The Joint Vasculitis Registry in German-speaking countries (GeVas): subgroup analysis of 195 GCA patients.

OBJECTIVES: Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is one of the most common forms of vasculitis. There is an abundance of studies which are conducted in a randomised controlled trial setting but limited with respect to cohort size and follow-up time. GeVas is the first large-scale registry for vasculitides in German-speaking countries that enables to evaluate this rare disease. Herein we focus on the subgroup of GCA patients including follow-up data up to one year. METHODS: GeVas is a prospective, web-based, multicentre registry for the documentation of organ manifestations, outcomes, and therapy regimens in vasculitides. Recruitment started in June 2019. By April 2023, 15 centres were initiated and have started to enrol patients. RESULTS: After 4 years, 195 GCA-patients were included in the registry, of which 64% were female and 36% were male. The average age was 76 years at the time of recruitment (IQR=69-82). Seventy-nine percent were included in the registry because of a newly diagnosed GCA and 21% because of a relapse. At the first assessment most of the patients (89%) described general symptoms. Thirty-one percent stated ocular symptoms. Cranial symptoms were documented in 78% of the cases. All patients were documented with immunosuppressive treatment at start, of whom 95% received prednisolone, 16% cyclophosphamide, 20% methotrexate, and 48% tocilizumab. After three months 62% and after one year 91% of the patients achieved remission. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding demographics, clinical manifestations and diagnostics, our study showed a similar composition compared to other studies. However, our data differed in terms of treatment regimens.

The Joint Vasculitis Registry in German-speaking countries (GeVas): subgroup analysis of 266 AAV patients.

OBJECTIVES: Prospective long-term observational data on the disease course of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) were missing in Germany to date. Therefore, the Joint Vasculitis Registry in German-speaking countries (GeVas) has been established to follow the course of patients with AAV. The aim of this study is to present baseline data of patients with newly diagnosed and relapsing AAV enrolled in the GeVas registry. METHODS: GeVas is a prospective, web-based, multicentre, clinician-driven registry for the documentation of organ manifestations, damage, long-term outcomes, and therapy regimens in various types of vasculitis. Recruitment started in June 2019. RESULTS: Between June 2019 and October 2022, 266 patients with AAV were included in the GeVas registry: 173 (65%) with new-onset and 93 (35%) with relapsing AAV. One hundred and sixty-two (61%) patients were classified as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), 66 (25%) as microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), 36 (13%) as eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), and 2 (1%) as renal limited AAV. The median age was 59 years (51-70 years, IQR), 130 (51%) patients were female. Most patients were ANCA positive (177; 67%) and affected by general symptoms, pulmonary, ear nose throat (ENT), renal and neurological involvement. For induction of remission, the majority of patients received glucocorticoids (247, 93%) in combination with either rituximab (118, 45%) or cyclophosphamide (112, 42%). CONCLUSIONS: Demographic characteristics are comparable to those in other European countries. Differences were found regarding ANCA status, frequencies of organ manifestations, and therapeutic regimens. The GeVas registry will allow longitudinal observations and prospective outcome measures in AAV.

The Joint Vasculitis Registry in German-speaking countries (GeVas) - a prospective, multicenter registry for the follow-up of long-term outcomes in vasculitis.

BACKGROUND: Vasculitides comprise a group of rare diseases which affect less than 5 in 10.000 individuals. Most types of vasculitis can become organ- and life-threatening and are characterized by chronicity, high morbidity and relapses, altogether resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Previous studies have been either monocentric or mainly retrospective - studies with a prospective design mostly consisted of rather small cohorts of 100 to 200 patients. The aim of the Joint Vasculitis Registry in German-speaking countries (GeVas) is to record all patients who have been recently diagnosed with vasculitis or who have changed their treatment due to a relapse (inception cohort). In GeVas, data are collected prospectively in a multicenter design in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. By this approach, courses of vasculitis and their outcomes can be monitored over an extended period. METHODS: GeVas is a prospective, web-based, multicenter, clinician-driven registry for the documentation of organ manifestations, damage, long-term progress and other outcomes of various types of vasculitis. The registry started recruiting in June 2019. As of October 2020, 14 centers have been initiated and started recruiting patients in Germany. Involvement of sites in Austria and the German-speaking counties of Switzerland is scheduled in the near future. DISCUSSION: In June 2019, we successfully established a prospective multicenter vasculitis registry being the first of its kind in German-speaking countries. The participating centers are currently recruiting, and systematic analysis of long-term vasculitis outcomes is expected in the ensuing period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien): DRKS00011866 . Registered 10 May 2019.

