Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Glycemic Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications for use with metformin to maintain target glycated hemoglobin levels in persons with type 2 diabetes is uncertain. METHODS: In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes of less than 10 years' duration who were receiving metformin and had glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.8 to 8.5%, we compared the effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications. We randomly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. The primary metabolic outcome was a glycated hemoglobin level, measured quarterly, of 7.0% or higher that was subsequently confirmed, and the secondary metabolic outcome was a confirmed glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5%. RESULTS: A total of 5047 participants (19.8% Black and 18.6% Hispanic or Latinx) who had received metformin for type 2 diabetes were followed for a mean of 5.0 years. The cumulative incidence of a glycated hemoglobin level of 7.0% or higher (the primary metabolic outcome) differed significantly among the four groups (P<0.001 for a global test of differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutide (26.1) were similar and lower than those with glimepiride (30.4) and sitagliptin (38.1). The differences among the groups with respect to a glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5% (the secondary outcome) paralleled those of the primary outcome. There were no material differences with respect to the primary outcome across prespecified subgroups defined according to sex, age, or race or ethnic group; however, among participants with higher baseline glycated hemoglobin levels there appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagliptin. Severe hypoglycemia was rare but significantly more frequent with glimepiride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7%). Participants who received liraglutide reported more frequent gastrointestinal side effects and lost more weight than those in the other treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: All four medications, when added to metformin, decreased glycated hemoglobin levels. However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit modestly, more effective in achieving and maintaining target glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).

Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With Blood-Based Biomarkers (Liquid Biopsy) vs Fecal Tests or Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is highly effective but underused. Blood-based biomarkers (liquid biopsy) could improve screening participation. METHODS: Using our established Markov model, screening every 3 years with a blood-based test that meets minimum Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' thresholds (CMSmin) (CRC sensitivity 74%, specificity 90%) was compared with established alternatives. Test attributes were varied in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: CMSmin reduced CRC incidence by 40% and CRC mortality by 52% vs no screening. These reductions were less profound than the 68%-79% and 73%-81%, respectively, achieved with multi-target stool DNA (Cologuard; Exact Sciences) every 3 years, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), or colonoscopy every 10 years. Assuming the same cost as multi-target stool DNA, CMSmin cost $28,500/quality-adjusted life-year gained vs no screening, but FIT, colonoscopy, and multi-target stool DNA were less costly and more effective. CMSmin would match FIT's clinical outcomes if it achieved 1.4- to 1.8-fold FIT's participation rate. Advanced precancerous lesion (APL) sensitivity was a key determinant of a test's effectiveness. A paradigm-changing blood-based test (sensitivity >90% for CRC and 80% for APL; 90% specificity; cost ≤$120-$140) would be cost-effective vs FIT at comparable participation. CONCLUSIONS: CMSmin could contribute to CRC control by achieving screening in those who will not use established methods. Substituting blood-based testing for established effective CRC screening methods will require higher CRC and APL sensitivities that deliver programmatic benefits matching those of FIT. High APL sensitivity, which can result in CRC prevention, should be a top priority for screening test developers. APL detection should not be penalized by a definition of test specificity that focuses on CRC only.

