e-Consent in UK academic-led clinical trials: current practice, challenges and the need for more evidence.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person healthcare visits were reduced. Consequently, trial teams needed to consider implementing remote methods for conducting clinical trials, including e-Consent. Although some clinical trials may have implemented e-Consent prior to the pandemic, anecdotes of uptake for this method increased within academic-led trials. When the increased use of this process emerged, representatives from several large academic clinical trial groups within the UK collaborated to discuss ways in which trialists can learn from one another when implementing e-Consent. METHODS: A survey of UKCRC-registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken in April-June 2021 to understand the implementation of and their views on the use of e-Consent and experiences from the perspectives of systems programmers and quality assurance staff on the use of e-Consent. CTUs not using e-Consent were asked to provide any reasons/barriers (including no suitable trials) and any plans for implementing it in the future. Two events for trialists and patient and public involvement (PPI) representatives were then held to disseminate findings, foster discussion, share experiences and aid in the identification of areas that the academic CTU community felt required more research. RESULTS: Thirty-four (64%) of 53 CTUs responded to the survey, with good geographical representation across the UK. Twenty-one (62%) of the responding CTUs had implemented e-Consent in at least one of their trials, across different types of trials, including CTIMPs (Clinical Trial of Investigational Medicinal Product), ATIMPs (Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products) and non-CTIMPs. One hundred ninety-seven participants attended the two workshops for wide-ranging discussions. CONCLUSION: e-Consent is increasingly used in academic-led trials, yet uncertainties remain amongst trialists, patients and members of the public. Uncertainties include a lack of formal, practical guidance and a lack of evidence to demonstrate optimal or appropriate methods to use. We strongly encourage trialists to continue to share their own experiences of the implementation of e-Consent.

Using routinely recorded data in a UK RCT: a comparison to standard prospective data collection methods.

BACKGROUND: Routinely recorded data held in electronic health records can be used to inform the conduct of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, limitations with access and accuracy have been identified. OBJECTIVE: Using epilepsy as an exemplar condition, we assessed the attributes and agreement of routinely recorded data compared to data collected using case report forms in a UK RCT assessing antiepileptic drug treatments for individuals newly diagnosed with epilepsy. METHODS: The case study RCT is the Standard and New Antiepileptic Drugs II (SANAD II) trial, a pragmatic, UK multicentre RCT assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of antiepileptic drugs as treatments for epilepsy. Ninety-eight of 470 eligible participants provided consent for access to routinely recorded secondary care data that were retrieved from NHS Digital Hospital Episode Statistics (N=71) and primary and secondary care data from The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank (N=27). We assessed data items relevant to the identification of individuals eligible for inclusion in SANAD II, baseline and follow-up visits. The attributes of routinely recorded data were assessed including the degree of missing data. The agreement between routinely recorded data and data collected on case report forms in SANAD II was assessed using calculation of Cohen's kappa for categorical data and construction of Bland-Altman plots for continuous data. RESULTS: There was a significant degree of missing data in the routine record for 15 of the 20 variables assessed, including all clinical variables. Agreement was poor for the majority of comparisons, including the assessments of seizure occurrence and adverse events. For example, only 23/62 (37%) participants had a date of first-ever seizure identified in routine datasets. Agreement was satisfactory for the date of prescription of antiepileptic drugs and episodes of healthcare resource use. CONCLUSIONS: There are currently significant limitations preventing the use of routinely recorded data for participant identification and assessment of clinical outcomes in epilepsy, and potentially other chronic conditions. Further research is urgently required to assess the attributes, agreement, additional benefits, cost-effectiveness and 'optimal mix' of routinely recorded data compared to data collected using standard methods such as case report forms at clinic visits for people with epilepsy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Standard and New Antiepileptic Drugs II (SANAD II (EudraCT No: 2012-001884-64, registered 05/09/2012; ISRCTN Number: ISRCTN30294119 , registered 03/07/2012)).

Core outcome set for surgical trials in gastric cancer (GASTROS study): international patient and healthcare professional consensus.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the primary treatment that can offer potential cure for gastric cancer, but is associated with significant risks. Identifying optimal surgical approaches should be based on comparing outcomes from well designed trials. Currently, trials report different outcomes, making synthesis of evidence difficult. To address this, the aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set (COS)-a standardized group of outcomes important to key international stakeholders-that should be reported by future trials in this field. METHODS: Stage 1 of the study involved identifying potentially important outcomes from previous trials and a series of patient interviews. Stage 2 involved patients and healthcare professionals prioritizing outcomes using a multilanguage international Delphi survey that informed an international consensus meeting at which the COS was finalized. RESULTS: Some 498 outcomes were identified from previously reported trials and patient interviews, and rationalized into 56 items presented in the Delphi survey. A total of 952 patients, surgeons, and nurses enrolled in round 1 of the survey, and 662 (70 per cent) completed round 2. Following the consensus meeting, eight outcomes were included in the COS: disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, surgery-related death, recurrence, completeness of tumour removal, overall quality of life, nutritional effects, and 'serious' adverse events. CONCLUSION: A COS for surgical trials in gastric cancer has been developed with international patients and healthcare professionals. This is a minimum set of outcomes that is recommended to be used in all future trials in this field to improve trial design and synthesis of evidence.

