Impact of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination on the subsequent incidence of COVID-19: a multicentre prospective cohort study among UK healthcare workers - the SIREN (Sarscov2 Immunity & REinfection EvaluatioN) study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the effectiveness and durability of protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by previous infection and COVID-19 is essential to inform ongoing management of the pandemic. This study aims to determine whether prior SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination in healthcare workers protects against future infection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective cohort study design in staff members working in hospitals in the UK. At enrolment, participants are allocated into cohorts, positive or naïve, dependent on their prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status, as measured by standardised SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing on all baseline serum samples and previous SARS-CoV-2 test results. Participants undergo monthly antibody testing and fortnightly viral RNA testing during follow-up and based on these results may move between cohorts. Any results from testing undertaken for other reasons (eg, symptoms, contact tracing) or prior to study entry will also be captured. Individuals complete enrolment and fortnightly questionnaires on exposures, symptoms and vaccination. Follow-up is 12 months from study entry, with an option to extend follow-up to 24 months.The primary outcome of interest is infection with SARS-CoV-2 after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination during the study period. Secondary outcomes include incidence and prevalence (both RNA and antibody) of SARS-CoV-2, viral genomics, viral culture, symptom history and antibody/neutralising antibody titres. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee, Health Research Authority (IRAS ID 284460, REC reference 20/SC/0230) on 22 May 2020; the vaccine amendment was approved on 12 January 2021. Participants gave informed consent before taking part in the study.Regular reports to national and international expert advisory groups and peer-reviewed publications ensure timely dissemination of findings to inform decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11041050.

Beyond bones: The relevance of variants of connective tissue (hypermobility) to fibromyalgia, ME/CFS and controversies surrounding diagnostic classification: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) are poorly understood conditions with overlapping symptoms, fuelling debate as to whether they are manifestations of the same spectrum or separate entities. Both are associated with hypermobility, but this remains significantly undiagnosed, despite impact on quality of life. OBJECTIVE: We planned to understand the relevance of hypermobility to symptoms in fibromyalgia and ME/CFS. METHOD: Sixty-three patient participants presented with a confirmed diagnosis of fibromyalgia and/or ME/CFS; 24 participants were healthy controls. Patients were assessed for symptomatic hypermobility. RESULTS: Evaluations showed exceptional overlap in patients between fibromyalgia and ME/CFS, plus 81% met Brighton criteria for hypermobility syndrome (odds ratio 7.08) and 18% met 2017 hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS) criteria. Hypermobility scores significantly predicted symptom levels. CONCLUSION: Symptomatic hypermobility is particularly relevant to fibromyalgia and ME/CFS, and our findings highlight high rates of mis-/underdiagnosis. These poorly understood conditions have a considerable impact on quality of life and our observations have implications for diagnosis and treatment targets.

C-Reactive Protein Predicts Further Ischemic Events in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack or Lacunar Stroke.

Patients who have experienced a first cerebral ischemic event are at increased risk of recurrent stroke. There is strong evidence that low-level inflammation as measured by high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) is a predictor of further ischemic events. Other mechanisms implicated in the pathogenesis of stroke may play a role in determining the risk of secondary events, including oxidative stress and the adaptive response to it and activation of neuroprotective pathways by hypoxia, for instance through induction of erythropoietin (EPO). This study investigated the association of the levels of CRP, peroxiredoxin 1 (PRDX1, an indicator of the physiological response to oxidative stress) and EPO (a neuroprotective factor produced in response to hypoxia) with the risk of a second ischemic event. Eighty patients with a diagnosis of lacunar stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) were included in the study and a blood sample was collected within 14 days from the initial event. Hs-CRP, PRDX1, and EPO were measured by ELISA. Further ischemic events were recorded with a mean follow-up of 42 months (min 24, max 64). Multivariate analysis showed that only CRP was an independent predictor of further events with an observed risk (OR) of 1.14 (P = 0.034, 95% CI 1.01-1.29). No association was observed with the levels of PRDX1 or EPO. A receiver operating curve (ROC) determined a cut-off CRP level of 3.25 µg/ml, with a 46% sensitivity and 81% specificity. Low-level inflammation as detected by hs-CRP is an independent predictor of recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events.