Real-World Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Against Infection and Severe Diseases in Children and Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine in pediatrics was assessed by randomized trials before the Omicron variant's emergence. The long-term durability of vaccine protection in this population during the Omicron period remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of BNT162b2 in preventing infection and severe diseases with various strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in previously uninfected children and adolescents. DESIGN: Comparative effectiveness research accounting for underreported vaccination in 3 study cohorts: adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Delta phase and children (5 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Omicron phase. SETTING: A national collaboration of pediatric health systems (PEDSnet). PARTICIPANTS: 77 392 adolescents (45 007 vaccinated) during the Delta phase and 111 539 children (50 398 vaccinated) and 56 080 adolescents (21 180 vaccinated) during the Omicron phase. INTERVENTION: First dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine versus no receipt of COVID-19 vaccine. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes of interest include documented infection, COVID-19 illness severity, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), and cardiac complications. The effectiveness was reported as (1-relative risk)*100, with confounders balanced via propensity score stratification. RESULTS: During the Delta period, the estimated effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.1% to 98.7%) against documented infection among adolescents, with no statistically significant waning after receipt of the first dose. An analysis of cardiac complications did not suggest a statistically significant difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. During the Omicron period, the effectiveness against documented infection among children was estimated to be 74.3% (CI, 72.2% to 76.2%). Higher levels of effectiveness were seen against moderate or severe COVID-19 (75.5% [CI, 69.0% to 81.0%]) and ICU admission with COVID-19 (84.9% [CI, 64.8% to 93.5%]). Among adolescents, the effectiveness against documented Omicron infection was 85.5% (CI, 83.8% to 87.1%), with 84.8% (CI, 77.3% to 89.9%) against moderate or severe COVID-19, and 91.5% (CI, 69.5% to 97.6%) against ICU admission with COVID-19. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against the Omicron variant declined 4 months after the first dose and then stabilized. The analysis showed a lower risk for cardiac complications in the vaccinated group during the Omicron variant period. LIMITATION: Observational study design and potentially undocumented infection. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that BNT162b2 was effective for various COVID-19-related outcomes in children and adolescents during the Delta and Omicron periods, and there is some evidence of waning effectiveness over time. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Distinguishing Clinical From Statistical Significances in Contemporary Comparative Effectiveness Research.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of clinical significance reporting in contemporary comparative effectiveness research (CER). BACKGROUND: In CER, a statistically significant difference between study groups may or may not be clinically significant. Misinterpreting statistically significant results could lead to inappropriate recommendations that increase health care costs and treatment toxicity. METHODS: CER studies from 2022 issues of the Annals of Surgery , Journal of the American Medical Association , Journal of Clinical Oncology , Journal of Surgical Research , and Journal of the American College of Surgeons were systematically reviewed by 2 different investigators. The primary outcome of interest was whether the authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in the "Methods." RESULTS: Of 307 reviewed studies, 162 were clinical trials and 145 were observational studies. Authors specified what they considered to be a clinically significant difference in 26 studies (8.5%). Clinical significance was defined using clinically validated standards in 25 studies and subjectively in 1 study. Seven studies (2.3%) recommended a change in clinical decision-making, all with primary outcomes achieving statistical significance. Five (71.4%) of these studies did not have clinical significance defined in their methods. In randomized controlled trials with statistically significant results, sample size was inversely correlated with effect size ( r = -0.30, P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary CER, most authors do not specify what they consider to be a clinically significant difference in study outcome. Most studies recommending a change in clinical decision-making did so based on statistical significance alone, and clinical significance was usually defined with clinically validated standards.

Controls, comparator arms, and designs for critical care comparative effectiveness research: It's complicated.

BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research is meant to determine which commonly employed medical interventions are most beneficial, least harmful, and/or most costly in a real-world setting. While the objectives for comparative effectiveness research are clear, the field has failed to develop either a uniform definition of comparative effectiveness research or an appropriate set of recommendations to provide standards for the design of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, spurring controversy in recent years. The insertion of non-representative control and/or comparator arm subjects into critical care comparative effectiveness research trials can threaten trial subjects' safety. Nonetheless, the broader scientific community does not always appreciate the importance of defining and maintaining critical care practices during a trial, especially when vulnerable, critically ill populations are studied. Consequently, critical care comparative effectiveness research trials sometimes lack properly constructed control or active comparator arms altogether and/or suffer from the inclusion of "unusual critical care" that may adversely affect groups enrolled in one or more arms. This oversight has led to critical care comparative effectiveness research trial designs that impair informed consent, confound interpretation of trial results, and increase the risk of harm for trial participants. METHODS/EXAMPLES: We propose a novel approach to performing critical care comparative effectiveness research trials that mandates the documentation of critical care practices prior to trial initiation. We also classify the most common types of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, as well as the most frequent errors in trial design. We present examples of these design flaws drawn from past and recently published trials as well as examples of trials that avoided those errors. Finally, we summarize strategies employed successfully in well-designed trials, in hopes of suggesting a comprehensive standard for the field. CONCLUSION: Flawed critical care comparative effectiveness research trial designs can lead to unsound trial conclusions, compromise informed consent, and increase risks to research subjects, undermining the major goal of comparative effectiveness research: to inform current practice. Well-constructed control and comparator arms comprise indispensable elements of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials, key to improving the trials' safety and to generating trial results likely to improve patient outcomes in clinical practice.