Stereotactic cisternal lavage in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage with urokinase and nimodipine for the prevention of secondary brain injury (SPLASH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delayed cerebral infarction (DCI) is a major cause of death and poor neurological outcome in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Direct intrathecal therapies with fibrinolytic and spasmolytic drugs have appeared promising in clinical trials. However, access to the subarachnoid space for intrathecal drug administration is an unsolved problem so far, especially in patients with endovascular aneurysm securing. We investigate a therapy protocol based on stereotactic catheter ventriculocisternostomy (STX-VCS), a new approach to overcome this problem. The primary objective of this study is to assess whether cisternal lavage with urokinase, nimodipine, and Ringer's solution administered via a stereotactically implanted catheter into the basal cisterns (= investigational treatment (IT)) is safe and improves neurological outcome in patients with aSAH. METHODS: This is a randomized, controlled, parallel-group, open-label phase II trial. Fifty-four patients with severe aSAH (WFNS grade ≥ 3) will be enrolled at one academic tertiary care center in Southern Germany. Patients will be randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to receive either standard of care only or standard of care plus the IT. The primary endpoint is the proportion of subjects with a favorable outcome on the Modified Rankin Scale (defined as mRS 0-3) at 6 months after aSAH. Further clinical and surrogate outcome parameters are defined as secondary endpoints. DISCUSSION: New approaches for the prevention and therapy of secondary brain injury in patients with aSAH are urgently needed. We propose this RCT to assess the clinical safety and efficacy of a novel therapy protocol for intrathecal administration of urokinase, nimodipine, and Ringer's solution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (German Clinical Trials Register), DRKS00015645 . Registered on 8 May 2019.

Cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: protocol for a randomised, controlled, open-label intervention, multicentre trial.

INTRODUCTION: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is a last resort treatment option in patients with severe COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Mortality in these critically ill patients is high. Elevated interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels in these severe courses are associated with poor outcome. Extracorporeal cytokine adsorption is an approach to lower elevated IL-6 levels. However, there is no randomised controlled data on the efficacy of cytokine adsorption and its effect on patient outcome in severe COVID-19 related ARDS requiring V-V ECMO support. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We here report the protocol of a 1:1 randomised, controlled, parallel group, open-label intervention, superiority multicentre trial to evaluate the effect of extracorporeal cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb device in severe COVID-19 related ARDS treated with V-V ECMO. We hypothesise that extracorporeal cytokine adsorption in these patients is effectively reducing IL-6 levels by 75% or more after 72 hours as compared with the baseline measurement and also reducing time to successful V-V ECMO explantation. We plan to include a total of 80 patients at nine centres in Germany. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol of this study was approved by the ethical committee of the University of Freiburg as the leading institution (EK 285/20). Additional votes will be obtained at all participating centres. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT04385771 and DRKS 00021248.

Safety and efficacy of abatacept in patients with treatment-resistant SARCoidosis (ABASARC) - protocol for a multi-center, single-arm phase IIa trial.

INTRODUCTION: Sarcoidosis is a granulomatous systemic disease that becomes chronic in approximately one third of affected patients resulting in quality of life and functional impairment. Immunosuppressive drugs other than steroids represent alternative therapeutic options, but side effects like liver and bone marrow toxicity or increased susceptibility to infections limit their use. Pathophysiological studies in sarcoidosis patients demonstrate altered regulatory T-cell functions with a reduced expression of CTLA-4 (CD152) and prolonged inflammation. Therefore, interfering with CTLA-4 using abatacept might be a therapeutic option in sarcoidosis similar to rheumatoid arthritis therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multicenter prospective open-labeled single arm phase II study addressing the safety of abatacept in sarcoidosis patients. 30 patients with chronic sarcoidosis requiring immunosuppressive therapy beyond 5 mg prednisolone equivalent will be treated with abatacept in combination with corticosteroids for one year in two centers.The primary endpoint is the number and characterization of severe infectious complications under treatment with abatacept.Secondary endpoints are the rate of all infections, patient-related outcomes (assessed by questionnaires), lung function and immunological parameters including alveolar inflammation assessed by bronchoaveolar lavage. DISCUSSION: This is the first trial of abatacept in patients with sarcoidosis. It is hypothesized that administration of abatacept is safe in patients with chronic sarcoidosis and can limit ongoing inflammation. Patients' wellbeing is assessed by established questionnaires. Immunological work-up will highlight the effect of abatacept on inflammatory pathways in sarcoidosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered at the German Clinical Trial Registry (Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien, DRKS) with the identity number DRKS00011660.

Evaluating the Diagnostic Accuracy of the Head-Impulse Test: A Scoping Review.

