Effect of a 2-week interruption in methotrexate treatment on COVID-19 vaccine response in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (VROOM study): a randomised, open label, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is the first-line treatment for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and reduces vaccine-induced immunity. We evaluated if a 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination improved antibody response against the S1 receptor binding domain (S1-RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation compared with uninterrupted treatment in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHOD: We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, superiority trial in secondary-care rheumatology and dermatology clinics in 26 hospitals in the UK. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases taking methotrexate (≤25 mg per week) for at least 3 months, who had received two primary vaccine doses from the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a centralised validated computer program, to temporarily suspend methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination or continue treatment as usual. The primary outcome was S1-RBD antibody titres 4 weeks after COVID-19 booster vaccination and was assessed masked to group assignment. All randomly assigned patients were included in primary and safety analyses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN11442263; following a pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was stopped early. FINDING: Between Sept 30, 2021, and March 7, 2022, we screened 685 individuals, of whom 383 were randomly assigned: to either suspend methotrexate (n=191; mean age 58·8 years [SD 12·5], 118 [62%] women and 73 [38%] men) or to continue methotrexate (n=192; mean age 59·3 years [11·9], 117 [61%] women and 75 [39%] men). At 4 weeks, the geometric mean S1-RBD antibody titre was 25 413 U/mL (95% CI 22 227-29 056) in the suspend methotrexate group and 12 326 U/mL (10 538-14 418) in the continue methotrexate group with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 2·08 (95% CI 1·59-2·70; p<0·0001). No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases enhanced antibody responses after COVID-19 booster vaccination that were sustained at 12 weeks and 26 weeks. There was a temporary increase in inflammatory disease flares, mostly self-managed. The choice to suspend methotrexate should be individualised based on disease status and vulnerability to severe outcomes from COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Optimising psoriatic arthritis therapy with immunological methods to increase standard evaluation: the protocol of an open-label multicentre, parallel-group, two-arm randomised controlled study evaluation precision medicine approach in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) affects around 150 000 people in the UK of whom around 50% require treatment with biologics. The most used biologics for PsA target tumour necrosis factor (TNF) or interleukin-17A (IL-17A). About 50% of patients respond to each, but it is not currently possible to predict response for individual patients, necessitating sequential treatment steps. A recent proof of concept study in PsA suggested that using peripheral immunophenotype to choose therapy could improve time to treatment response.This study will test the hypothesis, within an open-label parallel-group biomarker-stratified multicentre randomised controlled trial, which the baseline proportion of CD4+T cells with an activated type 17 immunophenotype (Th17 levels) predicts response to IL-17A or TNF inhibitors in PsA. Additional analyses will identify if the model can be refined by combining additional clinical and immunophenotypic factors. Statistical modelling will be used to predict the likely effectiveness of these approaches compared with standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with PsA eligible to start their first biologic as part of standard care are recruited and baseline blood tests are taken for immunophenotyping. Participants are stratified equally by Th17 levels and randomised 1:1 to receive either TNF (adalimumab) or IL-17A (secukinumab) inhibitors. The primary analysis will establish the interaction between baseline immunophenotype and treatment on the primary outcome (achievement of minimal disease activity criteria at week 24). In secondary analysis, modelling will identify if this prediction model can be optimised further by incorporating clinical phenotypes and additional immunophenotyping techniques. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the North West Preston Research Ethics Committee (ref 21/NW/0016). Dissemination will be via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications, aiming to impact on treatment guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17228602.

Protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial examining the effects of temporarily pausing Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy to coincide with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and its impact on immune responses in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

INTRODUCTION: People who are immunocompromised have a poor biological response to vaccinations. This study aims to determine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) if a 3-week pause in Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (BTKi) starting 1 week before delivery of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster, improves vaccine immune response when compared with continuation of BTKi. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An open-label, randomised controlled superiority trial will be conducted in haematology clinics in approximately 10 UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. The sample size is 120, randomised 1:1 to intervention and usual care arms. The primary outcome is anti-spike-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody level at 3 weeks post-SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination. Secondary outcomes are RBD antibody levels at 12 weeks postbooster vaccination, participant global assessments of disease activity, blood films, full blood count and lactate dehydrogenase levels, impact on quality of life, self-reported adherence with request to temporarily pause or continue BTKi, T cell response against spike protein and relative neutralising antibody titre against SARS-CoV-2 viral variants. Additionally, there will be an investigation of any effects in those given influenza vaccination contemporaneously versus COVID-19 alone.The primary analysis will be performed on the as randomised groups ('intention to treat'). The difference between the study arms in anti-spike-RBD antibody level will be estimated using a mixed effects regression model, allowing for repeated measures clustered within participants. The model will be adjusted for randomisation factor (first line or subsequent line of therapy), and prior infection status obtained from prerandomisation antinucleocapsid antibodies as fixed effects. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by Leeds East Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority (REC Reference:22/YH/0226, IRAS ID: 319057). Dissemination will be via peer-review publications, newsletters and conferences. Results will be communicated to participants, the CLL patient and clinical communities and health policy-makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14197181.

