Precision Medicine-Are We There Yet? A Narrative Review of Precision Medicine's Applicability in Primary Care.

Precision medicine (PM), also termed stratified, individualised, targeted, or personalised medicine, embraces a rapidly expanding area of research, knowledge, and practice. It brings together two emerging health technologies to deliver better individualised care: the many "-omics" arising from increased capacity to understand the human genome and "big data" and data analytics, including artificial intelligence (AI). PM has the potential to transform an individual's health, moving from population-based disease prevention to more personalised management. There is however a tension between the two, with a real risk that this will exacerbate health inequalities and divert funds and attention from basic healthcare requirements leading to worse health outcomes for many. All areas of medicine should consider how this will affect their practice, with PM now strongly encouraged and supported by government initiatives and research funding. In this review, we discuss examples of PM in current practice and its emerging applications in primary care, such as clinical prediction tools that incorporate genomic markers and pharmacogenomic testing. We look towards potential future applications and consider some key questions for PM, including evidence of its real-world impact, its affordability, the risk of exacerbating health inequalities, and the computational and storage challenges of applying PM technologies at scale.

Experiences of coordinated care for people in the UK affected by rare diseases: cross-sectional survey of patients, carers, and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Poorly coordinated care can have major impacts on patients and families affected by rare conditions, with negative physical health, psychosocial and financial consequences. This study aimed to understand how care is coordinated for rare diseases in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We undertook a national survey in the UK involving 760 adults affected by rare diseases, 446 parents/carers of people affected by rare diseases, and 251 healthcare professionals who care for people affected by rare diseases. RESULTS: Findings suggested that a wide range of patients, parents and carers do not have coordinated care. For example, few participants reported having a care coordinator (12% patients, 14% parents/carers), attending a specialist centre (32% patients, 33% parents/carers) or having a care plan (10% patients, 44% parents/carers). A very small number of patients (2%) and parents/carers (5%) had access to all three-a care coordinator, specialist centre and care plan. Fifty four percent of patients and 33% of parents/carers reported access to none of these. On the other hand, a higher proportion of healthcare professionals reported that families with rare conditions had access to care coordinators (35%), specialist centres (60%) and care plans (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Care for families with rare conditions is generally not well coordinated in the UK, with findings indicating limited access to care coordinators, specialist centres and care plans. Better understanding of these issues can inform how care coordination might be improved and embrace the needs and preferences of patients and families affected by rare conditions.

Rates of medical or surgical treatment for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: the ECLIPSE trial 10-year observational follow-up study.

Background: Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can significantly affect women's lives until menopause. There is a lack of evidence on longer-term outcomes after seeking health care and treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. Objectives: To assess the continuation rates of medical treatments and the rates of ablative and surgical interventions among women who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial (ISRCTN86566246) 10 years after initial management for heavy menstrual bleeding in primary care. To explore experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding and influences on treatment for women. Design: This was a prospective observational cohort study, with a parallel qualitative study. Setting: Primary care. Participants: A total of 206 women with heavy menstrual bleeding who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial consented to providing outcome data via a questionnaire approximately 10 years after original randomisation. Their mean age at follow-up was 54 years (standard deviation 5 years). A purposeful sample of 36 women also participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Interventions: The ECLIPSE trial randomised participants to either the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (52 mg) or the usual medical treatment (oral tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone, chosen as clinically appropriate by general practitioners and women). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were rates of ablative and surgical treatments; the rate of continuation of medical treatments; and quality of life using the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and EuroQol-5 Dimensions; women's experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding; and the influences on their decisions around treatment. Results: Over the 10-year follow-up period, 60 out of 206 (29%) women had received a surgical intervention [hysterectomy, n = 34 (17%); endometrial ablation, n = 26 (13%)]. Between 5 and 10 years post trial intervention, 89 women (43%) had ceased all medical treatments and 88 (43%) were using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system alone or in combination with other oral treatments. More women in the usual medical treatment group had also used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system than women in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group. Fifty-six women (28%) used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system at 10 years. There was no statistically significant difference in generic quality-of-life scores between the two original trial groups, although small improvements in the majority of domains were seen in both groups across time. Women reported wide-ranging impacts on their quality of life and normalisation of their heavy menstrual bleeding experience as a result of the taboo around menstruation. Women's treatment decisions and experiences were influenced by the perceived quality of health-care interactions with clinicians and their climacteric status. Limitations: Fewer than half of the original 571 participants participated; however, the cohort was clinically and demographically representative of the original trial population. Conclusions: Medical treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding can be initiated in primary care, with low rates of surgical intervention and improvement in quality of life observed 10 years later. Clinicians should be aware of the considerable challenges that women with heavy menstrual bleeding experience at presentation and subsequently over time, and the importance and value to women of patient-centred communication in this context. Future work: Any further evaluation of treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding should include long-term evaluation of outcomes and adherence. Trial registration: The original ECLIPSE trial was registered as ISRCTN86566246. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 17. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can significantly affect women's lives, yet many women do not seek medical help. Medical treatments, such as tablets and a hormonal coil inserted in the womb, were shown to help women with heavy menstrual bleeding in a previous clinical trial that we conducted, called ECLIPSE. In the ECLIPSE trial, women provided information for 5 years after their treatment started. We planned to continue to ask these women about their periods, their symptoms and quality of life, and the treatments that they chose about 10 years after they first joined the trial. We did this using questionnaires and by interviewing women. We received questionnaires from 206 out of the 490 women (42%) who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial 10 years earlier. Responders were, on average, 54 years old, and half reported that they had reached the menopause. About 3 in 10 women overall had either received a hysterectomy or undergone destruction of the womb lining. Just over one-quarter of women were using the hormonal coil. Quality of life remained improved and was generally higher than that before treatment. There was no big difference in quality of life or in the numbers of women having surgery between those who first used tablets and those who received the coil. Women described the wide-ranging impact of heavy bleeding on their lives and the taboo around periods. Women's experience of good or poor communication with their doctors, and thoughts about fertility and menopause, influenced the treatment choices that they made. Women's quality of life was improved by medical treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding, even as menopause approached, and this shows the importance of these treatments. This research can help doctors and women to make more informed decisions about medical and surgical treatments.

