Determining the feasibility of calculating pancreatic cancer risk scores for people with new-onset diabetes in primary care (DEFEND PRIME): study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis. Early diagnosis may improve survival by enabling curative treatment. Statistical and machine learning diagnostic prediction models using risk factors such as patient demographics and blood tests are being developed for clinical use to improve early diagnosis. One example is the Enriching New-onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model, which employs patients' age, blood glucose and weight changes to provide pancreatic cancer risk scores. These values are routinely collected in primary care in the UK. Primary care's central role in cancer diagnosis makes it an ideal setting to implement ENDPAC but it has yet to be used in clinical settings. This study aims to determine the feasibility of applying ENDPAC to data held by UK primary care practices. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a multicentre observational study with a cohort design, determining the feasibility of applying ENDPAC in UK primary care. We will develop software to search, extract and process anonymised data from 20 primary care providers' electronic patient record management systems on participants aged 50+ years, with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) test result of ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) and no previous abnormal HbA1c results. Software to calculate ENDPAC scores will be developed, and descriptive statistics used to summarise the cohort's demographics and assess data quality. Findings will inform the development of a future UK clinical trial to test ENDPAC's effectiveness for the early detection of pancreatic cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project has been reviewed by the University of Surrey University Ethics Committee and received a favourable ethical opinion (FHMS 22-23151 EGA). Study findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in international peer-reviewed journals. Participating primary care practices, clinical leads and policy makers will be provided with summaries of the findings.

The safety and efficacy of stem cells for the treatment of severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: A randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Evaluate the safety profile of expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell (eASC) for the treatment of severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b/2a trial. Patients with severe CABP were enrolled to receive intravenous infusions of Cx611 or placebo. The primary objective was safety including hypersensitivity reactions, thromboembolic events, and immunological responses to Cx611. The secondary endpoints included the clinical cure rate, ventilation-free days, and overall survival (Day 90). RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were randomized and received infusions (Cx611: n = 42]; placebo: n = 41]. The mean age was similar (Cx611: 61.1 [11.2] years; placebo: 63.4 [10.4] years). The number of AEs and treatment-emergent AEs were similar (243; 184 and 2; 1) in Cx611 and placebo respectively. Hypersensitivity reactions or thromboembolic events were similar (Cx611: n = 9; placebo: n = 12). Each study arm had similar anti-HLA antibody/DSA levels at Day 90. The clinical cure rate (Cx611: 86.7%; placebo: 93.8%), mean number of ventilator-free days (Cx611: 12.2 [10.29] days; placebo: 15.4 [10.75] days), and overall survival (Cx611: 71.5%; placebo: 77.0%) did not differ between study arms. CONCLUSION: Cx611 was well tolerated in severe CABP. These data provide insights for future stem cell clinical study designs, endpoints and sample size calculation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03158727 (retrospectively registered: May 09, 2017). Full study protocol: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ProvidedDocs/27/NCT03158727/Prot_000.pdf.

What impact do self-referral and direct access pathways for patients have on health inequalities?

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in self-referral and direct access as alternatives pathways to care to improve patient access to specialist services. The impact of these pathways on health inequalities is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review is to explore the impact of self-referral and direct access pathways on inequalities in health care use. DESIGN: Three databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science) and grey literature were systematically searched for articles from January 2000 to February 2023, reporting on self-referral and direct access pathways to care. Title and abstracts were screened against eligibility criteria to identify studies that evaluated the impact on health inequalities. Data were extracted from eligible studies after full text review and a quality assessment was performed using the ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 2948 articles. Nineteen records were included, covering seven countries and six healthcare services. The impact of self-referral and direct access on inequalities was mixed, suggesting that the relationship is dependent on patient and system factors. Typically self-referral pathways and direct access pathways tend to widen health inequalities. White, younger, educated women from less deprived backgrounds are more likely to self-refer, exacerbating existing health inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: Self-referral pathways risk widening health inequalities. Further research is required to understand the context-dependent mechanisms by which this can occur, explore ways to mitigate this and even narrow health inequalities, as well as understand the impact on the wider healthcare system.