Construct-related validity of the strengths and difficulties questionnaires with three and five dimensions: A multitrait-multimethod analysis.

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is one of the most broadly used questionnaires to evaluate children's psychological adjustment, however its internal structure has been a target of ongoing controversy. Recent studies suggested a three-factor structure of the SDQ, however data is still scarce. The present study used the Multitrait-Multimethod analysis to examine SDQ construct related-validity with three and five dimensions, provided by children, their parents and teachers. A total of 415 participants were recruited from a Portuguese community sample. Both SDQ versions presented good convergence-related validity, with higher values for the five version. Findings from this study suggest that the SDQ with three dimensions could be more suitable as a screening measure of children's psychological adjustment in a community low-risk sample. Nevertheless, the SDQ still needs further psychometric improvements in order to properly collect information from multi-source samples about the prevalence of children's psychological adjustment.

Are the children alright? A systematic review of psychological adjustment of children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies.

The present systematic review aims to assess the psychological adjustment of children born through assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and to screen for clinical problems when compared with normative data from the standardized indexes of mental health. Following PRISMA guidelines, the search was conducted from inception through September 2021 using APA PsycInfo, APA PsycArticles, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, Academic Search Complete, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Scielo, and RCAAP. Search terms related to ART and children's psychological adjustment were combined to Boolean operators to identify relevant published studies in English, French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish. Peer-reviewed studies focused on the psychological adjustment of ART children aged between the 3 and 11 years were included. From a total of 337 results, 45 papers were eligible to be included in this review. Data extraction was performed independently by two authors and revised and confirmed by other two authors. All children scored below the clinical range for psychiatric symptoms when compared with normative data for the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) or the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA), regardless of type of ART and different family configurations. Further, some evidence suggests that surrogacy children with gay fathers present the lowest levels of psychological problems when compared to normative data. These findings enable practitioners to develop an informed view of ART children mental health outcomes to help parents find more adaptive strategies to navigate their chosen pathways in healthier ways.

Hormone replacement therapy (conjugated oestrogens plus bazedoxifene) for post-menopausal women with symptomatic hand osteoarthritis: primary report from the HOPE-e randomised, placebo-controlled, feasibility study.

Background: Symptomatic hand osteoarthritis is more common in women than in men, and its incidence increases around the age of menopause, implicating oestrogen deficiency. No randomised controlled trials of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) have been done in people with hand osteoarthritis. We aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a form of HRT (conjugated oestrogens plus bazedoxifene) in post-menopausal women with painful hand osteoarthritis. Methods: The HOPE-e feasibility study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, for which we recruited women aged 40-65 years, for whom 1-10 years had passed after their final menstrual period, with definite hand osteoarthritis and at least two painful hand joints. Participants were recruited across three primary or secondary care sites and from the community and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive conjugated oestrogens plus bazedoxifene or placebo, orally once every day for 24 weeks, before weaning for 4 weeks until the end of the study. The primary feasibility outcomes were rates of identification, recruitment, randomisation, retention, and compliance of eligible participants, and the likelihood of unmasking. The secondary objective was to generate proof-of-concept quantitative and qualitative data on the acceptability of proposed clinical outcomes for a full trial and adverse events. We used an intention-to-treat analysis, and criteria for progression to a full trial were pre-defined as recruitment of at least 30 participants across all sites in 18 months; a dropout rate of less than or equal to 30% of randomised individuals; and acceptability to the majority of participants, including acceptable rates of adverse events. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the recruitment window was reduced to 12-15 months. A proportionately reduced minimum sample size of 22 was judged to be sufficient to test feasibility. This trial was registered at ISRCTN, ISRCTN12196200. Findings: From May 9, 2019 to Dec 31, 2020, 434 enquiries or referrals were received. We did 96 telephone pre-screens; of the 35 eligible participants, seven were excluded as ineligible at the telephone or face-to-face screening and 28 (80% [95% CI 63-92]) were randomly assigned. Of the 406 who were not randomly assigned, 250 (62%) were ineligible (with contraindicated medications accounting for 50 [20%] of these), 101 (25%) did not respond to further enquiries, and 55 (14%) chose not to proceed (with the most common reason being not wanting to take a hormone-based drug). All 28 randomised participants completed all follow-up assessments with high compliance and outcome measure completeness. All three adverse event-related treatment withdrawals were in the placebo group. No serious adverse events were reported. Participants and investigators were successfully masked (participant Bang's blinding index placebo group 0·50 [95% CI 0·25-0·75]). The trial met the prespecified criteria for progression to a full trial. Interpretation: This first-ever feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial of HRT for post-menopausal women with painful hand osteoarthritis met its progression criteria, although it was not powered to detect a clinical effect. This outcome indicates that a full trial of an HRT in this population is feasible and acceptable and identifies potential refinements with regard to the design of such a trial. Funding: Research for Patient Benefit programme, National Institute for Health Research.