Alternative cascade-testing protocols for identifying and managing patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: systematic reviews, qualitative study and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Background: Cascade testing the relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is an efficient approach to identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia. The cascade-testing protocol starts with identifying an index patient with familial hypercholesterolaemia, followed by one of three approaches to contact other relatives: indirect approach, whereby index patients contact their relatives; direct approach, whereby the specialist contacts the relatives; or a combination of both direct and indirect approaches. However, it is unclear which protocol may be most effective. Objectives: The objectives were to determine the yield of cases from different cascade-testing protocols, treatment patterns, and short- and long-term outcomes for people with familial hypercholesterolaemia; to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative protocols for familial hypercholesterolaemia cascade testing; and to qualitatively assess the acceptability of different cascade-testing protocols to individuals and families with familial hypercholesterolaemia, and to health-care providers. Design and methods: This study comprised systematic reviews and analysis of three data sets: PASS (PASS Software, Rijswijk, the Netherlands) hospital familial hypercholesterolaemia databases, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)-Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) linked primary-secondary care data set, and a specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register. Cost-effectiveness modelling, incorporating preceding analyses, was undertaken. Acceptability was examined in interviews with patients, relatives and health-care professionals. Result: Systematic review of protocols: based on data from 4 of the 24 studies, the combined approach led to a slightly higher yield of relatives tested [40%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37% to 42%] than the direct (33%, 95% CI 28% to 39%) or indirect approaches alone (34%, 95% CI 30% to 37%). The PASS databases identified that those contacted directly were more likely to complete cascade testing (p < 0.01); the CPRD-HES data set indicated that 70% did not achieve target treatment levels, and demonstrated increased cardiovascular disease risk among these individuals, compared with controls (hazard ratio 9.14, 95% CI 8.55 to 9.76). The specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register confirmed excessive cardiovascular morbidity (standardised morbidity ratio 7.17, 95% CI 6.79 to 7.56). Cost-effectiveness modelling found a net health gain from diagnosis of -0.27 to 2.51 quality-adjusted life-years at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £15,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The cost-effective protocols cascaded from genetically confirmed index cases by contacting first- and second-degree relatives simultaneously and directly. Interviews found a service-led direct-contact approach was more reliable, but combining direct and indirect approaches, guided by index patients and family relationships, may be more acceptable. Limitations: Systematic reviews were not used in the economic analysis, as relevant studies were lacking or of poor quality. As only a proportion of those with primary care-coded familial hypercholesterolaemia are likely to actually have familial hypercholesterolaemia, CPRD analyses are likely to underestimate the true effect. The cost-effectiveness analysis required assumptions related to the long-term cardiovascular disease risk, the effect of treatment on cholesterol and the generalisability of estimates from the data sets. Interview recruitment was limited to white English-speaking participants. Conclusions: Based on limited evidence, most cost-effective cascade-testing protocols, diagnosing most relatives, select index cases by genetic testing, with services directly contacting relatives, and contacting second-degree relatives even if first-degree relatives have not been tested. Combined approaches to contact relatives may be more suitable for some families. Future work: Establish a long-term familial hypercholesterolaemia cohort, measuring cholesterol levels, treatment and cardiovascular outcomes. Conduct a randomised study comparing different approaches to contact relatives. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018117445 and CRD42019125775. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia is an inherited condition that causes raised cholesterol levels from birth and increases risk of heart disease if left untreated. After someone in a family is found to have familial hypercholesterolaemia (called an index case), their close relatives need to be contacted and checked to see if they have familial hypercholesterolaemia, using genetic or cholesterol testing. This is called 'cascade testing'. We planned to find the most cost-effective and acceptable way to do this. The relatives could be contacted for testing by the index case (indirect approach), by a health-care professional (direct approach) or by a combination of both approaches. We found, based on looking at hospital records, that more relatives were tested if health-care professionals directly contacted relatives. In previous studies, slightly more relatives were tested for familial hypercholesterolaemia with a combination approach. Interviews with patients also suggested that the direct approach was the most effective, but the most acceptable and successful approach depends on family relationships: using one approach for some families and using both for other families. Furthermore, by looking at the health-care records of large numbers of patients, we confirmed that people with a recorded diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolaemia in general practice records have a much higher risk of heart disease than the general population, and this was especially so for those with previous heart disease and/or raised cholesterols levels when diagnosed. However, one-quarter of new patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia recorded in their records were not treated within 2 years, with less than one-third reaching recommended cholesterol levels. We used what we had learned to help us estimate the most cost-effective way to do cascade testing. This showed that if the health service directly contact all relatives simultaneously for further assessment, rather than the current approach whereby close (first-degree) relatives are contacted first, this was cost-effective and good value for money.

