analysis set. Patients received remdesivir (n = 42), HCQ (n = 52), or standard of care (SoC) (n = 87). MEASUREMENTS: In addition to the primary end point of WHO Solidarity, study-specific outcomes were viral clearance in oropharyngeal specimens, the degree of respiratory failure, and inflammatory variables. RESULTS: No significant differences were seen between treatment groups in mortality during hospitalization. There was a marked decrease in SARS-CoV-2 load in the oropharynx during the first week overall, with similar decreases and 10-day viral loads among the remdesivir, HCQ, and SoC groups. Remdesivir and HCQ did not affect the degree of respiratory failure or inflammatory variables in plasma or serum. The lack of antiviral effect was not associated with symptom duration, level of viral load, degree of inflammation, or presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 at hospital admittance. LIMITATION: The trial had no placebo group. CONCLUSION: Neither remdesivir nor HCQ affected viral clearance in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Clinical Therapy Research in the Specialist Health Services, Norway.

Skin emollient and early complementary feeding to prevent infant atopic dermatitis (PreventADALL): a factorial, multicentre, cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Skin emollients applied during early infancy could prevent atopic dermatitis, and early complementary food introduction might reduce food allergy in high-risk infants. The study aimed to determine if either regular skin emollients applied from 2 weeks of age, or early complementary feeding introduced between 12 and 16 weeks of age, reduced development of atopic dermatitis by age 12 months in the general infant population. METHODS: This population-based 2×2 factorial, randomised clinical trial was done at Oslo University Hospital and Østfold Hospital Trust, Oslo, Norway; and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Infants of women recruited antenatally at the routine ultrasound pregnancy screening at 18 weeks were cluster-randomised at birth from 2015 to 2017 to the following groups: (1) controls with no specific advice on skin care while advised to follow national guidelines on infant nutrition (no intervention group); (2) skin emollients (bath additives and facial cream; skin intervention group); (3) early complementary feeding of peanut, cow's milk, wheat, and egg (food intervention group); or (4) combined skin and food interventions (combined intervention group). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) using computer- generated cluster randomisation based on 92 geographical living area blocks as well as eight 3-month time blocks. Carers were instructed to apply the interventions on at least 4 days per week. Atopic dermatitis by age 12 months was the primary outcome, based on clinical investigations at 3, 6 and 12 months by investigators masked to group allocation. Atopic dermatitis was assessed after completing the 12-month investigations and diagnosed if either of the UK Working Party and Hanifin and Rajka (12 months only) diagnostic criteria were fulfilled. The primary efficacy analyses was done by intention-to-treat analysis on all randomly assigned participants. Food allergy results will be reported once all investigations at age 3 years are completed in 2020. This was a study performed within ORAACLE (the Oslo Research Group of Asthma and Allergy in Childhood; the Lung and Environment). The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02449850. FINDINGS: 2697 women were recruited between Dec 9, 2014, and Oct 31, 2016, from whom 2397 newborn infants were enrolled from April 14, 2015, to April 11, 2017. Atopic dermatitis was observed in 48 (8%) of 596 infants in the no intervention group, 64 (11%) of 575 in the skin intervention group, 58 (9%) of 642 in the food intervention group, and 31 (5%) of 583 in the combined intervention group. Neither skin emollients nor early complementary feeding reduced development of atopic dermatitis, with a risk difference of 3·1% (95% CI -0·3 to 6·5) for skin intervention and 1·0% (-2·1 to 4·1) for food intervention, in favour of control. No safety concerns with the interventions were identified. Reported skin symptoms and signs (including itching, oedema, exanthema, dry skin, and urticaria) were no more frequent in the skin, food, and combined intervention groups than in the no intervention group. INTERPRETATION: Neither early skin emollients nor early complementary feeding reduced development of atopic dermatitis by age 12 months. Our study does not support the use of these interventions to prevent atopic dermatitis by 12 months of age in infants. FUNDING: The study was funded by several public and private funding bodies: The Regional Health Board South East, The Norwegian Research Council, Health and Rehabilitation Norway, The Foundation for Healthcare and Allergy Research in Sweden-Vårdalstiftelsen, Swedish Asthma and Allergy Association's Research Foundation, Swedish Research Council-the Initiative for Clinical Therapy Research, The Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation, SFO-V at the Karolinska Institute, Freemason Child House Foundation in Stockholm, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare-FORTE, Oslo University Hospital, the University of Oslo, and Østfold Hospital Trust.