Effect of a 2-week interruption in methotrexate treatment versus continued treatment on COVID-19 booster vaccine immunity in adults with inflammatory conditions (VROOM study): a randomised, open label, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressive treatments inhibit vaccine-induced immunity against SARS-CoV-2. We evaluated whether a 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment immediately after the COVID-19 vaccine booster improved antibody responses against the S1 receptor-binding domain (S1-RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein compared with uninterrupted treatment in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHODS: We did an open-label, prospective, two-arm, parallel-group, multicentre, randomised, controlled, superiority trial in 26 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults from rheumatology and dermatology clinics who had been diagnosed with an immune-mediated inflammatory disease (eg, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis with or without arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, atopic dermatitis, polymyalgia rheumatica, and systemic lupus erythematosus) and who were taking low-dose weekly methotrexate (≤25 mg per week) for at least 3 months. Participants also had to have received two primary vaccine doses from the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme. We randomly assigned the participants (1:1), using a centralised validated computer randomisation program, to suspend methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks immediately after their COVID-19 booster (suspend methotrexate group) or to continue treatment as usual (continue methotrexate group). Participants, investigators, clinical research staff, and data analysts were unmasked, while researchers doing the laboratory analyses were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was S1-RBD antibody titres 4 weeks after receiving the COVID-19 booster vaccine dose, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ISRCT, ISRCTN11442263; following the pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was stopped early. FINDINGS: Between Sept 30, 2021 and March 3, 2022, we recruited 340 participants, of whom 254 were included in the interim analysis and had been randomly assigned to one of the two groups: 127 in the continue methotrexate group and 127 in the suspend methotrexate group. Their mean age was 59·1 years, 155 (61%) were female, 130 (51%) had rheumatoid arthritis, and 86 (34%) had psoriasis with or without arthritis. After 4 weeks, the geometric mean S1-RBD antibody titre was 22 750 U/mL (95% CI 19 314-26 796) in the suspend methotrexate group and 10 798 U/mL (8970-12 997) in the continue methotrexate group, with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 2·19 (95% CI 1·57-3·04; p<0·0001; mixed-effects model). The increased antibody response in the suspend methotrexate group was consistent across methotrexate dose, administration route, type of immune-mediated inflammatory disease, age, primary vaccination platform, and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were no intervention-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: A 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment for people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases resulted in enhanced boosting of antibody responses after COVID-19 vaccination. This intervention is simple, low-cost, and easy to implement, and could potentially translate to increased vaccine efficacy and duration of protection for susceptible groups. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Effects of temporarily suspending low-dose methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster on vaccine response in immunosuppressed adults with inflammatory conditions: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial and nested mechanistic substudy (Vaccine Response On/Off Methotrexate (VROOM) study).

INTRODUCTION: It is unknown if a temporary break in long-term immune-suppressive treatment after vaccination against COVID-19 improves vaccine response. The objective of this study was to evaluate if a 2-week interruption in low-dose weekly methotrexate treatment after SARS-CoV-2 vaccine boosters enhances the immune response compared with continuing treatment in adults with autoimmune inflammatory conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An open-label, pragmatic, prospective, parallel group, randomised controlled superiority trial with internal feasibility assessment and nested mechanistic substudy will be conducted in rheumatology and dermatology clinics in approximately 25 UK hospitals. The sample size is 560, randomised 1:1 to intervention and usual care arms. The main outcome measure is anti-spike receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibody level, collected at prebooster (baseline), 4 weeks (primary outcome) and 12 weeks (secondary outcome) post booster vaccination. Other secondary outcome measures are patient global assessments of disease activity, disease flares and their treatment, EuroQol 5- dimention 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), self-reported adherence with advice to interrupt or continue methotrexate, neutralising antibody titre against SARS-CoV-2 (mechanistic substudy) and oral methotrexate biochemical adherence (mechanistic substudy). Analysis of B-cell memory and T-cell responses at baseline and weeks 4 and 12 will be investigated subject to obtaining additional funding. The principal analysis will be performed on the groups as randomised (ie, intention to treat). The difference between the study arms in anti-spike RBD antibody level will be estimated using mixed effects model, allowing for repeated measures clustered within participants. The models will be adjusted for randomisation factors and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Leeds West Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority (REC reference: 21/HRA/3483, IRAS 303827). Participants will be required to give written informed consent before taking part in the trial. Dissemination will be via peer review publications, newsletters and conferences. Results will be communicated to policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11442263.