A population-based study exploring phenotypic clusters and clinical outcomes in stroke using unsupervised machine learning approach.

Individuals developing stroke have varying clinical characteristics, demographic, and biochemical profiles. This heterogeneity in phenotypic characteristics can impact on cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality outcomes. This study uses a novel clustering approach to stratify individuals with incident stroke into phenotypic clusters and evaluates the differential burden of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular outcomes. We used linked clinical data from primary care, hospitalisations, and death records in the UK. A data-driven clustering analysis (kamila algorithm) was used in 48,114 patients aged ≥ 18 years with incident stroke, from 1-Jan-1998 to 31-Dec-2017 and no prior history of serious vascular events. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for subsequent adverse outcomes, for each of the generated clusters. Adverse outcomes included coronary heart disease (CHD), recurrent stroke, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), heart failure, CVD-related and all-cause mortality. Four distinct phenotypes with varying underlying clinical characteristics were identified in patients with incident stroke. Compared with cluster 1 (n = 5,201, 10.8%), the risk of composite recurrent stroke and CVD-related mortality was higher in the other 3 clusters (cluster 2 [n = 18,655, 38.8%]: hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12; cluster 3 [n = 10,244, 21.3%]: HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.14-1.26; and cluster 4 [n = 14,014, 29.1%]: HR, 1.44; 95% CI: 1.37-1.50). Similar trends in risk were observed for composite recurrent stroke and all-cause mortality outcome, and subsequent recurrent stroke outcome. However, results were not consistent for subsequent risk in CHD, PVD, heart failure, CVD-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. In this proof of principle study, we demonstrated how a heterogenous population of patients with incident stroke can be stratified into four relatively homogenous phenotypes with differential risk of recurrent and major cardiovascular outcomes. This offers an opportunity to revisit the stratification of care for patients with incident stroke to improve patient outcomes.

Intravaginal lactic acid gel versus oral metronidazole for treating women with recurrent bacterial vaginosis: the VITA randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial vaginosis is a common and distressing condition for women. Short-term antibiotic treatment is usually clinically effective, but recurrence is common. We assessed the effectiveness of intravaginal lactic acid gel versus oral metronidazole for treating recurrent bacterial vaginosis. METHODS: We undertook an open-label, multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial in nineteen UK sexual health clinics and a university health centre. Women aged ≥ 16 years, with current bacterial vaginosis symptoms and a preceding history of bacterial vaginosis, were randomised in a 1:1 ratio using a web-based minimisation algorithm, to 400 mg twice daily oral metronidazole tablets or 5 ml once daily intravaginal lactic acid gel, for 7 days. Masking of participants was not possible. The primary outcome was participant-reported resolution of symptoms within 2 weeks. Secondary outcomes included time to first recurrence of symptoms, number of recurrences and repeat treatments over 6 months and side effects. RESULTS: Five hundred and eighteen participants were randomised before the trial was advised to stop recruiting by the Data Monitoring Committee. Primary outcome data were available for 79% (204/259) allocated to metronidazole and 79% (205/259) allocated to lactic acid gel. Resolution of bacterial vaginosis symptoms within 2 weeks was reported in 70% (143/204) receiving metronidazole versus 47% (97/205) receiving lactic acid gel (adjusted risk difference -23·2%; 95% confidence interval -32.3 to -14·0%). In those participants who had initial resolution and for whom 6 month data were available, 51 of 72 (71%) women in the metronidazole group and 32 of 46 women (70%) in the lactic acid gel group had recurrence of symptoms, with median times to first recurrence of 92 and 126 days, respectively. Reported side effects were more common following metronidazole than lactic acid gel (nausea 32% vs. 8%; taste changes 18% vs. 1%; diarrhoea 20% vs. 6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Metronidazole was more effective than lactic acid gel for short-term resolution of bacterial vaginosis symptoms, but recurrence is common following both treatments. Lactic acid gel was associated with fewer reported side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN14161293 , prospectively registered on 18th September 2017.