A core outcome set for pre-eclampsia research: an international consensus development study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a core outcome set for pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Consensus development study. SETTING: International. POPULATION: Two hundred and eight-one healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 patients, representing 56 countries, participated. METHODS: Modified Delphi method and Modified Nominal Group Technique. RESULTS: A long-list of 116 potential core outcomes was developed by combining the outcomes reported in 79 pre-eclampsia trials with those derived from thematic analysis of 30 in-depth interviews of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. Forty-seven consensus outcomes were identified from the Delphi process following which 14 maternal and eight offspring core outcomes were agreed at the consensus development meeting. Maternal core outcomes: death, eclampsia, stroke, cortical blindness, retinal detachment, pulmonary oedema, acute kidney injury, liver haematoma or rupture, abruption, postpartum haemorrhage, raised liver enzymes, low platelets, admission to intensive care required, and intubation and ventilation. Offspring core outcomes: stillbirth, gestational age at delivery, birthweight, small-for-gestational-age, neonatal mortality, seizures, admission to neonatal unit required and respiratory support. CONCLUSIONS: The core outcome set for pre-eclampsia should underpin future randomised trials and systematic reviews. Such implementation should ensure that future research holds the necessary reach and relevance to inform clinical practice, enhance women's care and improve the outcomes of pregnant women and their babies. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: 281 healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 women have developed #preeclampsia core outcomes @HOPEoutcomes @jamesmnduffy. [Correction added on 29 June 2020, after first online publication: the order has been corrected.].

Moving Towards Common Data Elements and Core Outcome Measures in Frailty Research.

With aging populations around the world, frailty is becoming more prevalent increasing the need for health systems and social systems to deliver optimal evidence based care. However, in spite of the growing number of frailty publications, high-quality evidence for decision making is often lacking. Inadequate descriptions of the populations enrolled including frailty severity and frailty conceptualization, lack of use of validated frailty assessment tools, utilization of different frailty instruments between studies, and variation in reported outcomes impairs the ability to interpret, generalize and implement the research findings. The utilization of common data elements (CDEs) and core outcome measures (COMs) in clinical trials is increasingly being adopted to address such concerns. To catalyze the development and use of CDEs and COMs for future frailty studies, the Canadian Frailty Network (www.cfn-nce.ca; CFN), a not-for-profit pan-Canadian nationally-funded research network, convened an international group of experts to examine the issue and plan the path forward. The meeting was structured to allow for an examination of current frailty evidence, ability to learn from other COMs and CDEs initiatives, discussions about specific considerations for frailty COMs and CDEs and finally the identification of the necessary steps for a COMs and CDEs consensus initiative going forward. It was agreed at the onset of the meeting that a statement based on the meeting would be published and herein we report the statement.

Efficacy of Oral Encochleated Amphotericin B in a Mouse Model of Cryptococcal Meningoencephalitis.

Cryptococcus neoformans is an encapsulated yeast responsible for approximately a quarter of a million deaths worldwide annually despite therapy, and upwards of 11% of HIV/AIDS-related deaths, rivaling the impact of tuberculosis and malaria. However, the most effective antifungal agent, amphotericin B, requires intravenous delivery and has significant renal and hematopoietic toxicity, making it difficult to utilize, especially in resource-limited settings. The present studies describe a new nanoparticle crystal encapsulated formulation of amphotericin B known as encochleated amphotericin B (CAmB) that seeks to provide an oral formulation that is low in toxicity and cost. Using a 3-day delayed model of murine cryptococcal meningoencephalitis and a large inoculum of a highly virulent strain of serotype A C. neoformans, CAmB, in combination with flucytosine, was found to have efficacy equivalent to parental amphotericin B deoxycholate with flucytosine and superior to oral fluconazole without untoward toxicity. Transport of fluorescent CAmB particles to brain as well as significant brain levels of amphotericin drug was demonstrated in treated mice, and immunological profiles were similar to those of mice treated with conventional amphotericin B. Additional toxicity studies using a standardized rat model showed negligible toxicity after a 28-day treatment schedule. These studies thus offer the potential for an efficacious oral formulation of a known fungicidal drug against intrathecal cryptococcal disease.IMPORTANCECryptococcus neoformans is a significant global fungal pathogen that kills an estimated quarter of a million HIV-infected individuals yearly and has poor outcomes despite therapy. The most effective therapy, amphotericin B, is highly effective in killing the fungus but is available only in highly toxic, intravenous formulations that are unavailable in most of the developing world, where cryptococcal disease in most prevalent. For example, in Ethiopia, reliance on the orally available antifungal fluconazole results in high mortality, even when initiated as preemptive therapy at the time of HIV diagnosis. Thus, alternative agents could result in significant saving of lives. Toward this end, the present work describes the development of a new formulation of amphotericin B (CAmB) that encapsulates the drug as a crystal lipid nanoparticle that facilitates oral absorption and prevents toxicity. Successful oral absorption of the drug was demonstrated in a mouse model that, in combination with the antifungal flucytosine, provided efficacy equal to a parental preparation of amphotericin B plus flucytosine. These studies demonstrate the potential for CAmB in combination with flucytosine to provide an effective oral formulation of a well-known, potent fungicidal drug combination.