Effect of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring vs Standard Therapy During Maintenance Infliximab Therapy on Disease Control in Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), consisting of individualized treatment based on scheduled assessments of serum drug levels, has been proposed as an alternative to standard therapy to optimize efficacy and safety of infliximab and other biologic drugs. However, it remains unclear whether proactive TDM improves clinical outcomes during maintenance therapy. Objective: To assess whether proactive TDM during maintenance therapy with infliximab improves treatment efficacy by preventing disease worsening compared with standard infliximab therapy without TDM. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, parallel-group, open-label clinical trial including 458 adults with rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn disease, or psoriasis undergoing maintenance therapy with infliximab in 20 Norwegian hospitals. Patients were recruited from June 7, 2017, to December 12, 2019. Final follow-up took place on December 14, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to proactive TDM with dose and interval adjustments based on scheduled monitoring of serum drug levels and antidrug antibodies (TDM group; n = 228) or to standard infliximab therapy without drug and antibody level monitoring (standard therapy group; n = 230). Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was sustained disease control without disease worsening, defined by disease-specific composite scores or consensus about disease worsening between patient and physician leading to a major change in treatment (switching to another biologic drug, adding an immunosuppressive drug including glucocorticoids, or increasing the infliximab dose), during the 52-week study period. Results: Among 458 randomized patients (mean age, 44.8 [SD, 14.3] years; 216 women [49.8%]), 454 received their randomly allocated intervention and were included in the full analysis set. The primary outcome of sustained disease control without disease worsening was observed in 167 patients (73.6%) in the TDM group and 127 patients (55.9%) in the standard therapy group. The estimated adjusted difference was 17.6% (95% CI, 9.0%-26.2%; P < .001) favoring TDM. Adverse events were reported in 137 patients (60%) and 142 patients (63%) in the TDM and standard therapy groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases undergoing maintenance therapy with infliximab, proactive TDM was more effective than treatment without TDM in sustaining disease control without disease worsening. Further research is needed to compare proactive TDM with reactive TDM, to assess the effects on long-term disease complications, and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this approach. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03074656.

Effect of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring vs Standard Therapy During Infliximab Induction on Disease Remission in Patients With Chronic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), defined as individualized drug dosing based on scheduled monitoring of serum drug levels, has been proposed as an alternative to standard therapy to maximize efficacy and safety of infliximab and other biological drugs. However, whether proactive TDM improves clinical outcomes when implemented at the time of drug initiation, compared with standard therapy, remains unclear. Objective: To assess whether TDM during initiation of infliximab therapy improves treatment efficacy compared with standard infliximab therapy without TDM. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, parallel-group, open-label clinical trial of 411 adults with rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn disease, or psoriasis initiating infliximab therapy in 21 hospitals in Norway. Patients were recruited from March 1, 2017, to January 10, 2019. Final follow-up occurred on November 5, 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive proactive TDM with dose and interval adjustments based on scheduled monitoring of serum drug levels and antidrug antibodies (TDM group; n = 207) or standard infliximab therapy without drug and antibody level monitoring (standard therapy group; n = 204). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was clinical remission at week 30. Results: Among 411 randomized patients (mean age, 44.7 [SD, 14.9] years; 209 women [51%]), 398 (198 in the TDM group and 200 in the standard therapy group) received their randomized intervention and were included in the full analysis set. Clinical remission at week 30 was achieved in 100 (50.5%) of 198 and 106 (53.0%) of 200 patients in the TDM and standard therapy groups, respectively (adjusted difference, 1.5%; 95% CI, -8.2% to 11.1%; P = .78). Adverse events were reported in 135 patients (68%) and 139 patients (70%) in the TDM and standard therapy groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases initiating treatment with infliximab, proactive therapeutic drug monitoring, compared with standard therapy, did not significantly improve clinical remission rates over 30 weeks. These findings do not support routine use of therapeutic drug monitoring during infliximab induction for improving disease remission rates. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03074656.