Hand Osteoarthritis: investigating Pain Effects of estrogen-containing therapy (HOPE-e): a protocol for a feasibility randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is a common condition, causing pain, stiffness and reduced quality of life. Incidence is higher amongst women, particularly around the age of the menopause. Whilst the relationship between sex hormones and OA has been studied in vitro, in epidemiological studies and in clinical trials of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), this study is the first to investigate the effect of estrogen-containing therapy on hand pain in post-menopausal women with symptomatic hand OA in a randomised study design. METHODS: This is a feasibility study of a double-blinded placebo-controlled intervention with 1:1 randomisation to either a combination of conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg and bazedoxifene acetate 20 mg (Duavive) or placebo. The target population is post-menopausal women with symptomatic hand OA, aiming to recruit 60-90 study participants. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of a future fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT). Participants will take the study medication for 24 weeks and be followed up for 28 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcomes used to determine feasibility are eligible participant identification rates and routes; recruitment, randomisation and retention rates of eligible participants; study medication compliance; and the likelihood of unintentional unblinding. Secondary outcomes include measures of hand pain, function, appearance and menopausal symptoms. An end of study questionnaire and focus groups will help to refine the final protocol for a full study. DISCUSSION: Identifying new treatments for symptomatic hand OA is a recognised research priority. The study will help us to understand whether there are sufficient interested and eligible individuals in this target population who would consider HRT for their hand symptoms. It will provide proof-of-concept RCT data on the effects of HRT on hand pain and other clinically relevant outcomes in this population. The study will gain valuable information on the feasibility of a full RCT and how best to run this. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12196200 registered on 15 January 2019.

Treating to target in psoriatic arthritis: assessing real-world outcomes and optimising therapeutic strategy for adults with psoriatic arthritis-study protocol for the MONITOR-PsA study, a trials within cohorts study design.

BACKGROUND: The Tight Control of psoriatic arthritis (TICOPA) trial confirmed improved clinical outcomes with a treat to target (T2T) strategy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This consisted of 4-weekly review and escalation of 'step up' therapy (single disease modifying therapy (DMARD), combination DMARDs and then biologics) based on remission criteria. Based on this, a T2T approach is supported by European PsA treatment recommendations. However, it is not commonly implemented in routine care primarily due to feasibility and cost concerns. In the TICOPA trial, the same treatment regime was used for all participants regardless of their disease profile. Despite the recognition of PsA as a highly heterogeneous condition, no studies have tailored which drugs are used depending on disease severity. The cohort will establish real world outcomes for the T2T approach in PsA and also form the basis of a trials within cohorts (TWiCs) design to test alternative therapeutic approaches within embedded clinical trials providing an evidence base for treatment strategy in PsA. METHODS: The Multicentre Observational Initiative in Treat to target Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis (MONITOR-PsA) cohort will apply a T2T approach within routine care. It will recruit newly diagnosed adult patients with PsA starting systemic therapies. The cohort is observational allowing routine therapeutic care within NHS clinics but a T2T approach will be supported when monitoring treatment within the cohort. Eligible participants will be adults (≥18 years) with active PsA with ≥ 1 tender or swollen joints or enthesis who have not previously had treatment with DMARDs for articular disease. DISCUSSION: This study is the first TWiC designed to support a fully powered randomised drug trial. The results from the observational cohort will be compared with those observed in the TICOPA trial investigating the clinical effectiveness and health care costs of the pragmatic T2T approach. Nested trials will provide definitive RCT evidence establishing the optimal management of PsA within the T2T approach. The TWiCs design allows robust generalizability to routine healthcare, avoids disappointment bias, aids recruitment and in future will allow assessment of longer-term outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03531073 . Retrospectively registered on 21 May 2018.

Family Sense of Coherence Scale: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a Portuguese Sample.