Reducing Premature Coronary Artery Disease in Malaysia by Early Identification of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Using the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Case Ascertainment Tool (FAMCAT): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is predominantly caused by mutations in the 4 FH candidate genes (FHCGs), namely, low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR), apolipoprotein B-100 (APOB-100), proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), and the LDL receptor adaptor protein 1 (LDLRAP1). It is characterized by elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) levels leading to premature coronary artery disease. FH can be clinically diagnosed using established clinical criteria, namely, Simon Broome (SB) and Dutch Lipid Clinic Criteria (DLCC), and can be identified using the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Case Ascertainment Tool (FAMCAT), a primary care screening tool. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) compare the detection rate of genetically confirmed FH and diagnostic accuracy between the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC in the Malaysian primary care setting; (2) identify the genetic mutation profiles, including novel variants, in individuals with suspected FH in primary care; (3) explore the experience, concern, and expectation of individuals with suspected FH who have undergone genetic testing in primary care; and (4) evaluate the clinical utility of a web-based FH Identification Tool that includes the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC in the Malaysian primary care setting. METHODS: This is a mixed methods evaluation study conducted in 11 Ministry of Health primary care clinics located at the central administrative region of Malaysia. In Work stream 1, the diagnostic accuracy study design is used to compare the detection rate and diagnostic accuracy of the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC against molecular diagnosis as the gold standard. In Work stream 2, the targeted next-generation sequencing of the 4 FHCGs is used to identify the genetic mutation profiles among individuals with suspected FH. In Work stream 3a, a qualitative semistructured interview methodology is used to explore the experience, concern, and expectation of individuals with suspected FH who have undergone genetic testing. Lastly, in Work stream 3b, a qualitative real-time observation of primary care physicians using the "think-aloud" methodology is applied to evaluate the clinical utility of a web-based FH Identification Tool. RESULTS: The recruitment for Work stream 1, and blood sampling and genetic analysis for Work stream 2 were completed in February 2023. Data collection for Work stream 3 was completed in March 2023. Data analysis for Work streams 1, 2, 3a, and 3b is projected to be completed by June 2023, with the results of this study anticipated to be published by December 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide evidence on which clinical diagnostic criterion is the best to detect FH in the Malaysian primary care setting. The full spectrum of genetic mutations in the FHCGs including novel pathogenic variants will be identified. Patients' perspectives while undergoing genetic testing and the primary care physicians experience in utilizing the web-based tool will be established. These findings will have tremendous impact on the management of patients with FH in primary care and subsequently reduce their risk of premature coronary artery disease. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/47911.

Implementation of a diabetes prevention programme in a multi-ethnic community in primary care in England: An evaluation using constructs from the RE-AIM Framework.

AIMS: To implement a diabetes prevention programme in primary care METHODS: The programme was implemented for 12 months in two neighbouring towns, served by eight general practices. Practices requested a referral pathway involving an external administrator running electronic searches and sending postal invitations. If interested, people called and booked a place on the programme. Practices were also provided with resources to refer people directly. Six Educators were trained to deliver the programme. The RE-AIM constructs "Adoption", "Reach" and "Uptake" were assessed. RESULTS: All practices engaged in the searches and postal invitations. Overall, 3.9 % of those aged ≥ 25 years had an HbA1c level indicative of non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) and were invited. Overall uptake (attended as percentage of invited) was 16 % (practice range 10.5-26.6 %) and was highest in two practices where the invitation was followed by a telephone call. Four people were referred directly by their practice. Groups at risk of being excluded were the Bengali population and those unable to attend because of issues such as health, mobility and frailty. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive electronic searches meant everyone previously diagnosed with NDH was invited to attend. Follow-up telephone call improved uptake and providing practices with resources to make these calls themselves would likely increase uptake further.

Women's experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding and medical treatment: a qualitative study in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is common and can affect women's lives. Evidence on women's experiences and their treatment of this problem after seeking primary care is lacking. AIM: To explore women's experiences of HMB and their medical treatment up to 10 years after initial management in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a qualitative study in UK primary care. METHOD: Semistructured interviews with a purposeful sample of 36 women who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial of medical treatments for HMB in primary care (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or other usual medical treatments - oral tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen; or progesterone alone). Data were analysed thematically and a process of respondent validation was undertaken. RESULTS: Women reported the wide-ranging and debilitating impact of HMB on their lives. They had often normalised their experience underlining persisting societal taboos about menstruation and reflecting low general awareness of HMB as treatable. Women commonly delayed seeking help for several years. They could then be frustrated by lack of a medical explanation for HMB. Women who had pathology identified felt able to make better sense of their HMB. Experiences of medical treatments varied considerably but were strongly influenced by the perceived quality of healthcare interactions with clinicians. Other influences on women's treatment included considerations for their fertility, health concerns, family and peers, and views when approaching menopause. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware of the considerable challenges faced by women with HMB; widely differing experiences of, and influences on, their treatment; and the value of patient-centred communication in this context.