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: an international Delphi exercise to identify a core set of domains and domain items for national atopic eczema photo- and systemic therapy registries.

BACKGROUND: Evidence of immunomodulatory therapies to guide clinical management of atopic eczema (AE) is scarce, despite frequent and often off-label use. Patient registries provide valuable evidence for the effects of treatments under real-world conditions that can inform treatment guidelines, give the opportunity for health economic evaluation and the evaluation of quality of care, as well as pharmacogenetic and dynamic research, which cannot be adequately addressed in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: The TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce aims to seek international consensus on a core set of domains and items ('what to measure') for AE research registries, using a Delphi approach. METHODS: Participants from six stakeholder groups were included: doctors, nurses, nonclinical researchers, patients, industry and regulatory body representatives. The eDelphi comprised three sequential online rounds, requesting participants to rate the importance of each proposed domain item. Participants could add domain items to the proposed list in round 1. A final consensus meeting was held to ratify the core set. RESULTS: Participants (n = 479) from 36 countries accessed the eDelphi platform, of whom 86%, 79% and 74% completed rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At the face-to-face consensus meeting attended by 42 participants the final core set was established containing 19 domains with 69 domain items (49 baseline and 20 follow-up items). CONCLUSIONS: This core set of domains and items to be captured by national AE systemic therapy registries will standardize data collection and thereby allow direct comparability across registries and facilitate data pooling between countries. Ultimately, it will provide greater insight into the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of photo- and systemic immunomodulatory therapies.

Systematic review of outcome measures following chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of anal cancer (CORMAC).

AIM: Six Phase III randomized trials have determined the effectiveness of chemoradiotherapy as primary treatment for anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC), but outcomes reported in these trials varied widely, hindering evidence synthesis. To improve reporting in all future trials, we aim to develop a core outcomes set (COS). As the first stage of COS development, we undertook a systematic review to summarize the outcomes reported in studies evaluating chemoradiotherapy for ASCC. METHOD: Systematic literature searches identified studies evaluating radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for ASCC. Outcomes and accompanying definitions were extracted verbatim and categorized into domains. RESULTS: From 5170 abstracts, we identified 95 eligible studies, reporting 1192 outcomes and 533 unique terms. We collapsed these terms into 86 standardized outcomes and five domains: survival; disease activity; life impact [including quality of life (QoL)]; delivery of care; and toxicity. The most commonly reported domains were survival and disease activity, reported in 74 (86%) and 54 (62%) studies, respectively. No outcome was reported in every publication. Over half (43/86) of the standardized outcome terms were reported in fewer than five studies, and 21 (25%) were reported in a single study only. There was wide variation in definitions of disease-free survival, colostomy-free survival and progression-free survival (PFS). Anal continence was reported in only 35 (41%) studies. CONCLUSION: Outcomes reported in studies evaluating chemoradiotherapy for ASCC were heterogenous and definitions varied widely. Outcomes likely to be important to patients, such as ano-rectal function, toxicity and QoL, have been neglected. A COS for future trials will address these issues.

Using routinely recorded data in the UK to assess outcomes in a randomised controlled trial: The Trials of Access.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, routinely recorded data may benefit prospective studies including randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In an on-going study, we aim to assess the feasibility of access and agreement of routinely recorded clinical and non-clinical data compared to data collected during a RCT using standard prospective methods. This paper will summarise available UK routinely recorded data sources and discuss our experience with the feasibility of accessing routinely recorded data for participants of a RCT before finally proposing recommendations for improving the access and implementation of routinely recorded data in RCTs. METHODS: Setting: the case study RCT is the Standard and New Antiepileptic Drugs II (SANAD II) trial, a pragmatic, UK, multicentre, phase IV RCT assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of antiepileptic drug treatments for newly diagnosed epilepsy. PARTICIPANTS: 98 participants have provided written consent to permit the request of routinely recorded data. Study procedures: routinely recorded clinical and non-clinical data were identified and data requested through formal applications from available data holders for the duration that participants have been recruited into SANAD II. The feasibility of accessing routinely recorded data during a RCT is assessed and recommendations for improving access proposed. RESULTS: Secondary-care clinical and socioeconomic data is recorded on a national basis and can be accessed, although there are limitations in the application process. Primary-care data are recorded by a number of organisations on a de-identified basis but access for specific individuals has not been feasible. Access to data recorded by non-clinical sources, including The Department for Work and Pensions and The Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency, was not successful. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations discussed include further research to assess the attributes of routinely recorded data, an assessment of public perceptions and the development of strategies to collaboratively improve access to routinely recorded data for research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ISRCTN30294119 . Registered on 3 July 2012. EudraCT No: 2012-001884-64. Registered on 9 May 2012.