The frequency of intrapartum caesarean section use with the WHO partograph versus Zhang's guideline in the Labour Progression Study (LaPS): a multicentre, cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate concerning which guidelines and monitoring tools are most beneficial for assessing labour progression, to help prevent use of intrapartum caesarean section (ICS). The WHO partograph has been used for decades with the assumption of a linear labour progression; however, in 2010, Zhang introduced a new guideline suggesting a more dynamic labour progression. We aimed to investigate whether the frequency of ICS use differed when adhering to the WHO partograph versus Zhang's guideline for labour progression. METHODS: We did a multicentre, cluster-randomised controlled trial at obstetric units in Norway, and each site was required to deliver more than 500 fetuses per year to be eligible for inclusion. The participants were nulliparous women who had a singleton, full-term fetus with cephalic presentation, and who entered spontaneous active labour. The obstetric units were treated as clusters, and women treated within these clusters were all given the same treatment. We stratified these clusters by size and number of previous caesarean sections. The clusters containing the obstetric units were then randomly assigned (1:1) to the control group, which adhered to the WHO partograph, or to the intervention group, which adhered to Zhang's guideline. The randomisation was computer-generated and was done in the Unit of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway, and investigators in this unit had no further involvement in the trial. Our study design did not enable masking of participants or health-care providers, but the investigators who were analysing the data were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was use of ICS during active labour (cervical dilatation of 4-10 cm) in all participating women. The Labour Progression Study (LaPS) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02221427. FINDINGS: Between Aug 1, 2014, and Sept 1, 2014, 14 clusters were enrolled in the LaPS trial, and on Sept 11, 2014, seven obstetric units were randomly assigned to the control group (adhering to the WHO partograph) and seven obstetric units were randomly assigned to the intervention group (adhering to Zhang's guideline). Between Dec 1, 2014, and Jan 31, 2017, 11 615 women were judged to be eligible for recruitment in the trial, which comprised 5421 (46·7%) women in the control group units and 6194 (53·3%) women in the intervention group units. In the control group, 2100 (38·7%) of 5421 women did not give signed consent to participate and 16 (0·3%) women abstained from participation. In the intervention group, 2181 (35·2%) of 6194 women did not give signed consent to participate and 41 (0·7%) women abstained from participation. 7277 (62·7%) of 11 615 eligible women were therefore included in the analysis of the primary endpoint. Of these women, 3305 (45·4%) participants were in an obstetric unit that was randomly assigned to the control group (adhering to the WHO partograph) and 3972 (54·6%) participants were in an obstetric unit that was randomly assigned to the intervention group (adhering to Zhang's guideline). No women dropped out during the trial. Before the start of the trial, ICS was used in 9·5% of deliveries in the control group obstetric units and in 9·3% of intervention group obstetric units. During our trial, there were 196 (5·9%) ICS deliveries in women in the control group (WHO partograph) and 271 (6·8%) ICS deliveries in women in the intervention group (Zhang's guideline), and the frequency of ICS use did not differ between the groups (adjusted relative risk 1·17, 95% CI 0·98-1·40; p=0·08; adjusted risk difference 1·00%, 95% CI -0·1 to 2·1). We identified no maternal or neonatal deaths during our study. INTERPRETATION: We did not find any significant difference in the frequency of ICS use between the obstetric units assigned to adhere to the WHO partograph and those assigned to adhere to Zhang's guideline. The overall decrease in ICS use that we observed relative to the previous frequency of ICS use noted in these obstetric units might be explained by the close focus on assessing labour progression more than use of the guidelines. Our results represent an important contribution to the discussion on implementation of the new guideline. FUNDING: Østfold Hospital Trust.

The Labor Progression Study: The use of oxytocin augmentation during labor following Zhang's guideline and the WHO partograph in a cluster randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate the use of oxytocin augmentation during labor in nulliparous women following Zhang's guideline or the WHO partograph. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial in 14 birth-care units in Norway, randomly assigned to either the intervention group, which followed Zhang's guideline, or to the control group, which followed the WHO partograph, for labor progression. The participants were nulliparous women who had a singleton full-term fetus in a cephalic presentation and spontaneous onset of labor, denoted as group 1 in the Ten Group Classification System. RESULTS: Between December 2014 and January 2017, 7277 participants were included. A total of 3219 women (44%) received augmentation with oxytocin during labor. Oxytocin was used in 1658 (42%) women in the Zhang group compared with 1561 (47%) women in the WHO group. The adjusted relative risk for augmentation with oxytocin was 0.98 (95% CI 0.84-1.15; P = .8) in the Zhang vs WHO group, with an adjusted risk difference of -0.8% (95% CI -7.8 to 6.1). The participants in the Zhang group were less likely to be augmented with oxytocin before reaching 6 cm of cervical dilatation (24%) compared with participants in the WHO group (28%), with an adjusted relative risk of 0.84 (95% CI 0.75-0.94; P = .003). Oxytocin was administered for almost 20 min longer in the Zhang group than in the WHO group, with an adjusted mean difference of 17.9 min (95% CI 2.7-33.1; P = .021). In addition, 19% of the women in the Zhang group and 23% in the WHO group received augmentation with oxytocin without being diagnosed with labor dystocia. CONCLUSIONS: Although no significant difference in the proportion of oxytocin augmentation was observed between the 2 study groups, there were differences in how oxytocin was used. Women in the Zhang group were less likely to receive oxytocin augmentation before 6 cm of cervical dilatation. The duration of augmentation with oxytocin was longer in the Zhang group than in the WHO group.