Background: Family sense of coherence (FSOC) can be defined as the cognitive map of a family that enables the family to deal with stress during their lifetime. FSOC is the degree to which a family perceives family life as comprehensible, manageable, and meaningful. To the best of our knowledge, few studies have used this scale, and very few have evaluated FSOC Scale psychometric properties. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the original FSOC Scale in a sample of Portuguese caregivers of children aged between 10 and 15 years. Methods: A total of 329 caregivers completed a sociodemographic questionnaire and the FSOC Scale. Analyses were performed to evaluate the factor structure of the FSOC Scale with 26 items as well as composite reliability, internal consistency, convergent-related validity, and discriminant-related validity of the scale scores. Results: The findings supported a three-factor solution for a 13-item version that maintains the original FSOC Scale structure. The three FSOC dimensions presented a good fit to the data. Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, and convergent-related validity were considered very good for the FSOC Scale (α = 0.956; CR = 0.974; AVE = 0.689). No evidence of discriminant-related validity was found for the dimensions of FSOC. Conclusion: The findings support the use of the Portuguese FSOC Scale for research and clinical purposes with Portuguese caregivers. Future research is necessary to further develop a European Portuguese version of the FSOC Scale. Implications: This study provides a psychometric evaluation of FSOC Scale characteristics in a Portuguese sample. The results are helpful for clinicians and family therapists who work with families since it could help them to assess the resources of families and their ability to cope with adversity and enhance their strengths.

Clinical effectiveness of symptomatic therapy compared with standard step-up care for the treatment of low-impact psoriatic oligoarthritis: the two-arm parallel group randomised POISE feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: In psoriatic arthritis (PsA), treatment recommendations support first-line use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). There are few treatment strategy trials, and no previous studies have investigated tailored treatment choice by disease severity. Studies in oligoarthritis (<5 inflamed joints) are limited but have suggested that some can be managed without DMARDs, preventing unnecessary side effects. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a study comparing standard DMARD treatment against symptomatic therapy in patients with mild psoriatic oligoarthritis. METHODS: This trial was embedded within the MONITOR-PsA cohort, which uses a Trials Within Cohorts (TWiCs) design. Patients with newly diagnosed psoriatic oligoarthritis, with low disease activity (PASDAS ⩽ 3.2) and the absence of poor prognostic factors [C reactive protein (CRP) < 5 mg/dL, HAQ < 1, no radiographic erosions] were randomised open-label to either standard care with 'step-up' DMARD therapy or to symptomatic therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and local corticosteroid injections to inflamed joints. Key outcomes were the proportion of eligible cohort patients, consent and study completion rate. RESULTS: Over the 15-month study period, only one eligible patient was randomised. Although oligoarthritis patients represented 45% of patients in this early PsA cohort, the majority did not have mild disease (24% raised CRP, 51% moderate disease activity, 13% radiographic damage and/or poor function). Of those meeting trial inclusion criteria, many patients refused treatment in the observational cohort prior to an invitation into the trial as they did not wish to be treated with DMARDs. CONCLUSION: The study was not feasible as designed. Oligoarthritis represents around half of initial PsA presentations, but the majority starting therapy have high-impact disease. A small proportion have mild oligoarticular disease but many are not keen on treatment with DMARDs, given the potential side effects of these medications. Further research is needed to support evidence-based treatment in this subgroup. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: - ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03797872) and EudraCT (2018-001085-42).

Ter duas mães: dinâmica da triangulação em filhos de casais de lésbicas / Having two mothers: the triangulation dynamics of children in lesbian led families / Avoir deux mères: dynamique de la triangulation chez des enfants de couples de lesbiennes

As autoras fazem uma reflexão teórica centrada em duas questões fundamentais equacionadas pela psicanálise: a triangulação edipiana e a identificação. O objetivo é o de problematizar a dinâmica destes dois processos em crianças vivendo com duas mães, o que anula a oposição básica binária e obriga a construção de novos posicionamentos sobre a diferenciação e a organização interna frente a esse novo cenário familiar. Com isso, são discutidas novas possibilidades de arranjo triangular, identificatório e de diferenciação frente à ausência de uma polarização anatômica, quer se trate dos meninos, quer das meninas de uma família constituída por duas mães.

The authors are reflecting about two fundamental questions considered by psychoanalysis: Oedipus triangulation and identification. The main purpose is to problematize the dynamic of these two processes in children from families with two mothers. These modern families invalidate the basic gender binary concept and forces the development of new theoretical positions about internal differentiation and organization. Therefore, new possible arrangements of triangulation, identification and differentiation are discussed due to the absence of an anatomic polarization, both for boys and girls from lesbian-led families.

Les auteurs font une réflexion théorique centrée sur deux questions fondamentales posées par la psychanalyse: la triangulation œdipienne et l'identification. Le but est celui de problématiser la dynamique de ces deux processus chez des enfants qui vivent avec deux mères, ce qui annule l'opposition binaire de base et force la construction de nouveaux positionnements sur la différentiation et l'organisation interne face à ce nouveau scénario familial. On discute les nouvelles possibilités de compositions triangulaires, identificatoires et de différentiation face à l'absence de polarisation anatomique, qu'il s'agisse des garçons et des filles dans une famille composée par deux mères.