Outcome reporting across randomised controlled trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre-eclampsia.

BACKGROUND: Standardising outcome collection and reporting in pre-eclampsia trials requires an appraisal of current outcome reporting. OBJECTIVES: To map maternal and offspring outcome reporting across randomised trials evaluating therapeutic interventions for pre-eclampsia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised trials were identified by searching bibliographical databases from inception to January 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We systematically extracted and categorised outcome reporting. MAIN RESULTS: Seventy-nine randomised trials, reporting data from 31 615 maternal participants and 28 172 of their offspring, were included. Fifty-five different interventions were evaluated. Included trials reported 119 different outcomes, including 72 maternal outcomes and 47 offspring outcomes. Maternal outcomes were inconsistently reported across included trials; for example, 11 trials (14%) reported maternal mortality, reporting data from 12 422 participants, and 16 trials (20%) reported cardiovascular morbidity, reporting data from 14 963 maternal participants. Forty-three trials (54%) reported fetal outcomes and 23 trials (29%) reported neonatal outcomes. Twenty-eight trials (35%) reported offspring mortality. There was poor reporting of childhood outcomes: six trials (8%) reported neurodevelopmental outcomes. Less than half of included trials reported any relevant information regarding harms for maternal participants and their offspring. CONCLUSIONS: Most randomised trials evaluating interventions for pre-eclampsia are missing information on clinically important outcomes, and in particular have neglected to evaluate efficacy and safety in the offspring of participants. Developing and implementing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, in future pre-eclampsia trials could help to address these issues. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Future #preeclampsia research requires a core outcome set to reduce #research waste. @coreoutcomes @jamesmnduffy International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42015015529; www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.aspID=CRD42015015529.

The COMET Initiative database: progress and activities update (2015).

This letter describes the substantial activity on the Core Outcome Measure in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) website in 2015, updating our earlier progress reports for the period from the launch of the COMET website and database in August 2011 to December 2014. As in previous years, 2015 saw further increases in the annual number of visits to the website, the number of pages viewed and the number of searches undertaken. The sustained growth in use of the website and database suggests that COMET is continuing to gain interest and prominence, and that the resources are useful to people interested in the development of core outcome sets.

Questioning assent: how are children's views included as families make decisions about clinical trials?

BACKGROUND: Assent is used to take children's wishes into account when they are invited into clinical trials, but the concept has attracted considerable criticism. We investigated children's accounts of decision-making with the aim of informing practice in supporting children when invited to join a clinical trial. METHODS: We audio-recorded qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 22 children aged 8-16 years about being invited to take part in a clinical trial. Most children were interviewed with their parents. Analysis of the transcribed interviews examined the content of participants' accounts thematically, whilst also drawing on principles of discourse analysis, which examines how individuals use talk to achieve certain effects or social practices. RESULTS: It was not possible to separate children's knowledge of the clinical trial, or their decision-making processes from that of their parents, with parents taking a substantial mediating role in producing their children's decisions. Decision-making gradually unfolded across time and events and was interwoven within the family context, rather than happening in one moment or in the clinical setting. Whilst children valued their parents' role, a case study of child-parent disagreement indicated how children can struggle to be heard. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions happen within a process of family dynamics, in contrast to ideas of assent that isolate it from this context. Parents have a substantial role in children's decisions, and thus how families come to provide consent. Reflecting this we argue that assent practices need to focus on supporting parents to support their children in learning and deliberating about trials. However, this needs to be accompanied by practitioners being alert to the possibility of divergence in child and parent views and enabling children's perspectives to be heard.