An Integrated Care Pathway for depression in adolescents: protocol for a Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-implementation, Non-randomized, Cluster Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Our group developed an Integrated Care Pathway to facilitate the delivery of evidence-based care for adolescents experiencing depression called CARIBOU-2 (Care for Adolescents who Receive Information 'Bout OUtcomes, 2nd iteration). The core pathway components are assessment, psychoeducation, psychotherapy options, medication options, caregiver support, measurement-based care team reviews and graduation. We aim to test the clinical and implementation effectiveness of the CARIBOU-2 pathway relative to treatment-as-usual (TAU) in community mental health settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use a Type 1 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation, Non-randomized Cluster Controlled Trial Design. Primary participants will be adolescents (planned n = 300, aged 13-18 years) with depressive symptoms, presenting to one of six community mental health agencies. All sites will begin in the TAU condition and transition to the CARIBOU-2 intervention after enrolling 25 adolescents. The primary clinical outcome is the rate of change of depressive symptoms from baseline to the 24-week endpoint using the Childhood Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R). Generalized mixed effects modelling will be conducted to compare this outcome between intervention types. Our primary hypothesis is that there will be a greater rate of reduction in depressive symptoms in the group receiving the CARIBOU-2 intervention relative to TAU over 24 weeks as per the CDRS-R. Implementation outcomes will also be examined, including clinician fidelity to the pathway and its components, and cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approvals have been obtained. Should our results support our hypotheses, systematic implementation of the CARIBOU-2 intervention in other community mental health agencies would be indicated.

Comparative effectiveness of omalizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab in asthma: A target trial emulation.

BACKGROUND: Multiple mAbs are currently approved for the treatment of asthma. However, there is limited evidence on their comparative effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of omalizumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab in individuals with moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS: We emulated a hypothetical randomized trial using electronic health records from a large US-based academic health care system. Participants aged 18 years or older with baseline IgE levels between 30 and 700 IU/mL and peripheral eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells/µL were eligible for study inclusion. The study period extended from March 2016 to August 2021. Outcomes included the incidence of asthma-related exacerbations and change in baseline FEV1 value over 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: In all, 68 individuals receiving dupilumab, 68 receiving omalizumab, and 65 receiving mepolizumab met the inclusion criteria. Over 12 months of follow-up, 31 exacerbations occurred over 68 person years (0.46 exacerbations per person year) in the dupilumab group, 63 over 68 person years (0.93 per person year) in the omalizumab group, and 86 over 65 person years (1.32 per person year) in the mepolizumab group (adjusted incidence rate ratios: dupilumab vs mepolizumab, 0.28 [95% CI = 0.09-0.84]; dupilumab vs omalizumab, 0.36 [95% CI = 0.12-1.09]; and omalizumab vs mepolizumab, 0.78 [95% CI = 0.32-1.91]). The differences in the change in FEV1 comparing patients who received the different biologics were as follows: 0.11 L (95% CI = -0.003 to 0.222 L) for dupilumab versus mepolizumab, 0.082 L (95% CI -0.040 to 0.204 L) for dupilumab versus omalizumab, and 0.026 L (95% CI -0.083 to 0.140 L) for omalizumab versus mepolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with asthma and eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells/µL and IgE levels of 30 to 700 kU/L, dupilumab was associated with greater improvements in exacerbation and FEV1 value than omalizumab and mepolizumab.

Does Early Mobilization Following Resection of Spinal Intra-Dural Pathology Increase the Risk of Cerebrospinal Fluid Leaks?-A Dual-Center Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Background and Objectives: Prolonged bed rest after the resection of spinal intradural tumors is postulated to mitigate the development of cerebrospinal fluid leaks (CSFLs), which is one of the feared postoperative complications. Nonetheless, the empirical evidence supporting this conjecture remains limited and requires further investigation. The goal of the study was to investigate whether prolonged bed rest lowers the risk of CSFL after the resection of spinal intradural tumors. The primary outcome was the rate of CSFL in each cohort. Materials and Methods: To validate this hypothesis, we conducted a comparative effectiveness research (CER) study at two distinct academic neurosurgical centers, wherein diverse postoperative treatment protocols were employed. Specifically, one center adopted a prolonged bed rest regimen lasting for three days, while the other implemented early postoperative mobilization. For statistical analysis, case-control matching was performed. Results: Out of an overall 451 cases, we matched 101 patients from each center. We analyzed clinical records and images from each case. In the bed rest center, two patients developed a CSFL (n = 2, 1.98%) compared to four patients (n = 4, 3.96%) in the early mobilization center (p = 0.683). Accordingly, CSFL development was not associated with early mobilization (OR 2.041, 95% CI 0.365-11.403; p = 0.416). Univariate and multivariate analysis identified expansion duraplasty as an independent risk factor for CSFL (OR 60.33, 95% CI: 0.015-0.447; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this CER, we demonstrate that early mobilization following the resection of spinal intradural tumors does not confer an increased risk of the development of CSFL.