Ibuprofen versus pivmecillinam for uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women-A double-blind, randomized non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Although uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) are often self-limiting, most patients will be prescribed antibiotic treatment. We assessed whether treatment with ibuprofen was non-inferior to pivmecillinam in achieving symptomatic resolution by day 4, with a non-inferiority margin of 10%. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind non-inferiority trial. We recruited patients from 16 sites in a general practice setting in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. Non-pregnant women aged 18-60 years presenting with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI were screened for eligibility from 11 April 2013 to 22 April 2016. Patients with informed consent were randomized (1:1 ratio) to treatment with either 600 mg ibuprofen or 200 mg pivmecillinam 3 times a day for 3 days. The patient, treating physician, and study personnel were blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who felt cured by day 4, as assessed from a patient diary. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients in need of secondary treatment with antibiotics and cases of pyelonephritis. A total of 383 women were randomly assigned to treatment with either ibuprofen (n = 194, 181 analyzed) or pivmecillinam (n = 189, 178 analyzed). By day 4, 38.7% of the patients in the ibuprofen group felt cured versus 73.6% in the pivmecillinam group. The adjusted risk difference with 90% confidence interval was 35% (27% to 43%) in favor of pivmecillinam, which crossed the prespecified non-inferiority margin. Secondary endpoints were generally in favor of pivmecillinam. After 4 weeks' follow-up, 53% of patients in the ibuprofen group recovered without antibiotic treatment. Seven cases of pyelonephritis occurred, all in the ibuprofen group, giving a number needed to harm of 26 (95% CI 13 to 103). Five of these patients were hospitalized and classified as having serious adverse events; 2 recovered as outpatients. A limitation of the study was the extensive list of exclusion criteria, eliminating almost half of the patients screened. We did not register symptoms in the screening process; hence, we do not know the symptom burden for those who declined to participate. This might make our results less generalizable. CONCLUSIONS: Ibuprofen was inferior to pivmecillinam for treating uncomplicated UTIs. More than half of the women in the ibuprofen group recovered without antibiotics. However, pyelonephritis occurred in 7 out of 181 women using ibuprofen. Until we can identify those women who will develop complications, we cannot recommend ibuprofen alone as initial treatment to women with uncomplicated UTIs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01849926 EU Clinical Trials Register (EU-CTR), EudraCT Number 2012-002776-14.

Clinical and ultrasound remission after 6 months of treat-to-target therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: associations to future good radiographic and physical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To explore associations between remission, based on clinical and ultrasound definitions, and future good radiographic and physical outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Newly diagnosed patients with RA followed a treat-to-target strategy incorporating ultrasound information in the Aiming for Remission in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised trial examining the benefit of ultrasound in a Clinical TIght Control regimen (ARCTIC) trial. We defined 6-month remission according to Disease Activity Score, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints-erythrocyte sedimentation rate, American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean criteria, Simplified Disease Activity Index, Clinical Disease Activity Index and two ultrasound definitions (no power Doppler signal, grey scale score ≤2). Two outcomes were defined: no radiographic progression and good outcome (no radiographic progression+physical function≥general population median), both sustained 12-24 months. We calculated the ORs of these outcomes for the remission definitions. RESULTS: Of 103 patients, 42%-82% reached remission at 6 months, dependent on definition. Seventy-one per cent of patients had no radiographic progression and 37% had good outcome. An association between 6-month remission and no radiographic progression was observed for ACR/EULAR Boolean remission (44 joints, OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 8.4), ultrasound power Doppler (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 10.0) and grey scale remission (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 8.0). All clinical, but not ultrasound remission criteria were associated with achievement of a good outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support ACR/EULAR Boolean remission based on 44 joints as the preferred treatment target in early RA. Absence of ultrasound inflammation was associated with no radiographic progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01205854; Post-results.