UK Lung Cancer RCT Pilot Screening Trial: baseline findings from the screening arm provide evidence for the potential implementation of lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) was shown to reduce lung cancer mortality by 20% in the National Lung Screening Trial. METHODS: The pilot UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) is a randomised controlled trial of LDCT screening for lung cancer versus usual care. A population-based questionnaire was used to identify high-risk individuals. CT screen-detected nodules were managed by a pre-specified protocol. Cost effectiveness was modelled with reference to the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial mortality reduction. RESULTS: 247 354 individuals aged 50-75 years were approached; 30.7% expressed an interest, 8729 (11.5%) were eligible and 4055 were randomised, 2028 into the CT arm (1994 underwent a CT). Forty-two participants (2.1%) had confirmed lung cancer, 34 (1.7%) at baseline and 8 (0.4%) at the 12-month scan. 28/42 (66.7%) had stage I disease, 36/42 (85.7%) had stage I or II disease. 35/42 (83.3%) had surgical resection. 536 subjects had nodules greater than 50 mm(3) or 5 mm diameter and 41/536 were found to have lung cancer. One further cancer was detected by follow-up of nodules between 15 and 50 mm(3) at 12 months. The baseline estimate for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of once-only CT screening, under the UKLS protocol, was £8466 per quality adjusted life year gained (CI £5542 to £12 569). CONCLUSIONS: The UKLS pilot trial demonstrated that it is possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage and deliver potentially curative treatment in over 80% of cases. Health economic analysis suggests that the intervention would be cost effective-this needs to be confirmed using data on observed lung cancer mortality reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 78513845.

Identification of Aph1, a phosphate-regulated, secreted, and vacuolar acid phosphatase in Cryptococcus neoformans.

UNLABELLED: Cryptococcus neoformans strains isolated from patients with AIDS secrete acid phosphatase, but the identity and role of the enzyme(s) responsible have not been elucidated. By combining a one-dimensional electrophoresis step with mass spectrometry, a canonically secreted acid phosphatase, CNAG_02944 (Aph1), was identified in the secretome of the highly virulent serotype A strain H99. We created an APH1 deletion mutant (Δaph1) and showed that Δaph1-infected Galleria mellonella and mice survived longer than those infected with the wild type (WT), demonstrating that Aph1 contributes to cryptococcal virulence. Phosphate starvation induced APH1 expression and secretion of catalytically active acid phosphatase in the WT, but not in the Δaph1 mutant, indicating that Aph1 is the major extracellular acid phosphatase in C. neoformans and that it is phosphate repressible. DsRed-tagged Aph1 was transported to the fungal cell periphery and vacuoles via endosome-like structures and was enriched in bud necks. A similar pattern of Aph1 localization was observed in cryptococci cocultured with THP-1 monocytes, suggesting that Aph1 is produced during host infection. In contrast to Aph1, but consistent with our previous biochemical data, green fluorescent protein (GFP)-tagged phospholipase B1 (Plb1) was predominantly localized at the cell periphery, with no evidence of endosome-mediated export. Despite use of different intracellular transport routes by Plb1 and Aph1, secretion of both proteins was compromised in a Δsec14-1 mutant. Secretions from the WT, but not from Δaph1, hydrolyzed a range of physiological substrates, including phosphotyrosine, glucose-1-phosphate, ß-glycerol phosphate, AMP, and mannose-6-phosphate, suggesting that the role of Aph1 is to recycle phosphate from macromolecules in cryptococcal vacuoles and to scavenge phosphate from the extracellular environment. IMPORTANCE: Infections with the AIDS-related fungal pathogen Cryptococcus neoformans cause more than 600,000 deaths per year worldwide. Strains of Cryptococcus neoformans isolated from patients with AIDS secrete acid phosphatase; however, the identity and role of the enzyme(s) are unknown. We have analyzed the secretome of the highly virulent serotype A strain H99 and identified Aph1, a canonically secreted acid phosphatase. By creating an APH1 deletion mutant and an Aph1-DsRed-expressing strain, we demonstrate that Aph1 is the major extracellular and vacuolar acid phosphatase in C. neoformans and that it is phosphate repressible. Furthermore, we show that Aph1 is produced in cryptococci during coculture with THP-1 monocytes and contributes to fungal virulence in Galleria mellonella and mouse models of cryptococcosis. Our findings suggest that Aph1 is secreted to the environment to scavenge phosphate from a wide range of physiological substrates and is targeted to vacuoles to recycle phosphate from the expendable macromolecules.

Statistical power of multilevel modelling in dental caries clinical trials: a simulation study.

Outcome data from dental caries clinical trials have a naturally hierarchical structure, with surfaces clustered within teeth, clustered within individuals. Data are often aggregated into the DMF index for each individual, losing tooth- and surface-specific information. If these data are to be analysed by tooth or surface, allowing exploration of effects of interventions on different teeth and surfaces, appropriate methods must be used to adjust for the clustered nature of the data. Multilevel modelling allows analysis of clustered data using individual observations without aggregating data, and has been little used in the field of dental caries. A simulation study was conducted to investigate the performance of multilevel modelling methods and standard caries increment analysis. Data sets were simulated from a three-level binomial distribution based on analysis of a caries clinical trial in Scottish adolescents, with varying sample sizes, treatment effects and random tooth level effects based on trials reported in Cochrane reviews of topical fluoride, and analysed to compare the power of multilevel models and traditional analysis. 40,500 data sets were simulated. Analysis showed that estimated power for the traditional caries increment method was similar to that for multilevel modelling, with more variation in smaller data sets. Multilevel modelling may not allow significant reductions in the number of participants required in a caries clinical trial, compared to the use of traditional analyses, but investigators interested in exploring the effect of their intervention in more detail may wish to consider the application of multilevel modelling to their clinical trial data.