Clinical effectiveness of active Alpha-Stim AID versus sham Alpha-Stim AID in major depression in primary care in England (Alpha-Stim-D): a multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Randomised sham-controlled trials of cranial electrostimulation with the Alpha-Stim Anxiety Insomnia and Depression (AID) device have reported improved anxiety and depression symptoms; however, no adequately powered sham-controlled trials in major depression are available. We investigated whether active Alpha-Stim AID is superior to sham Alpha-Stim AID in terms of clinical effectiveness for depression symptoms in major depression. METHODS: The Alpha-Stim-D trial was a multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, recruiting participants from 25 primary care centres in two regions in England, UK. Eligible participants were aged 16 years or older with a current diagnosis of primary major depression, a score of 10-19 on the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire, and had been offered or prescribed and reported taking antidepressant medication for at least 6 weeks in the previous 3 months. Main exclusion criteria were contraindications to Alpha-Stim AID device use, having persistent suicidal ideation or self-harm, neurological conditions, a substance use disorder or dependence, an eating disorder, bipolar disorder, or non-affective psychosis, or receiving psychological treatment in the past 3 months. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1, minimised by region, anxiety disorder, and antidepressant use) to 1 h daily use of active (100 µA) or sham Alpha-Stim AID treatment for 8 weeks. Randomisation was via an independent web-based system, with participants, outcome assessors, and data analyst masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was change from baseline in score on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17, GRID version) at 16 weeks after randomisation, with participants analysed by intention to treat (ITT; all randomly assigned participants). Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN11853110); status completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 8, 2020, and Jan 14, 2022, 236 eligible participants were randomly assigned to active or sham Alpha-Stim AID (n=118 each). 156 (66%) participants were women, 77 (33%) were men, and three (1%) self-reported as other gender; 200 (85%) were White British or Irish; and the mean age was 38·0 years (SD 15·3; range 16-83). 102 (86%) participants in the active Alpha-Stim AID group and 98 (83%) in the sham group were followed up 16 weeks after randomisation. In the ITT population, mean change in GRID-HDRS-17 at 16 weeks was -5·9 (95% CI -7·1 to -4·8) in the active Alpha-Stim AID group and -6·5 (-7·7 to -5·4) in the sham group (mean change difference -0·6 [95% CI -1·0 to 2·2], p=0·46). Among the 236 participants, 17 adverse events were reported in 17 (7%) participants (nine [8%] participants in the active Alpha-Stim AID group; and eight [7%] participants in the sham group). One serious adverse event of suicidal ideation leading to hospitalisation was reported in the sham group, which was judged to be unrelated to the device. INTERPRETATION: Active Alpha-Stim AID was safe and acceptable, but no more clinically effective than sham Alpha-Stim AID in major depression. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands and Electromedical Products International.

Cardiovascular outcomes and mortality after incident ischaemic stroke in patients with a recent cancer history.

BACKGROUND: Up to 10% of patients with ischaemic stroke have comorbid cancer and stroke in these patients is thought to have a poor short-term prognosis. There is little known about the long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality outcomes after incident ischaemic stroke in patients with recent cancer history. OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of subsequent cardiovascular morbidity and mortality outcomes in patients with an incident ischaemic stroke and recent cancer history. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with an incident ischaemic stroke between 1998 and 2017, with any diagnosis of cancer within 12 months before the stroke event, and no prior history of serious vascular event were identified from UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data. To minimize selection bias, these patients were propensity-score matched with patients with incident ischaemic stroke and no history of cancer. Propensity-score matching was done using covariates such as demographic data, vascular risk factors, comorbid conditions, and prescribed medication. Multivariable models (Competing risks and Cox regression) were used to determine the risk of subsequent major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcomes and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Our cohort included 22,460 patients with a median age of 75 (IQR 64-83) years and a follow-up of 12.3 (IQR 7.2-16.7) years. Recent cancer was identified in 1,149 patients (5.1%) at the time of incident ischaemic stroke. The patients with recent cancer history had a lower risk of composite MACE (sub-distribution hazard ratio (SHR) 0.83 [95% CI: 0.75-0.92]) and recurrent stroke (SHR 0.85 95% CI:0.75-0.96]) and a higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.67 [95% CI:1.47-1.91]). The risk of coronary heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure, and CVD-related death outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: After incident ischaemic stroke, patients with recent cancer history have a lower risk of composite MACE and recurrent stroke outcomes but a higher risk of all-cause mortality when compared with patients without a prior history of cancer.

Medical treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in primary care: 10-year data from the ECLIPSE trial.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem that can significantly affect women's lives. There is a lack of evidence on long-term outcomes after seeking treatment. AIM: To assess continuation rates of medical treatments and rates of surgery in women 10 years after initial management for HMB in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a prospective observational cohort study. METHOD: Women with HMB who participated in the ECLIPSE primary care trial (ISRCTN86566246) completed questionnaires 10 years after randomisation to the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or other usual medical treatments (oral tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen; or progesterone alone). Outcomes were rates of surgery, medical treatments, and quality of life using the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and EuroQoL EQ-5D. RESULTS: The responding cohort of 206 women was demographically and clinically representative of the original trial population. Mean age at baseline was 41.9 years (SD 4.9) and 53.7 years (SD 5.1) at follow-up. Over the 10-year follow-up, 60 of 206 (29.1%) women had surgery (hysterectomy n = 34, 16.5%; endometrial ablation n = 26, 12.6%). Between 5 and 10 years, 89 women (43.2%) ceased all medical treatments and 88 (42.7%) used LNG-IUS alone or in combination with other treatments. Fifty-six women (27.2%) were using LNG-IUS at 10 years. There were improvements over time in quality-of-life scores, with no evidence of differences in these or other outcomes between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Medical treatments for women with HMB can be successfully initiated in primary care, with low rates of surgery and improvement in quality of life observed a decade later.

Identifying Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease in UK Primary Care: A Case-Control Study and Prediction Model.

Bicuspid aortic valve disease (BAV) is the most common congenital heart condition, and early detection can improve outcomes for patients. In this case−control study, patients with a diagnosis of BAV were identified from their electronic primary-care records in the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Each case was propensity-score matched to up to five controls. The clinical features recorded before diagnosis were compared. The proposed clinical features shown to be associated with BAV (p < 0.05) were incorporated into a multivariable regression model. We identified 2898 cases. The prevalence of BAV in the CPRD was 1 in 5181, significantly lower than expected, suggesting that diagnosis and/or recording could be improved. The following biologically plausible clinical features were associated with a subsequent diagnosis of BAV: palpitations (OR: 2.86 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.16)), atrial fibrillation (AF) (OR: 2.25 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.16)) and hypertension (OR: 1.72 (1.48, 2.00)). The best model had an AUC of 0.669 (95% CI: 0.658 to 0.680), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 5.9% (95% CI: 4.0% to 8.7%) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99% (95% CI: 99% to 99%) at a population prevalence of 1%. This study indicates that palpitations, hypertension and AF should trigger a clinical suspicion of BAV and assessment via echocardiography. It also demonstrates the potential to develop a prediction model for BAV to stratify patients for echocardiography screening.