Improved Postoperative Outcomes after Prehabilitation for Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Older Patients: An Emulated Target Trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a multimodal prehabilitation program on perioperative outcomes in colorectal cancer patients with a higher postoperative complication risk, using an emulated target trial (ETT) design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An ETT design including overlap weighting based on propensity score was performed. The study consisted of all patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (2016-2021), in a large nonacademic training hospital, who were candidate to elective colorectal cancer surgery and had a higher risk for postoperative complications defined by: age ≥ 65 years and or American Society of Anesthesiologists score III/IV. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of prehabilitation compared with usual care on perioperative complications and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one patients were included: 128 in the usual care group and 123 patients in the prehabilitation group. In the ITT analysis, the number needed to treat to reduce one or more complications in one person was 4.2 (95% CI 2.6-10). Compared with patients in the usual care group, patients undergoing prehabilitation had a 55% lower comprehensive complication score (95% CI -71 to -32%). There was a 33% reduction (95% CI -44 to -18%) in LOS from 7 to 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a clinically relevant reduction of complications and LOS after multimodal prehabilitation in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery with a higher postoperative complication risk. The study methodology used may serve as an example for further larger multicenter comparative effectiveness research on prehabilitation.

Comparison of lower extremity bypass and peripheral vascular intervention for chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the Medicare-linked Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: There is a relative lack of comparative effectiveness research on revascularization for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). We examined the association between lower extremity bypass (LEB) vs peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) for CLTI and 30-day and 5-year all-cause mortality and 30-day and 5-year amputation. METHODS: Patients undergoing LEB and PVI of the below-the-knee popliteal and infrapopliteal arteries between 2014 and 2019 were queried from the Vascular Quality Initiative, and outcomes data were obtained from the Medicare claims-linked Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database. Propensity scores were calculated on 15 variables using a logistic regression model to control for imbalances between treatment groups. A 1:1 matching method was used. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and hierarchical Cox proportional hazards regression with a random intercept for site and operator nested in site to account for clustered data compared 30-day and 5-year all-cause mortality between groups. Thirty-day and 5-year amputation were subsequently compared using competing risk analysis to account for the competing risk of death. RESULTS: There was a total of 2075 patients in each group. The overall mean age was 71 ± 11 years, 69% were male, and 76% were white, 18% were black, and 6% were of Hispanic ethnicity. Baseline clinical and demographic characteristics in the matched cohort were balanced between groups. There was no association between all-cause mortality over 30 days and LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence, 2.3% vs 2.3% by Kaplan Meier; log-rank P-value = .906; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-1.44; P-value = .80). All-cause mortality over 5 years was lower for LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence, 55.9% vs 60.1% by Kaplan Meier; log-rank P-value < .001; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.86; P-value < .001). Accounting for competing risk of death, amputation over 30 days was also lower in LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence function, 1.9% vs 3.0%; Fine and Gray P-value = .025; subHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.95; P-value = .025). There was no association between amputation over 5 years and LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence function, 22.6% vs 23.4%; Fine and Gray P-value = .184; subHR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79-1.05; P-value = .184). CONCLUSIONS: In the Vascular Quality Initiative-linked Medicare registry, LEB vs PVI for CLTI was associated with a lower risk of 30-day amputation and 5-year all-cause mortality. These results will serve as a foundation to validate recently published randomized controlled trial data, and to broaden the comparative effectiveness evidence base for CLTI.

Comparative Effectiveness Research on Spinal versus General Anesthesia for Surgery in Older Adults.

Comparative effectiveness research aims to understand the benefits and harms of different treatments to assist patients and clinicians in making better decisions. Within anesthesia practice, comparing outcomes of spinal versus general anesthesia in older adults represents an important focus of comparative effectiveness research. The authors review methodologic issues involved in studying this topic and summarize available evidence from randomized studies in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, elective knee and hip arthroplasty, and vascular surgery. Across contexts, randomized trials show that spinal and general anesthesia are likely to be equivalent in terms of safety and acceptability for most patients without contraindications. Choices between spinal and general anesthesia represent "preference-sensitive" care in which decisions should be guided by patients' preferences and values, informed by best available evidence.