Rates of Mortality in Lumbar Spine Surgery and Factors Associated With Its Occurrence Over a 10-Year Period: A Study of 803,949 Patients in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: The rate of mortality in surgical procedures involving the lumbar spine has historically been low, and as a result, there has been difficulty providing accurate quantitative mortality rates to patients in the preoperative planning phase. Awareness of these mortality rates is essential in reducing postoperative complications and improving outcomes. Additionally, mortality rates can be influenced by procedure type and patient profile, including demographics and comorbidities. The purpose of this study is to assess rates and risk factors associated with mortality in surgical procedures involving the lumbar spine using a large national database. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was reviewed from 2003 to 2012. A total of 803,949 patients age 18 years or older were identified by ICD-9CM procedure codes for spinal fusion or decompression of the lumbar spine. Mortality was stratified based on type of procedure (simple or complex fusion, decompression), patient demographics and comorbidities, and in-hospital complications. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the risk of death while controlling for comorbidities, race, sex, and procedure performed. Significance was defined as P < .05 differences relative to the overall cohort. RESULTS: Mortality for all patients requiring surgery of the lumbar spine was 0.13%. Mortality based on procedure type was 0.105% for simple fusions, 0.321% for complex fusions, and 0.081% for decompression only. Increased mortality was observed demographically in patients who were male (odds ratio [OR]: 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51-2.03), black (OR: 1.40; CI: 1.10-1.79), ages 65-74 (OR: 1.46; CI: 1.25-1.70), and age 75+ (OR: 2.70; CI: 2.30-3.17). Comorbidities associated with the greatest increase in mortality were mild (OR: 10.04; CI: 7.76-13.01) and severe (OR: 26.47; CI: 16.03-43.70) liver disease and congestive heart failure (OR: 4.57; CI: 3.77-5.53). The complications with the highest mortality rates were shock (OR: 20.67; CI: 13.89-30.56) and pulmonary embolism (OR: 20.15; CI: 14.01-29.00). CONCLUSIONS: From 2003 to 2012, the overall mortality rate in 803,949 lumbar spine surgery patients was 0.13%. Risk factors that were significantly associated with increased mortality rates were male gender, black race, and ages 65-74 and 75+. Comorbidities associated with an increased mortality rate were mild and severe liver disease and congestive heart failure. Inpatient complications with the highest mortality rates were shock and pulmonary embolism. These findings can be helpful to surgeons providing preoperative counseling for patients considering elective lumbar procedures and for allocating resources to treat and prevent perioperative complications leading to mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

First-line selective internal radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global): a combined analysis of three multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) in third-line or subsequent therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer has clinical benefit in patients with colorectal liver metastases with liver-dominant disease after chemotherapy. The FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global randomised studies evaluated the efficacy of combining first-line chemotherapy with SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with liver metastases. The studies were designed for combined analysis of overall survival. METHODS: FOXFIRE, SIRFLOX, and FOXFIRE-Global were randomised, phase 3 trials done in hospitals and specialist liver centres in 14 countries worldwide (Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WHO performance status 0 or 1) with liver metastases not suitable for curative resection or ablation were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (FOLFOX: leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX plus single treatment SIRT concurrent with cycle 1 or 2 of chemotherapy. In FOXFIRE, FOLFOX chemotherapy was OxMdG (oxaliplatin modified de Gramont chemotherapy; 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, L-leucovorin 175 mg or D,L-leucovorin 350 mg infusion over 2 h, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). In SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global, FOLFOX chemotherapy was modified FOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin infusion over 2 h, 200 mg leucovorin, and 400 mg/m2 bolus fluorouracil followed by a 2400 mg/m2 continuous fluorouracil infusion over 46 h). Randomisation was done by central minimisation with four factors: presence of extrahepatic metastases, tumour involvement of the liver, planned use of a biological agent, and investigational centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, using a two-stage meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data. All three trials have completed 2 years of follow-up. FOXFIRE is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83867919. SIRFLOX and FOXFIRE-Global are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00724503 (SIRFLOX) and NCT01721954 (FOXFIRE-Global). FINDINGS: Between Oct 11, 2006, and Dec 23, 2014, 549 patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX alone and 554 patients were assigned FOLFOX plus SIRT. Median follow-up was 43·3 months (IQR 31·6-58·4). There were 411 (75%) deaths in 549 patients in the FOLFOX alone group and 433 (78%) deaths in 554 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group. There was no difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·19; p=0·61). The median survival time in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group was 22·6 months (95% CI 21·0-24·5) compared with 23·3 months (21·8-24·7) in the FOLFOX alone group. In the safety population containing patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, as treated, the most common grade 3-4 adverse event was neutropenia (137 [24%] of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone vs 186 (37%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 244 (43%) of 571 patients receiving FOLFOX alone and 274 (54%) of 507 patients receiving FOLFOX plus SIRT. 10 patients in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and 11 patients in the FOLFOX alone group died due to an adverse event; eight treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX plus SIRT group and three treatment-related deaths occurred in the FOLFOX alone group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of SIRT to first-line FOLFOX chemotherapy for patients with liver-only and liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve overall survival compared with that for FOLFOX alone. Therefore, early use of SIRT in combination with chemotherapy in unselected patients with metastatic colorectal cancer cannot be recommended. To further define the role of SIRT in metastatic colorectal cancer, careful patient selection and studies investigating the role of SIRT as consolidation therapy after chemotherapy are needed. FUNDING: Bobby Moore Fund of Cancer Research UK, Sirtex Medical.