Introducing genetic testing with case finding for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care: qualitative study of patient and health professional experience.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited condition causing elevated cholesterol, premature heart disease, and early death. Although FH can be effectively treated, over 80% of people with FH remain undetected. AIM: To explore patient and health professional experiences of introducing genetic testing with case finding for FH in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in UK general practice. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of 41 participants (24 patients and 17 health professionals) from eight practices, using an electronic case-finding tool (FAMCAT) to identify patients with higher likelihood of having FH and who were then offered diagnostic genetic testing in primary care. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: While prior awareness of FH was low, patients were unsurprised to be identified as being at risk, and positive about being offered genetic testing by their practice. Patients not found to have FH were relieved, although some felt frustrated that their high cholesterol lacked a clear cause. Those confirmed to have FH largely expected and accepted this outcome. Practitioners saw detection of FH as an important new opportunity for preventive care. They found the case-finding tool easy to apply and noted patients' high uptake of genetic testing. While they were comfortable referring appropriate patients for further specialist management, GPs sought clearer definition about responsibility for identification and long- term care of FH in future care pathways. CONCLUSION: Introducing genetic testing with electronic case finding for FH in primary care was positively experienced by patients and practitioners. Further development of this approach could help improve detection of FH in the general population.

Comparison of Risk of Serious Cardiovascular Events after Hemorrhagic versus Ischemic Stroke: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke are considered a very high risk population for subsequent cardiovascular events and guidelines recommend intensive preventive strategies. However, there is no clear recommendation that patients with hemorrhagic stroke should also be regarded as a very high cardiovascular risk population. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of subsequent cardiovascular morbidity/mortality between patients with incident hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with incident hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke between 1998 and 2017 and no prior history of serious vascular event were identified from UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics data. RESULTS: The cohort included 32,091 patients with an overall follow-up of 381,237 person-years (median: 11.8 years). After adjusting for potential confounders, patients with incident hemorrhagic stroke had no significantly different risk of subsequent cardiovascular morbidity compared with patients with incident ischemic stroke-coronary heart disease (CHD; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.32), recurrent stroke (HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.83-1.02), peripheral vascular disease (PVD; HR: 1.15, 95% CI:0.56-2.38), or heart failure (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.61-1.74). Patients with incident hemorrhagic stroke had significantly higher risk of subsequent cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related mortality (HR: 2.35, 95% CI: 2.04-2.72) and all-cause mortality (HR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.94-2.41). Propensity-score matched analysis of 1,039 patients with hemorrhagic stroke and 1,039 with ischemic stroke showed similar risk in subsequent cardiovascular morbidity-CHD (stratified HR [sHR]: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.55-1.54), recurrent stroke (sHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.82-1.02), PVD (sHR: 1.04 95% CI: 0.45-2.41), or heart failure (sHR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.39-1.27). CONCLUSION: The risk of subsequent cardiovascular events is similar between patients with incident hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke. Patients with previous hemorrhagic stroke should be regarded as a population at very high risk for subsequent CVD.

A randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Alpha-Stim AID cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) in patients seeking treatment for moderate severity depression in primary care (Alpha-Stim-D Trial).

BACKGROUND: Major depression is the second leading cause of years lost to disability worldwide and is a leading contributor to suicide. However, first-line antidepressants are only fully effective for 33%, and only 40% of those offered psychological treatment attend for two sessions or more. Views gained from patients and primary care professionals are that greater treatment uptake might be achieved if people with depression could be offered alternative and more accessible treatment options. Although there is evidence that the Alpha-Stim Anxiety Insomnia and Depression (AID) device is safe and effective for anxiety and depression symptoms in people with anxiety disorders, there is much less evidence of efficacy in major depression without anxiety. This study investigates the effectiveness of the Alpha-Stim AID device, a cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) treatment that people can safely use independently at home. The device provides CES which has been shown to increase alpha oscillatory brain activity, associated with relaxation. METHODS: The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Alpha-Stim AID in treatment-seeking patients (aged 16 years upwards) with moderate to moderately severe depressive symptoms in primary care. The study is a multi-centre parallel-group, double-blind, non-commercial, randomised controlled superiority trial. The primary objective of the study is to examine the clinical efficacy of active daily use of 8 weeks of Alpha-Stim AID versus sham Alpha-Stim AID on depression symptoms at 16 weeks (8 weeks after the end of treatment) in people with moderate severity depression. The primary outcome is the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at 16 weeks. All trial and treatment procedures are carried out remotely using videoconferencing, telephone and postal delivery considering the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. DISCUSSION: This study is investigating whether participants using the Alpha-Stim AID device display a reduction in depressive symptoms that can be maintained over 8 weeks post-treatment. The findings will help to determine whether Alpha-Stim AID should be recommended, including being made available in the NHS for patients with depressive symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRTCN ISRCTN11853110 . Registered on 14 August 2020.