Calprotectin as a marker of inflammation in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Calprotectin is an inflammatory marker of interest in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We evaluated whether the level of calprotectin was associated with disease activity, and if it was predictive of treatment response and radiographic progression in patients with early RA. METHODS: Plasma from disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients with RA fulfilling 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria with symptom duration <2 years was analysed for calprotectin at baseline, and after 1, 3 and 12 months. All patients received treat-to-target therapy, as part of a randomised controlled strategy trial (ARCTIC). The association between calprotectin, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C reactive protein (CRP) and measures of disease activity were assessed by correlations. We used likelihood ratios and logistic regression models to assess the predictive value of the baseline inflammatory markers for treatment response and radiographic damage. RESULTS: 215 patients were included: 61% female, 82% anti-citrullinated peptide antibody positive, mean (SD) age 50.9 (13.7) years and median (25, 75 percentile) symptom duration 5.8 (2.8, 10.5) months. Calprotectin was significantly correlated with Clinical Disease Activity Index (r=0.32), ESR (r=0.50) and ultrasonography power Doppler (r=0.42) before treatment onset. After 12 months of treatment, calprotectin, but not ESR and CRP, was significantly correlated with power Doppler (r=0.27). Baseline levels of calprotectin, ESR and CRP were not predictive of treatment response, but high levels of calprotectin were associated with radiographic progression in multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS: Calprotectin was correlated with inflammation assessed by ultrasound before and during DMARD treatment, and was also associated with radiographic progression. The data support that calprotectin may be of interest as an inflammatory marker when assessing disease activity in different stages of RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01205854; Post-results.

Patients with seronegative RA have more inflammatory activity compared with patients with seropositive RA in an inception cohort of DMARD-naïve patients classified according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the presentation of seropositive and seronegative early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients classified according to the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria. METHODS: All patients had symptom duration from first swollen joint <2 years and were DMARD naïve with an indication for DMARD treatment. Patients were stratified as seropositive (positive rheumatoid factor (RF)+ and/or anticitrullinated peptide antibody (ACPA)+) or seronegative (RF- and ACPA-), and disease characteristics were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients were included, and 36 (15.4%) were seronegative. Ultrasonography (US) scores for joints (median 55 vs 25, p<0.001) and tendons (median 3 vs 0, p<0.001), number of swollen joints (median 17 vs 8, p<0.001), disease activity score (DAS; mean 3.9 vs 3.4, p=0.03) and physician global assessment (mean 49.1 vs 38.9, p=0.006) were significantly higher in seronegative patients compared with seropositive. Total van der Heijde-modified Sharp score, Richie Articular Index and patient-reported outcome measures were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Seronegative patients had higher levels of inflammation, assessed both clinically and by US, than seropositive patients. These differences may reflect the high number of involved joints required for seronegative patients to fulfil the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01205854; Pre-results.

First step in the development of an ultrasound joint inflammation score for rheumatoid arthritis using a data-driven approach.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate candidate sets of joints and tendons for assessment of ultrasound (US) joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients were included in one of two cohorts from 2010 to June 2013: disease-modifying antirheumatic drug naïve early RA or established RA starting/switching biologics. An extensive US examination was performed by experienced sonographers using a validated grey-scale (GSUS) and power Doppler (PDUS) semiquantitative scoring system with scores 0-3 for both GSUS and PDUS in 36 joints and four tendons. We performed factor analysis in the early RA US data and selected candidate joint/tendon sets based on these results. The proportion of information in the total US scores retained in these candidate sets was assessed by R(2) from linear regression analysis. Finally, the candidate sets and previously proposed joint scores were tested in the established RA cohort, and we also evaluated the sensitivity to change with standardised response means. RESULTS: 227 patients with early RA and 212 patients with established RA were included. We identified two candidate sets of joints/tendons: candidate set A consisted of seven joints/two tendons (meatacarpophalangeal 1 (MCP1), MCP2, proximal interphalangeal 3, radiocarpal, elbow, metatarsophalangeal 1 (MTP1), MTP2, tibialis posterior tendon, extensor carpi ulnaris tendon) and set B of nine joints/two tendons (MCP5 and MTP5 added to set A). Unilateral reduced scores retained 78%-85% of the information in total score, while bilateral reduced scores retained 89%-93%, and both sets performed better than previously proposed reduced joint scores, and similar or slightly better regarding sensitivity to change. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced GSUS and PDUS scores retained most of the information from the total score and performed well in a validation cohort of established RA. TRIAL REGISTATION NUMBER: NCT01205854, ACTRN12610000284066.