Addressing missing data in the estimation of time-varying treatments in comparative effectiveness research.

Comparative effectiveness research is often concerned with evaluating treatment strategies sustained over time, that is, time-varying treatments. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) is often used to address the time-varying confounding by re-weighting the sample according to the probability of treatment receipt at each time point. IPW can also be used to address any missing data by re-weighting individuals according to the probability of observing the data. The combination of these two distinct sets of weights may lead to inefficient estimates of treatment effects due to potentially highly variable total weights. Alternatively, multiple imputation (MI) can be used to address the missing data by replacing each missing observation with a set of plausible values drawn from the posterior predictive distribution of the missing data given the observed data. Recent studies have compared IPW and MI for addressing the missing data in the evaluation of time-varying treatments, but they focused on missing confounders and monotone missing data patterns. This article assesses the relative advantages of MI and IPW to address missing data in both outcomes and confounders measured over time, and across monotone and non-monotone missing data settings. Through a comprehensive simulation study, we find that MI consistently provided low bias and more precise estimates compared to IPW across a wide range of scenarios. We illustrate the implications of method choice in an evaluation of biologic drugs for patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis, using the US National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases, in which 25% of participants had missing health outcomes or time-varying confounders.

Back Pain Consortium (BACPAC): Protocol and Pilot Study Results for a Randomized Comparative-Effectiveness Trial of Antidepressants, Fear Avoidance Rehabilitation, or the Combination for Chronic Low Back Pain and Comorbid High Negative Affect.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and comorbid depression or anxiety disorders are highly prevalent. Negative affect (NA) refers to a combination of negative thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. Patients with CLBP with high NA have greater pain, worse treatment outcomes, and greater prescription opioid misuse. We present the protocol for SYNNAPTIC (SYNergizing Negative Affect & Pain Treatment In Chronic pain). DESIGN: A randomized comparative-effectiveness study of antidepressants, fear-avoidance rehabilitation, or their combination in 300 patients with CLBP with high NA. In the antidepressant- or rehabilitation-only arms, SYNNAPTIC includes an adaptive design of re-randomization after 4 months for nonresponders. SETTING: A multisite trial conducted in routine pain clinical treatment settings: pain clinics and physical and occupational therapy treatment centers. METHODS: Inclusion criteria include CLBP with elevated depression and anxiety symptoms. Antidepressant and rehabilitation treatments follow validated and effective protocols for musculoskeletal pain in patients with high NA. Power and sample size are based on superior outcomes of combination therapy with these same treatments in a 71-subject 4-arm pilot randomized controlled trial. CONCLUSIONS: SYNNAPTIC addresses the lack of evidence-based protocols for the treatment of the vulnerable subgroup of patients with CLBP and high NA. We hypothesize that combination therapy of antidepressants plus fear-avoidance rehabilitation will be more effective than each treatment alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04747314.

Association of nonpharmacological interventions for cognitive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions to improve cognitive function in older adults with MCI and identifying the best intervention may help inform ideas for future RCT studies and clinical decision-making. AIM: The main focus of this study was to assess the comparative effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions on cognitive function in older adults with MCI and to rank the interventions. METHODS: RCT studies until September 2022 were searched from six databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO and CINAHL. The risk of bias in eligible trials was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Both pairwise and network meta-analyses were used, and pooled effect sizes were reported using SMD and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 28 RCT studies were included in this study, pooling 18 categories of nonpharmacological interventions. MBE (mind-body exercise) (SMD (standard mean difference): 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.41, P = 0.004), DTE (dual-task exercise) (SMD: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.09-1.13, P = 0.02), PE (physical exercise) (SMD: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.04-1.12, P = 0.03) may be effective in improving cognitive function in older adults with MCI. Acupressure + CT (cognitive training) was the top-ranked intervention among all interventions. No greater benefits of MA (mindful awareness) on cognitive function were found. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, nonpharmacological interventions significantly improved cognitive function in older adults with MCI. Acupressure + CT(cognitive training) was the most effective intervention for managing cognitive impairment. Future studies with high quality and large sample size RCT studies are needed to confirm our results.

Comparative Effectiveness of an Automated Text Messaging Service for Monitoring COVID-19 at Home.