Randomised clinical trial: palliative long-term abdominal drains vs large-volume paracentesis in refractory ascites due to cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care remains suboptimal in end-stage liver disease. AIM: To inform a definitive study, we assessed palliative long-term abdominal drains in end-stage liver disease to determine recruitment, attrition, safety/potential effectiveness, questionnaires/interview uptake/completion and make a preliminary cost comparison. METHODS: A 12-week feasibility nonblinded randomised controlled trial comparing large-volume paracentesis vs long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites due to end-stage liver disease with fortnightly home visits for clinical/questionnaire-based assessments. Study success criteria were attrition not >50%, <10% long-term abdominal drain removal due to complications, the long-term abdominal drain group to spend <50% ascites-related study time in hospital vs large-volume paracentesis group and 80% questionnaire/interview uptake/completion. RESULTS: Of 59 eligible patients, 36 (61%) were randomised, 17 to long-term abdominal drain and 19 to large-volume paracentesis. Following randomisation, median number (IQR) of hospital ascitic drains (long-term abdominal drain group vs large-volume paracentesis group) were 0 (0-1) vs 4 (3-7); week 12 serum albumin (g/L) and serum creatinine (µmol/L) were 29 (26.5-32.5) vs 30 (25-35) and 104.5 (81-115.5) vs 127 (63-158) respectively. Total attrition was 42% (long-term abdominal drain group 47%, large-volume paracentesis group 37%). Median (IQR) fortnightly community/hospital/social care ascites-related costs and percentage study time in hospital were lower in the long-term abdominal drain group, £329 (253-580) vs £843 (603-1060) and 0% (0-0.74) vs 2.75% (2.35-3.84) respectively. Self-limiting cellulitis/leakage occurred in 41% (7/17) in the long-term abdominal drain group vs 11% (2/19) in the large-volume paracentesis group; peritonitis incidence was 6% (1/17) vs 11% (2/19) respectively. Questionnaires/interview uptake/completion were ≥80%; interviews indicated that long-term abdominal drains could transform the care pathway. CONCLUSIONS: The REDUCe study demonstrates feasibility with preliminary evidence of long-term abdominal drain acceptability/effectiveness/safety and reduction in health resource utilisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN30697116, date assigned: 07/10/2015.

Correction to: Palliative long-term abdominal drains versus repeated drainage in individuals with untreatable ascites due to advanced cirrhosis: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that the figure legend for Figure 3 was absent. In addition, they have requested additional funding information to be added. In this Correction the initial and updated funding information are shown. The original publication of this article has been corrected.

Palliative long-term abdominal drains versus repeated drainage in individuals with untreatable ascites due to advanced cirrhosis: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: UK deaths due to chronic liver diseases such as cirrhosis have quadrupled over the last 40 years, making this condition now the third most common cause of premature death. Most patients with advanced cirrhosis (end-stage liver disease [ESLD]) develop ascites. This is often managed with diuretics, but if refractory, then the fluid is drained from the peritoneal cavity every 10-14 days by large volume paracentesis (LVP), a procedure requiring hospital admissions. As the life expectancy of patients with ESLD and refractory ascites (if ineligible for liver transplantation) is on average ≤ 6 months, frequent hospital visits are inappropriate from a palliative perspective. One alternative is long-term abdominal drains (LTADs), used successfully in patients whose ascites is due to malignancy. Although inserted in hospital, these drains allow ascites management outside of a hospital setting. LTADs have not been formally evaluated in patients with refractory ascites due to ESLD. METHODS/DESIGN: Due to uncertainty about appropriate outcome measures and whether patients with ESLD would wish or be able to participate in a study, a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed. Patients were consulted on trial design. We plan to recruit 48 patients with refractory ascites and randomise them (1:1) to either (1) LTAD or (2) current standard of care (LVP) for 12 weeks. Outcomes of interest include acceptability of the LTAD to patients, carers and healthcare professionals as well as recruitment and retention rates. The Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale, the Short Form Liver Disease Quality of Life questionnaire, the EuroQol 5 dimensions instrument and carer-reported (Zarit Burden Interview) outcomes will also be assessed. Preliminary data on cost-effectiveness will be collected, and patients and healthcare professionals will be interviewed about their experience of the trial with a view to identifying barriers to recruitment. DISCUSSION: LTADs could potentially improve end-of-life care in patients with refractory ascites due to ESLD by improving symptom control, reducing hospital visits and enabling some self-management. Our trial is designed to see if such patients can be recruited, as well as to inform the design of a subsequent definitive trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN30697116 . Registered on 7 October 2015.

Protocol for a Prospective (P) study to develop a model to stratify the risk (RI) of medication (M) related harm in hospitalized elderly (E) patients in the UK (The PRIME study).

BACKGROUND: Medication related harm (MRH) is a common cause of morbidity and hospital admission in the elderly, and has significant cost implications for both primary and secondary healthcare resources. The development of risk prediction models has become an increasingly common phenomenon in medicine and can be useful to guide objective clinical decision making, resource allocation and intervention. There are no risk prediction models that are widely used in clinical practice to identify elderly patients at high risk of MRH following hospital discharge. The aim of this study is to develop a risk prediction model (RPM) to identify elderly patients at high risk of MRH upon discharge from hospital, and to compare this with routine clinical judgment. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, prospective observational study following a cohort of patients for 8 weeks after hospital discharge. Data collection including patient characteristics, medication use, social factors and frailty will take place prior to patient discharge and then the patient will be followed up in the community over the next 8 weeks to determine if they have experienced MRH. Research pharmacists will determine whether patients have experienced MRH by prospectively reviewing records for unplanned emergency department attendance, hospital readmission and GP consultation related to MRH. Research pharmacists will also telephone patients directly to determine self-reported MRH, which patients may not have sought further medical attention for. The data collected will inform the development of a RPM which will be externally validated in a follow-up study. DISCUSSION: There are no RPMs that are used in clinical practice to help stratify elderly patients at high risk of MRH in the community following hospital discharge, despite this being a significant public health problem. This study plans to develop a clinically useful RPM that is better than routine clinical judgment. As this is a multi-centre study involving clinical settings that serve elderly people of heterogeneous sociodemographic background, it is anticipated that this RPM will be generalizable.