Single arm NCRI phase II study of CHOP in combination with Ofatumumab in induction and maintenance for patients with newly diagnosed Richter's syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Transformation of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (B-CLL) to diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) (Richter's syndrome (RS)) is a rare (2-15% of patients) but catastrophic complication of B-CLL. Dose-intense chemotherapy regimens investigated in small single institution trials, but with the exception of bone marrow transplantation for a minority of patients, little has improved the median overall survival of patients with RS beyond eight months. Patients are often elderly, immunosuppressed, possess co-morbidities and have a deteriorating performance status. TP53 disruption is a common molecular abnormality noted in RS and contributes to the tumour's chemotherapy resistance. Ofatumumab is a fully human anti-CD20 monoclonal IgG1κ antibody that targets a unique epitope on B lymphocytes. It has displayed increased binding affinity and a longer dissociation time when compared to rituximab resulting in improved complement dependent cellular cytotoxicity (CDCC); a mechanism with the potential to overcome apoptosis-resistance in TP53 disruption. Given the prevalence of TP53 disruption in RS, Ofatumumab was considered a relatively non-toxic agent with a sound rationale to test in a prospective multicentre trial as an adjunct to CHOP induction and subsequent ofatumumab maintenance therapy in responding patients. METHODS/DESIGN: The CHOP-OR study is a prospective phase II study to evaluate the safety, feasibility and activity of a CHOP chemotherapy in combination with ofatumumab in induction and subsequent maintenance for patients with newly diagnosed RS. The primary objective will be the overall response rate (ORR) in patients with RS after six cycles of CHOP-O. The secondary objectives include feasibility of recruitment, progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The study will be accompanied by exploratory analysis of the genomic landscape of RS in newly diagnosed patients. DISCUSSION: The CHOP-OR trial evaluates the safety, feasibility and activity of CHOP plus Ofatumumab induction and Ofatumumab maintenance in new RS patients. The study is currently recruiting and has met the interim analysis criteria, with more than 7 of the first 25 participants achieving a CR or PR after six cycles of CHOP-O. The study has the potential to identify predictive biomarkers for this treatment modality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01171378.

EnROL: a multicentre randomised trial of conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme.

BACKGROUND: During the last two decades the use of laparoscopic resection and a multimodal approach known as an enhanced recovery programme, have been major changes in colorectal perioperative care. Clinical outcome improves using laparoscopic surgery to resect colorectal cancer but until recently no multicentre trial evidence had been reported regarding whether the benefits of laparoscopy still exist when open surgery is optimized within an enhanced recovery programme. The EnROL trial (Enhanced Recovery Open versus Laparoscopic) examines the hypothesis that laparoscopic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme will provide superior postoperative outcomes when compared to conventional open resection of colorectal cancer within the same programme. METHODS/DESIGN: EnROL is a phase III, multicentre, randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open resection of colon and rectal cancer with blinding of patients and outcome observers to the treatment allocation for the first 7 days post-operatively, or until discharge if earlier. 202 patients will be recruited at approximately 12 UK hospitals and randomised using minimization at a central computer system in a 1:1 ratio. Recruiting surgeons will previously have performed >100 laparoscopic colorectal resections and >50 open total mesorectal excisions to minimize conversion. Eligible patients are those suitable for elective resection using either technique. Excluded patients include: those with acute intestinal obstruction and patients in whom conversion from laparoscopic to open procedure is likely. The primary outcome is physical fatigue as measured by the physical fatigue domain of the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 (MFI-20) with secondary outcomes including postoperative hospital stay; complications; reoperation and readmission; quality of life indicators; cosmetic assessments; standardized performance indicators; health economic analysis; the other four domains of the MFI-20. Pathological assessment of surgical quality will also be undertaken and compliance with the enhanced recovery programme will be recorded for all patients. DISCUSSION: Should this trial demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery confers a significant clinical and/or health economic benefit this will further support the transition to this type of surgery, with implications for the training of surgeons and resource allocation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN48516968.