MAGNEsium Trial In Children (MAGNETIC): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial and economic evaluation of nebulised magnesium sulphate in acute severe asthma in children.

BACKGROUND: There are few data on the role of nebulised magnesium sulphate (MgSO4) in the management of acute asthma in children. Those studies that have been published are underpowered, and use different methods, interventions and comparisons. Thus, no firm conclusions can be drawn. OBJECTIVES: Does the use of nebulised MgSO4, when given as an adjunct to standard therapy in acute severe asthma in children, result in a clinical improvement when compared with standard treatment alone? DESIGN: Patients were randomised to receive three doses of MgSO4 or placebo, each combined with salbutamol and ipratropium bromide, for 1 hour. The Yung Asthma Severity Score (ASS) was measured at baseline, randomisation, and at 20, 40, 60 (T60), 120, 180 and 240 minutes after randomisation. SETTING: Emergency departments and children's assessment units at 30 hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 2-15 years with acute severe asthma. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to receive nebulised salbutamol 2.5 mg (ages 2-5 years) or 5 mg (ages ≥ 6 years) and ipratropium bromide 0.25 mg mixed with either 2.5 ml of isotonic MgSO4 (250 mmol/l, tonicity 289 mOsm; 151 mg per dose) or 2.5 ml of isotonic saline on three occasions at approximately 20-minute intervals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the ASS after 1 hour of treatment. Secondary measures included 'stepping down' of treatment at 1 hour, number and frequency of additional salbutamol administrations, length of stay in hospital, requirement for intravenous bronchodilator treatment, and intubation and/or admission to a paediatric intensive care unit. Data on paediatric quality of life, time off school/nursery, health-care resource usage and time off work were collected 1 month after randomisation. RESULTS: A total of 508 children were recruited into the study; 252 received MgSO4 and 256 received placebo along with the standard treatment. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. There was a small, but statistically significant difference in ASS at T60 in those children who received nebulised MgSO4 {0.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.48]; p = 0.034} and this difference was sustained for up to 240 minutes [0.20 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.40), p = 0.042]. The clinical significance of this gain is uncertain. Assessing treatment-covariate interactions, there is evidence of a larger effect in those children with more severe asthma exacerbations ( p = 0.034) and those with a shorter duration of symptoms ( p = 0.049). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes measured. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 19% of children in the magnesium group and 20% in the placebo group. There were no clinically significant serious AEs in either group. The results of the base-case economic analyses are accompanied by considerable uncertainty, but suggest that, from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, the addition of magnesium to standard treatment may be cost-effective compared with standard treatment only. The results of economic evaluation show that the probability of magnesium being cost-effective is over 60% at cost-effectiveness thresholds of £1000 per unit decrement in ASS and £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, respectively; it is noted that for some parameter variations this probability is much lower, reflecting the labile nature of the cost-effectiveness ratio in light of the small differences in benefits and costs shown in the trial and the relation between the main outcome measure (ASS) and preference based measures of quality of life used in cost-utility analysis (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions; EQ-5D). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of nebulised isotonic MgSO4 at the dose of 151 mg given three times in the first hour of treatment as an adjuvant to standard treatment when a child presents with an acute episode of severe asthma. No harm is done by adding magnesium to salbutamol and ipratropium bromide, and in some individuals it may be clinically helpful. The response is likely to be more marked in those children with more severe attacks and with a shorter duration of exacerbation. Although the study was not powered to demonstrate this fully, the data certainly support the hypotheses that nebulised magnesium has a greater clinical effect in children who have more severe exacerbation with shorter duration of symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81456894. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Management of Asthma in School age Children On Therapy (MASCOT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study of efficacy and safety.