BACKGROUND: Although most patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection can be safely managed at home, the need for hospitalization can arise suddenly. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether enrollment in an automated remote monitoring service for community-dwelling adults with COVID-19 at home ("COVID Watch") was associated with improved mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING: Mid-Atlantic academic health system in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 23 March and 30 November 2020. INTERVENTION: The COVID Watch service consists of twice-daily, automated text message check-ins with an option to report worsening symptoms at any time. All escalations were managed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by dedicated telemedicine clinicians. MEASUREMENTS: Thirty- and 60-day outcomes of patients enrolled in COVID Watch were compared with those of patients who were eligible to enroll but received usual care. The primary outcome was death at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Treatment effects were estimated with propensity score-weighted risk adjustment models. RESULTS: A total of 3488 patients enrolled in COVID Watch and 4377 usual care control participants were compared with propensity score weighted models. At 30 days, COVID Watch patients had an odds ratio for death of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.72), with 1.8 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (CI, 0.5 to 3.1) (P = 0.005); at 60 days, the difference was 2.5 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (CI, 0.9 to 4.0) (P = 0.002). Patients in COVID Watch had more telemedicine encounters, ED visits, and hospitalizations and presented to the ED sooner (mean, 1.9 days sooner [CI, 0.9 to 2.9 days]; all P < 0.001). LIMITATION: Observational study with the potential for unobserved confounding. CONCLUSION: Enrollment of outpatients with COVID-19 in an automated remote monitoring service was associated with reduced mortality, potentially explained by more frequent telemedicine encounters and more frequent and earlier presentation to the ED. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin and Recurrent VTE in Patients With Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In patients with cancer who have venous thromboembolism (VTE) events, long-term anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended to prevent recurrent VTE. The effectiveness of a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) compared with LMWH for preventing recurrent VTE in patients with cancer is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate DOACs, compared with LMWH, for preventing recurrent VTE and for rates of bleeding in patients with cancer following an initial VTE event. Design, Setting, and Participants: Unblinded, comparative effectiveness, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted at 67 oncology practices in the US that enrolled 671 patients with cancer (any invasive solid tumor, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia) who had a new clinical or radiological diagnosis of VTE. Enrollment occurred from December 2016 to April 2020. Final follow-up was in November 2020. Intervention: Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either a DOAC (n = 335) or LMWH (n = 336) and were followed up for 6 months or until death. Physicians and patients selected any DOAC or any LMWH (or fondaparinux) and physicians selected drug doses. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the recurrent VTE rate at 6 months. Noninferiority of anticoagulation with a DOAC vs LMWH was defined by the upper limit of the 1-sided 95% CI for the difference of a DOAC relative to LMWH of less than 3% in the randomized cohort that received at least 1 dose of assigned treatment. The 6 prespecified secondary outcomes included major bleeding, which was assessed using a 2.5% noninferiority margin. Results: Between December 2016 and April 2020, 671 participants were randomized and 638 (95%) completed the trial (median age, 64 years; 353 women [55%]). Among those randomized to a DOAC, 330 received at least 1 dose. Among those randomized to LMWH, 308 received at least 1 dose. Rates of recurrent VTE were 6.1% in the DOAC group and 8.8% in the LMWH group (difference, -2.7%; 1-sided 95% CI, -100% to 0.7%) consistent with the prespecified noninferiority criterion. Of 6 prespecified secondary outcomes, none were statistically significant. Major bleeding occurred in 5.2% of participants in the DOAC group and 5.6% in the LMWH group (difference, -0.4%; 1-sided 95% CI, -100% to 2.5%) and did not meet the noninferiority criterion. Severe adverse events occurred in 33.8% of participants in the DOAC group and 35.1% in the LMWH group. The most common serious adverse events were anemia and death. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with cancer and VTE, DOACs were noninferior to LMWH for preventing recurrent VTE over 6-month follow-up. These findings support use of a DOAC to prevent recurrent VTE in patients with cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02744092.

Heterogeneity of outcomes in randomized controlled trials on implant prosthodontic therapy is hindering comparative effectiveness research: meta-research study.