Developing a taxonomy of care coordination for people living with rare conditions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Improving care coordination is particularly important for individuals with rare conditions (who may experience multiple inputs into their care, across different providers and settings). To develop and evaluate strategies to potentially improve care coordination, it is necessary to develop a method for organising different ways of coordinating care for rare conditions. Developing a taxonomy would help to describe different ways of coordinating care and in turn facilitate development and evaluation of pre-existing and new models of care coordination for rare conditions. To the authors' knowledge, no studies have previously developed taxonomies of care coordination for rare conditions. This research aimed to develop and refine a care coordination taxonomy for people with rare conditions. METHODS: This study had a qualitative design and was conducted in the United Kingdom. To develop a taxonomy, six stages of taxonomy development were followed. We conducted interviews (n = 30 health care professionals/charity representatives/commissioners) and focus groups (n = 4 focus groups, 22 patients/carers with rare/ultra-rare/undiagnosed conditions). Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded with consent, and professionally transcribed. Findings were analysed using thematic analysis. Themes were used to develop a taxonomy, and to identify which types of coordination may work best in which situations. To refine the taxonomy, we conducted two workshops (n = 12 patients and carers group; n = 15 professional stakeholder group). RESULTS: Our taxonomy has six domains, each with different options. The six domains are: (1) Ways of organising care (local, hybrid, national), (2) Ways of organising those involved in care (collaboration between many or all individuals, collaboration between some individuals, a lack of collaborative approach), (3) Responsibility for coordination (administrative support, formal roles and responsibilities, supportive roles and no responsibility), (4) How often appointments and coordination take place (regular, on demand, hybrid), (5) Access to records (full or filtered access), and (6) Mode of care coordination (face-to-face, digital, telephone). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that there are different ways of coordinating care across the six domains outlined in our taxonomy. This may help to facilitate the development and evaluation of existing and new models of care coordination for people living with rare conditions.

Development of models of care coordination for rare conditions: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Improving care coordination for people with rare conditions may help to reduce burden on patients and carers and improve the care that patients receive. We recently developed a taxonomy of different ways of coordinating care for rare conditions. It is not yet known which models of care coordination are appropriate in different situations. This study aimed to: (1) explore what types of care coordination may be appropriate in different situations, and (2) use these findings to develop hypothetical models of care coordination for rare conditions. METHODS: To explore appropriateness of different types of care coordination, we conducted interviews (n = 30), four focus groups (n = 22) and two workshops (n = 27) with patients, carers, healthcare professionals, commissioners, and charity representatives. Participants were asked about preferences, benefits and challenges, and the factors influencing coordination. Thematic analysis was used to develop hypothetical models of care coordination. Models were refined following feedback from workshop participants. RESULTS: Stakeholders prefer models of care that: are nationally centralised or a hybrid of national and local care, involve professionals collaborating to deliver care, have clear roles and responsibilities outlined (including administrative, coordinator, clinical and charity roles), provide access to records and offer flexible appointments (in terms of timing and mode). Many factors influenced coordination, including those relating to the patient (e.g., condition complexity, patient's location and ability to coordinate their own care), the healthcare professional (e.g., knowledge and time), the healthcare environment (e.g., resources) and societal factors (e.g., availability of funding). We developed and refined ten illustrative hypothetical models of care coordination for rare conditions. CONCLUSION: Findings underline that different models of care coordination may be appropriate in different situations. It is possible to develop models of care coordination which are tailored to the individual in context. Findings may be used to facilitate planning around which models of care coordination may be appropriate in different services or circumstances. Findings may also be used by key stakeholders (e.g. patient organisations, clinicians and service planners) as a decision-making tool.