Importance: Vestibular symptoms rank among the most common complaints in medicine worldwide. Underlying disorders manifested by these symptoms are generally associated with an impairment of the vestibular-ocular reflex and can be assessed with different diagnostic procedures. In recent years, an increasing number of diagnostic test accuracy studies comparing various head-impulse test (HIT) methods with other diagnostic procedures have been published but not systematically reviewed. Objective: To conduct a scoping review and describe key characteristics of the growing number of diagnostic studies in patients presenting with vestibular symptoms. Evidence Review: In April 2017, published studies were identified through searches of 4 bibliographic databases: Medline, Science Citation Index Expanded, the Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect. Studies were included if they provided diagnostic accuracy data (sensitivity and specificity) for any HIT method with reference to any other vestibular test or clinical diagnosis in patients with vestibular symptoms. Study key characteristics were extracted, and the current literature was described narratively. All analysis took place between June 2017 and July 2018. Findings: We identified a total of 27 diagnostic studies (including 3821 participants). There were disagreements between diagnostic test accuracy data both within and between studies when different HIT methods were compared with other diagnostic procedures. The proportion of correctly identified people having the disease (sensitivity) ranged between 0% and 100% (median, 41%), whereas the proportion of correctly identified people without the disease (specificity) was higher and ranged between 56% and 100% (median, 94%). Conclusions and Relevance: Based on the studies included in this review, sensitivity, specificity, and, more importantly, the risk of misdiagnosis and associated undertreatment or overtreatment cannot be reliably estimated by HIT methods for patients with vestibular symptoms. We recommend that further diagnostic studies consider (1) multiple possible underlying causes of vestibular symptoms and multiple test thresholds, (2) a representative sample of patients with and without the disease, and (3) reporting guidelines for diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Virtual patients in the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills: does presentation mode matter? A quasi-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to compare two different instructional methods in the curricular use of computerized virtual patients in undergraduate medical education. We aim to investigate whether using many short and focused cases - the key feature principle - is more effective for the learning of clinical reasoning skills than using few long and systematic cases. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-randomized, non-blinded, controlled parallel-group intervention trial in a large medical school in Southwestern Germany. During two seminar sessions, fourth- and fifth-year medical students (n = 56) worked on the differential diagnosis of the acute abdomen. The educational tool - virtual patients - was the same, but the instructional method differed: In one trial arm, students worked on multiple short cases, with the instruction being focused only on important elements ("key feature arm", n = 30). In the other trial arm, students worked on few long cases, with the instruction being comprehensive and systematic ("systematic arm", n = 26). The overall training time was the same in both arms. The students' clinical reasoning capacity was measured by a specifically developed instrument, a script concordance test. Their motivation and the perceived effectiveness of the instruction were assessed using a structured evaluation questionnaire. RESULTS: Upon completion of the script concordance test with a reference score of 80 points and a standard deviation of 5 for experts, students in the key feature arm attained a mean of 57.4 points (95% confidence interval: 50.9-63.9), and in the systematic arm, 62.7 points (57.2-68.2), with Cohen's d at 0.337. The difference is statistically non-significant (p = 0.214). In the evaluation survey, students in the key feature arm indicated that they experienced more time pressure and perceived the material as more difficult. CONCLUSIONS: In this study powered for a medium effect, we could not provide empirical evidence for the hypothesis that a key feature-based instruction on multiple short cases is superior to a systematic instruction on few long cases in the curricular implementation of virtual patients. The results of the evaluation survey suggest that learners should be given enough time to work through case examples, and that caution should be taken to prevent cognitive overload.

Validation of undergraduate medical student script concordance test (SCT) scores on the clinical assessment of the acute abdomen.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals often manage medical problems in critical situations under time pressure and on the basis of vague information. In recent years, dual process theory has provided a framework of cognitive processes to assist students in developing clinical reasoning skills critical especially in surgery due to the high workload and the elevated stress levels. However, clinical reasoning skills can be observed only indirectly and the corresponding constructs are difficult to measure in order to assess student performance. The script concordance test has been established in this field. A number of studies suggest that the test delivers a valid assessment of clinical reasoning. However, different scoring methods have been suggested. They reflect different interpretations of the underlying construct. In this work we want to shed light on the theoretical framework of script theory and give an idea of script concordance testing. We constructed a script concordance test in the clinical context of "acute abdomen" and compared previously proposed scores with regard to their validity. METHODS: A test comprising 52 items in 18 clinical scenarios was developed, revised along the guidelines and administered to 56 4(th) and 5(th) year medical students at the end of a blended-learning seminar. We scored the answers using five different scoring methods (distance (2×), aggregate (2×), single best answer) and compared the scoring keys, the resulting final scores and Cronbach's α after normalization of the raw scores. RESULTS: All scores except the single best answers calculation achieved acceptable reliability scores (>= 0.75), as measured by Cronbach's α. Students were clearly distinguishable from the experts, whose results were set to a mean of 80 and SD of 5 by the normalization process. With the two aggregate scoring methods, the students' means values were between 62.5 (AGGPEN) and 63.9 (AGG) equivalent to about three expert SD below the experts' mean value (Cronbach's α : 0.76 (AGGPEN) and 0.75 (AGG)). With the two distance scoring methods the students' mean was between 62.8 (DMODE) and 66.8 (DMEAN) equivalent to about two expert SD below the experts' mean value (Cronbach's α: 0.77 (DMODE) and 0.79 (DMEAN)). In this study the single best answer (SBA) scoring key yielded the worst psychometric results (Cronbach's α: 0.68). CONCLUSION: Assuming the psychometric properties of the script concordance test scores are valid, then clinical reasoning skills can be measured reliably with different scoring keys in the SCT presented here. Psychometrically, the distance methods seem to be superior, wherein inherent statistical properties of the scales might play a significant role. For methodological reasons, the aggregate methods can also be used. Despite the limitations and complexity of the underlying scoring process and the calculation of reliability, we advocate for SCT because it allows a new perspective on the measurement and teaching of cognitive skills.