BACKGROUND: Consistency in outcomes across clinical trials allows for comparing and combining results from different studies. A core outcome set (COS), representing a minimally agreed standardized group of outcomes that should be monitored and measured through research in a specific field of medicine, is not yet available for trials in implant prosthodontic (dental implant) therapy. This meta-research study aimed to analyze outcomes used in clinical trials on implant prosthodontic therapy. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG) register to identify systematic reviews of interventions in implant prosthodontic therapy published by October 2023. From the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the relevant reviews, we extracted data on the characteristics of the included trials and the outcomes used. We categorized outcomes into domains. RESULTS: From 182 systematic reviews in the COHG register, we included 11 systematic reviews on dental implant therapy. The reviews included 117 unique RCTs with 4725 participants, published from 1995 to 2020, which analyzed 74 different outcomes. Using different definitions, implant failure was analyzed in 73 RCTs. Seventeen RCTs did not define implant failure. Failure was most often (30 RCTs) followed up for one year. Only one RCT assessed implant failure after five years. Trials used 17 definitions of implant failure, while 17 trials did not report on the criteria of implant failure. Complications were analyzed in 48 RCTs, although they were not clearly defined in 12 RCTs. Failure of prosthodontic supra-structure was analyzed in 74 RCTs, with definitions of failure and criteria not clearly defined in 44 RCTs. Trials considered adverse events, peri-implant tissue health, patient attitudes, and other outcomes, including cost, aesthetics, or procedure duration. These outcomes were often different between trials. Twenty-six outcomes were used only once per study. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials in implant prosthodontics used different outcomes, different definitions of outcomes and used different times to monitor them. Standardization of outcomes is necessary to allow comparability and evidence synthesis about the effectiveness of implant prosthodontic therapy.

Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Lumpectomy and Mastectomy for Elderly Female Breast Cancer Patients: A Deep Learning-based Big Data Analysis.

Objectives: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatments, a randomized clinical trial remains the gold standard but can be challenged by a high cost, a limited sample size, an inability to fully reflect the real world, and feasibility concerns. The objective is to showcase a big data approach that takes advantage of large electronic medical record (EMR) data to emulate clinical trials. To overcome the limitations of regression analysis, a deep learning-based analysis pipeline was developed. Study Design and Setting: Lumpectomy (breast-conserving surgery) and mastectomy are the two most commonly used surgical procedures for early-stage female breast cancer patients. An emulation trial was designed using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to evaluate their relative effectiveness in overall survival. The analysis pipeline consisted of a propensity score step, a weighted survival analysis step, and a bootstrap inference step. Results: A total of 65,997 subjects were enrolled in the emulated trial, with 50,704 and 15,293 in the lumpectomy and mastectomy arms, respectively. The two surgery procedures had comparable effects in terms of overall survival (survival year change = 0.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.08, 0.25) for the elderly SEER-Medicare early-stage female breast cancer patients. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the power of "mining large EMR data + deep learning-based analysis," and the proposed analysis strategy and technique can be potentially broadly applicable. It provided convincing evidence of the comparative effectiveness of lumpectomy and mastectomy.

Comparative effectiveness analysis of deep low heat burns in the shin surgical approaches: Outcomes and cost for wound rehabilitation.

A variety of surgical techniques exist for deep burn wounds in the shin at low temperature reconstruction after appropriate debridement, but limited high-quality data exist to inform treatment strategies. Using multi-institutional data, the authors evaluated the length of healing time, cost, and outcomes of three common surgical reconstructive modalities. All subjects with deep burn wounds in the shin caused by low temperature who received direct suture repair, skin grafting, or local flap reconstruction were retrospectively reviewed (from 2015.01 to 2021.03). Mean operation time, mean blood loss in operation, postoperative healing time, whether there is scar depression after operation were the primary outcomes; patient satisfaction score, Vancouver scar scale (VSS) score and average costs were secondary outcomes. Two hundred subjects (68 suture, 87 skin-grafting, and 45 local flap coverage patients) were evaluated. Matched patients (n = 200; 3/groups) were analysed. The average operation time, average operation blood loss, and postoperative healing time were statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). Readmissions and reoperations were greater for direct suture and local flaps, if achievable, direct suture provided success at low cost. Skin grafting was effective with large burn wounds but at higher costs and longer length of stay. Local flaps successfully treated smaller burn wounds unable to suture directly, with less pigmentation and scars, even suitable for older patients. Deep low heat burn wounds in the shin healing can be performed effectively using multiple modalities with varying degrees of success and costs. Direct suture or local skin flap reconstruction, if achievable, provides successful coverage at minimal costs, no skin contractures, and reducing length of hospital stay.