Lactic acid gel versus metronidazole for recurrent bacterial vaginosis in women aged 16 years and over: the VITA RCT.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial vaginosis is a common and distressing condition associated with serious comorbidities. Antibiotic treatment is usually clinically effective in the short term, but recurrence is common and side effects can occur. OBJECTIVES: The objective is to assess whether or not intravaginal lactic acid gel is clinically effective and cost-effective for treating recurrent bacterial vaginosis compared with oral metronidazole (Flagyl, Sanofi). DESIGN: This was an open-label, multicentre, parallel-arm, randomised (1 : 1) controlled trial. SETTING: This took place in one general practice and 19 sexual health centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged ≥ 16 years with bacterial vaginosis symptoms and one or more episode(s) within the past 2 years took part. INTERVENTIONS: The interventions were 5 ml of intravaginal lactic acid gel taken once daily for 7 days (intervention) or 400-mg oral metronidazole tablets taken twice daily for 7 days (control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the resolution of bacterial vaginosis symptoms 14 days after randomisation. The secondary outcomes were time to first recurrence of symptoms; number of recurrences and treatment courses over 6 months; microbiological resolution on microscopy of vaginal smears at week 2; time to resolution of symptoms; tolerability, adherence and acceptability of the treatment; prevalence of concurrent sexually transmitted infections; quality of life; and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Recruitment stopped prior to reaching the target of 1900 participants on recommendation from the Data Monitoring Committee and Trial Steering Committee after a planned review of the results indicated that the research question had been answered. Overall, 518 participants were randomised and primary outcome data were available for 409 participants (79%; 204 in the metronidazole arm, 205 in the lactic acid gel arm). Participant-reported symptom resolution at week 2 was higher with metronidazole (143/204; 70%) than with lactic acid gel (97/205; 47%) (adjusted risk difference -23.2%, 95% confidence interval -32.3% to -14.0%). Recurrence in 6 months in a subset of participants who had initial resolution and were available for follow-up was similar across arms (metronidazole arm: 51/72, 71%; lactic acid gel arm: 32/46, 70%). A higher incidence of some side effects was reported with metronidazole than with lactic acid gel (nausea 32% vs. 8%; taste changes 18% vs. 1%; diarrhoea 20% vs. 6%, respectively). At week 2, the average cost per participant with resolved symptoms was £86.94 (metronidazole), compared with £147.00 (lactic acid gel). Some participants preferred using lactic acid gel even if they perceived it to be less effective than metronidazole. LIMITATIONS: Loss to follow-up for collection of the primary outcome data was 21% and was similar in both arms. There is a risk of bias owing to missing outcome data at 3 and 6 months post treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A higher initial response was seen with metronidazole than with lactic acid gel, but subsequent treatment failure was common with both. Lactic acid gel was less cost-effective than metronidazole. In general, women disliked taking repeated courses of metronidazole and preferred lactic acid gel, even when they were aware that it was less likely to provide symptom resolution. In the absence of effective curative therapy, further evaluation of non-antibiotic treatments to control the symptoms of recurrent bacterial vaginosis is required to improve quality of life for these patients. Further microbiological analysis of vaginal samples would be useful to identify additional factors affecting response to treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14161293. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Bacterial vaginosis is a common cause of unpleasant vaginal discharge that is caused by an imbalance of vaginal bacteria. The usual treatment is an antibiotic called metronidazole (Flagyl, Sanofi). Although this generally works in the short term, symptoms often return, leading to the repeated use of antibiotics; this can cause side effects as well as increase the risk of antibiotic resistance. Lactic acid gel might be an alternative treatment, but previous studies have not confirmed how clinically effective it is. We wanted to find out if lactic acid gel was better than metronidazole for treating recurrent bacterial vaginosis. Women with typical symptoms and a history of bacterial vaginosis who were taking part in our trial were selected randomly to receive either 7 days of treatment with lactic acid gel inserted into the vagina once per day or 7 days of treatment with metronidazole tablets taken by mouth twice per day. Overall, 518 women took part in the trial. We originally intended to recruit 1900 women but the trial was stopped early because a planned review of the data showed which treatment was better. Most of the women took all of their treatment and 70% reported that symptoms had cleared 2 weeks after taking metronidazole, compared with 47% after using lactic acid gel. Less than half of the women stayed in the trial for the full 6 months; however, the data suggested that the majority of those whose symptoms cleared within 2 weeks with either treatment had symptoms return over the next 6 months. More side effects were reported for metronidazole than for lactic acid gel: nausea 32% compared with 8%, taste changes 18% compared with 1%, and diarrhoea 20% compared with 6%, respectively. Despite thinking that it was less effective, women preferred lactic acid gel because it avoided the need to take an antibiotic and had a soothing effect. The cost-effectiveness analysis found that lactic acid gel was less effective than metronidazole in clearing symptoms by 2 weeks and that the average costs for women whose symptoms resolved were higher (£86.94 with metronidazole vs. £147.00 with lactic acid gel).

Sex disparity in subsequent outcomes in survivors of coronary heart disease.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence on sex differences in outcomes after developing coronary heart disease (CHD) has focused on recurrent CHD, all-cause mortality or revascularisation. We assessed sex disparities in subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in adults surviving their first-time CHD. METHODS: Using a population-based cohort obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) linked to hospitalisation and death records in the UK, we identified 143 702 adults (aged ≥18 years) between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2017 with no prior history of MACE. MACE outcome was a composite of recurrent CHD, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure and cardiovascular-related mortality. Multivariable models (Cox and competing risks regressions) were used to assess differences between sexes. RESULTS: There were 143 702 adults with any incident CHD (either angina, myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation). Women (n=63 078, 43.9%) were older than men (median age, 73 vs 66 years). First subsequent MACE outcome was observed in 91 706 (63.8%). Women had a significantly lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio (HR), 0.68 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.69); sub-hazard ratio (HRsd), 0.71 (0.70 to 0.72), respectively) and recurrent CHD (n=66 543, 46.3%) (HR, 0.60 (0.59 to 0.61); HRsd, 0.62 (0.61 to 0.63)) when compared with men after incident CHD. However, women had a significantly higher risk of stroke (n=5740, 4.0%) (HR, 1.26 (1.19 to 1.33); HRsd, 1.32 (1.25 to 1.39)), heart failure (n=7905, 5.5%) (HR, 1.09 (1.04 to 1.15); HRsd, 1.13 (1.07 to 1.18)) and all-cause mortality (n=29 503, 20.5%) (HR, 1.05 (1.02 to 1.07); HRsd, 1.11 (1.08 to 1.13)). CONCLUSIONS: After incident CHD, women have lower risk of composite MACE and recurrent CHD outcomes but higher risk of stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality compared with men.