BACKGROUND: Asthma affects one in eight children in the UK. National management guidelines have been available for many years but, unlike in adults, studies in children have been few, with their methodologies often based on inappropriate adult models. Sound medical evidence in support of the national guidelines for asthma management in children is lacking. The MASCOT study has been developed to address this need. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether adding salmeterol or montelukast to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) can reduce the number of exacerbations requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids in children with uncontrolled asthma. DESIGN: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a 4-week run-in period on a fluticasone propionate inhaler (100 µg twice daily) with inhaler technique correction. Patients who met the post run-in period eligibility criteria were randomised in the ratio of 1 : 1 : 1 and were followed for 48 weeks. SETTING: Secondary care hospitals based in England and Scotland with recruitment from primary and secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 6-14 years with asthma requiring frequent short-acting beta-2 agonist relief, with symptoms of asthma resulting in nocturnal wakening and/or asthma that has interfered with usual activities. INTERVENTIONS: Three groups were compared: (1) inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 µg twice daily plus placebo tablet once daily; (2) inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 µg and salmeterol 50 µg twice daily (combination inhaler) plus placebo tablet once daily; and (3) inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 µg twice daily plus montelukast 5-mg tablet once daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the number of exacerbations requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids over 48 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included quality of life as measured by the Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire with Standardised Activities [PAQLQ(S)] and the Paediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire (PACQLQ); time from randomisation to first exacerbation requiring treatment with a short course of oral corticosteroids; school attendance; hospital admissions; amount of rescue beta-2 agonist therapy prescribed; time from randomisation to treatment withdrawal (because of lack of efficacy or side effects); lung function at 48 weeks (as assessed by spirometry); cost-effectiveness; adverse events. RESULTS: The study was closed prematurely because of poor recruitment and the target sample size of 450 was not achieved. In total, 898 children were screened to enter the trial, 166 were registered for the 4-week run-in period and 63 were randomised (group 1: 19, group 2: 23, group 3: 21), with 38 contributing data for the primary outcome analysis. There were no significant differences between groups for any of the outcomes. Adverse events were similar between the groups except for nervous system disorders, which were more frequently reported on fluticasone plus montelukast. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the MASCOT study it is not possible to conclude whether adding salmeterol or montelukast to ICSs can reduce the number of exacerbations requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids in children with uncontrolled asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN03556343. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 17, No. 4. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Melatonin for sleep problems in children with neurodevelopmental disorders: randomised double masked placebo controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of melatonin in treating severe sleep problems in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. DESIGN: 12 week double masked randomised placebo controlled phase III trial. SETTING: 19 hospitals across England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: 146 children aged 3 years to 15 years 8 months were randomised. They had a range of neurological and developmental disorders and a severe sleep problem that had not responded to a standardised sleep behaviour advice booklet provided to parents four to six weeks before randomisation. A sleep problem was defined as the child not falling asleep within one hour of lights out or having less than six hours' continuous sleep. INTERVENTIONS: Immediate release melatonin or matching placebo capsules administered 45 minutes before the child's bedtime for a period of 12 weeks. All children started with a 0.5 mg capsule, which was increased through 2 mg, 6 mg, and 12 mg depending on their response to treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total sleep time at night after 12 weeks adjusted for baseline recorded in sleep diaries completed by the parent. Secondary outcomes included sleep onset latency, assessments of child behaviour, family functioning, and adverse events. Sleep was measured with diaries and actigraphy. RESULTS: Melatonin increased total sleep time by 22.4 minutes (95% confidence interval 0.5 to 44.3 minutes) measured by sleep diaries (n=110) and 13.3 (-15.5 to 42.2) measured by actigraphy (n=59). Melatonin reduced sleep onset latency measured by sleep diaries (-37.5 minutes, -55.3 to -19.7 minutes) and actigraphy (-45.3 minutes, -68.8 to -21.9 minutes) and was most effective for children with the longest sleep latency (P=0.009). Melatonin was associated with earlier waking times than placebo (29.9 minutes, 13.6 to 46.3 minutes). Child behaviour and family functioning outcomes showed some improvement and favoured use of melatonin. Adverse events were mild and similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Children gained little additional sleep on melatonin; though they fell asleep significantly faster, waking times became earlier. Child behaviour and family functioning outcomes did not significantly improve. Melatonin was tolerable over this three month period. Comparisons with slow release melatonin preparations or melatonin analogues are required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCT No 05534585.

The use of MElatonin in children with neurodevelopmental disorders and impaired sleep: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study (MENDS).