Delivering adolescent vaccinations in the medical home: a new era?

BACKGROUND: Medical homes are health care settings that offer continuous, comprehensive, accessible primary care; these settings generally involve pediatric and family physician practices or community health centers but can also involve gynecologists or internists. OBJECTIVES: In this article, we review available evidence on the role of the medical home in optimizing adolescent immunization delivery, particularly with respect to health care utilization patterns and barriers to vaccinations in medical homes, and solutions. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the existing immunization and adolescent literature and used a Delphi process to solicit opinions from content experts across the United States. RESULTS: Most adolescents across the United States do have a medical home, and many pay a health care visit to their medical home within any given year. Barriers exist in regards to the receipt of adolescent immunizations, and they are related to the adolescent/family, health care provider, and health care system. Although few studies have evaluated adolescent vaccination delivery, many strategies recommended for childhood or adult vaccinations should be effective for adolescent vaccination delivery as well. These strategies include education of health care providers and adolescents/parents; having appropriate health insurance coverage; tracking and reminder/recall of adolescents who need vaccination; practice-level interventions to ensure that needed vaccinations are provided to eligible adolescents at the time of any health care visit; practice-level audits to measure vaccination coverage; and linkages across health care sites to exchange information about needed vaccinations. Medical homes should perform a quality improvement project to improve their delivery of adolescent vaccinations. Because many adolescents use a variety of health care sites, it is critical to effectively transfer vaccination information across health care settings to identify adolescents who are eligible for vaccinations and to encourage receipt of comprehensive preventive. CONCLUSIONS: Medical homes are integral to both the delivery of adolescent immunizations and comprehensive adolescent preventive health care. Many strategies recommended for childhood and adult vaccinations should work for adolescent vaccinations and should be evaluated and implemented if they are successful. By incorporating evidence-based strategies and coordinating effectively with other health care sites used by adolescents, medical homes will be the pivotal settings for the delivery of adolescent vaccinations.

Acellular pertussis vaccine boosters combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoid boosters for adolescents: safety and immunogenicity assessment when preceded by different 5-dose DTaP/DTwP schedules.

A sixth dose of tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine in adolescents might produce a differing reactogenicity and/or immunogenicity response depending on the composition of the 5 prior doses of DTaP or DT-whole cell pertussis (DTwP) vaccine. Reactions and immune responses following receipt of the Sanofi Pasteur (Adacel) and GlaxoSmithKline (Boostrix) Tdap vaccines were assessed in 229 adolescents. No differences were observed for reactions to either Tdap vaccine regardless of the prior DTaP/DTwP vaccination history. Seroprotective levels and antibody concentrations were comparable regardless of prior DTaP/DTwP vaccine history. A sixth sequential dose of Tdap after 5 doses of DTaP appears safe and immunogenic.

Efficacy of cephalexin two vs. three times daily vs. cefadroxil once daily for streptococcal tonsillopharyngitis.

The purpose of this study was to compare the bacteriologic and clinical efficacy of oral cephalexin twice vs. three times daily vs. cefadroxil once daily as therapy for group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal (GABHS) tonsillopharyngitis. A prospective open-label, observational cohort study was conducted over 18 months (January 2000-June 2001). Children enrolled had an acute onset of symptoms and signs of a tonsillopharyngeal illness and a laboratory-documented GABHS infection. Follow-up examination and laboratory testing occurred 21 +/- 4 days following enrollment. Two hundred seventy-one patients were enrolled (intent to treat group): 63 received cephalexin twice daily, 124 received cephalexin three times daily, and 84 received cefadroxil once daily. Fifty-three children did not return for the follow-up visit, leaving 218 patients in the per-protocol group: 54 cephalexin twice-daily treated, 94 cephalexin 3-times daily treated, and 70 cefadroxil once-daily treated. In the per-protocol group, bacteriologic cure for those treated with cephalexin twice daily was 87%, for cephalexin 3 times daily, it was 81% and for cefadroxil once daily it was 81% (p = 0.61). The clinical cure rate for cephalexin twice-daily treatment was 91%; for three-times daily, it was 86%; and for cefadroxil once daily, it was 84% (p = 0.56). Because treatment allocation was not randomized, logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for treatment group differences. Younger age of patient was significantly associated with bacteriologic (p = 0.04) and clinical (p = 0.01) failure independent of treatment group but in the adjusted logistic model no differences were found among the 3 treatment regimens. Cephalexin dosed twice daily or three times daily and cefadroxil dosed once daily appear equivalent in bacteriologic and clinical cure of GABHS tonsillopharyngitis.