BACKGROUND: Difficulties in initiating and maintaining sleep are common in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. Melatonin is unlicensed in children yet widely prescribed for sleep problems. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether or not immediate-release melatonin is beneficial compared with placebo in improving total duration of night-time sleep in children with neurodevelopmental problems. DESIGN: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study. SETTING: Hospitals throughout England and Wales recruited patients referred by community paediatricians and other clinical colleagues. PARTICIPANTS: Children with neurodevelopmental problems aged from 3 years to 15 years 8 months who did not fall asleep within 1 hour of lights out or who had < 6 hours of continuous sleep. Before randomisation, patients meeting eligibility criteria entered a 4- to 6-week behaviour therapy period in which a behaviour therapy advice booklet was provided. Sleep was measured using sleep diaries and actigraphy. After this period the sleep diaries were reviewed to determine if the sleep problem fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Eligible participants were randomised and followed for 12 weeks. INTERVENTIONS: Melatonin or placebo capsules in doses of 0.5 mg, 2 mg, 6 mg and 12 mg for a period of 12 weeks. The starting dose was 0.5 mg and the dose could be escalated through 2 mg and 6 mg to 12 mg during the first 4 weeks, at the end of which the child was maintained on that dose. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total night-time sleep time (TST) calculated using sleep diaries at 12 weeks compared with baseline. Secondary outcome measures included TST calculated using actigraphy data, sleep-onset latency (SOL) (time taken to fall asleep), sleep efficiency, Composite Sleep Disturbance Index score, global measure of child's sleep quality, Aberrant Behaviour Checklist, Family Impact Module of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL™), the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, number and severity of seizures and adverse events. Salivary melatonin concentrations and association of genetic variants with abnormal melatonin production were also investigated. RESULTS: A total of 275 children were screened to enter the trial; 263 (96%) children were registered and completed the 4- to 6-week behaviour therapy period and 146 (56%) children were randomised, of whom 110 (75%) contributed data for the primary outcome. The difference in TST time between the melatonin and placebo groups adjusted for baseline was 22.43 minutes [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 44.34 minutes; p = 0.04] measured using sleep diaries. A reduction in SOL, adjusted for baseline, was seen for melatonin compared with placebo when measured by sleep diaries (-37.49 minutes, 95% CI -55.27 to -19.71 minutes; p < 0.0001) and actigraphy (-45.34 minutes, 95% CI -68.75 to -21.93 minutes; p = 0.0003). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the reporting of adverse events. The results of other secondary outcomes favoured melatonin but were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: On average, the children treated with melatonin slept 23 minutes longer than those in the placebo group; however, the upper limit of the confidence interval was less than 1 hour, the minimum clinically worthwhile difference specified at the outset of the trial. Melatonin is effective in reducing SOL in children with neurodevelopmental delay by a mean of 45 minutes; a value of 30 minutes was specified a priori to be clinically important. Future studies should be conducted over longer periods and directly compare different formulations of melatonin with conventional hypnotic and sedative medications. It would also be important to study groups of children with specific neurological disorders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN05534585. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 16, No. 40. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Processes in recruitment to randomised controlled trials of medicines for children (RECRUIT): a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate recruitment processes across a range of clinical trials and from the perspective of parents, young people and practitioners to identify strategies to improve recruitment and its conduct across the spectrum of trials of medicines for children. DESIGN: Qualitative interview and observational study. SETTING: Eleven paediatric clinical trial centres recruiting to four trials. PARTICIPANTS: Members of 60 families approached to consider entry to one of the participating trials and 31 practitioners. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were verbatim transcripts of (1) audio-recorded trial recruitment discussions between practitioners and families (n = 41) and (2) semi-structured interviews with parents (n = 62), young people (n = 22) and practitioners (19 doctors and 12 research nurses). Analyses were interpretive, following the general principles of the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Practitioners were concerned to avoid overburdening parents and some indicated that they found approaching families about trials to be aversive. By contrast, even in the most difficult situations, parents did not mind being asked about trials and they did not describe the approach as burdensome. Some parents viewed the trial approach as a positive or exciting opportunity. Parents and young people took little active part in the trial discussions and asked few questions. Despite this, they were satisfied with how they had been approached, and spoke of how they had felt involved, valued, cared for and comfortable to interject during the discussion. However, we identified several parents who had important misunderstandings about the trial. There were few differences between parents who consented and those who declined a trial. Regardless of whether they consented or declined, parents' trial decisions were influenced by their perceptions of the trial in relation to their child's safety and well-being, potential benefits to the child and family, potential benefits to others and the practicality of participation. Of these, parents' paramount consideration was safety. Parents', young people's and practitioners' views of what was important when considering a trial were broadly convergent, although families gave greater importance than practitioners to the trial's practical requirements. All parties valued the face-to-face trial discussion highly and wanted shorter and less complex written information. Parents did not feel pressured by the trial team to participate, but some described how their personal values made them reluctant to decline, and several parents who did decline described a passing sense of discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: The concerns of some practitioners that families would be overburdened were unfounded, as parents did not object to being asked about research. Practitioners may benefit from support that helps them feel personally more at ease in approaching families about trials. Parents and young people often described the trial discussions in strongly positive terms and emphasised the importance of the social and emotional aspects of these encounters. Informed consent training could be enhanced if it similarly emphasised these aspects of recruitment; the misunderstandings we identified indicate how this training could also help practitioners to improve the clarity of their trial discussions with families. Guidelines on informed consent documents should take account of findings that all groups thought that these documents should be shorter and more straightforward. FUNDING: This research was commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.