The prevalence of late-follicular phase progesterone elevation and impact on the ongoing pregnancy rate after fresh and frozen blastocyst transfer. Sub-study of an RCT.

The effect of late-follicular phase progesterone elevation (LFPE) during ovarian stimulation on reproductive outcomes in ART treatment remains controversial, but recent studies indicate lower pregnancy rates with rising progesterone levels. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of late-follicular phase progesterone elevation (LFPE) and possible impact on ongoing pregnancy rate after fresh or frozen blastocyst transfer in a sub-study setting of a randomised controlled trial. A total of 288 women were included (n=137 and n=151 in the fresh transfer and freeze-all group, respectively). Among these 11(3.8%) had a progesterone level ≥1.5 ng/ml, and 20(6.9%) had a progesterone level ≥1.2 ng/ml on trigger day. Spline regression analysis showed no significant effect of late follicular phase progesterone levels on ongoing pregnancy. In the multivariate regression analysis (n = 312) only age, but not progesterone level on trigger day was significantly associated with ongoing pregnancy. In conclusion, in a clinical setting with moderate gonadotrophin stimulation and well-defined trigger and fresh transfer cancellation criteria, the prevalence of women with LFPE ≥1.5 ng/ml was low and did not indicate the clinical value of routine measurement of progesterone in the late follicular phase.

A composite immune and vascular stress marker in patients newly diagnosed with bipolar disorder and their unaffected first-degree relatives.

AIMS: Substantial evidence emphasizes immune dysregulation in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). However, whether immune dysregulation is present already in the early illness stages of BD or even precedes development of BD is largely unknown. In this study we compared immune and vascular stress markers in patients newly diagnosed with BD, their unaffected first-degree relatives (UR) and healthy control individuals (HC) and investigated the ability a composite immune and vascular stress marker to discriminate between the three groups of participants. METHODS: In a unique sample including 373 patients newly diagnosed with BD, 95 UR and 190 HC, we compared 47 immune and vascular stress markers at the baseline visit in the ongoing longitudinal Bipolar Illness Onset study. For comparison of individual immune and vascular stress markers between groups, we applied linear mixed models, whereas the composite immune and vascular stress marker was investigated using the SuperLearner ensemble-method. RESULTS: Compared with HC, patients newly diagnosed with BD had higher levels of the anti-inflammatory interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA) and IL-10, and of the pro-inflammatory IL-6, eotaxin, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), MCP-4, Macrophage Derived Chemokine (MDC), and Thymus and Activation-Regulated Chemokine (TARC) in analyses adjusted for sex and age ranging from 26 % higher levels of IL-6 (1.26, 95 %CI: [1.12-1.43], p < 0.001, adjusted p = 0.009) and IL-10 (1.26, 95 %CI: [1.09-1.46], p = 0.002, adjusted p = 0.049), respectively, to 9 % higher eotaxin levels (1.09, 95 %CI: [1.04-1.15], p = 0.001, adjusted p = 0.024). Of these, MDC levels were 12 % higher in BD compared with UR (1.12, 95 %CI: [1.02-1.22], p = 0.001, adjusted p = 0.024). For all other markers, UR showed no difference from patients with BD or HC. Based on a data-driven model, a composite marker including all 47 immune and vascular stress markers, sex, age, BMI, smoking status, and alcohol intake, discriminated patients with BD from HC with a with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.77) CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory immune markers are present in patients newly diagnosed with BD but not in UR compared with HC, supporting immune dysregulation playing a role in the pathophysiology of BD.

Disease progression of retinitis pigmentosa caused by PRPF31 variants in a Nordic population: a retrospective study with up to 36 years follow-up.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To investigate the natural history of PRPF31-related retinitis pigmentosa (RP11). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified individuals with RP11 and collected retrospective data from disease onset to present date including genetics, demographic data, Goldmann visual field areas, and visual acuity measurements. Visual fields were evaluated as summed squared degrees and best-corrected visual acuity was converted to logMAR. We performed linear mixed model regression analysis to evaluate annual disease progression, and survival analysis to evaluate the age of legal blindness. RESULTS: We included 46 subjects with RP11. Median age of disease onset was 10 years (range 5-65). Follow-up spanned from 0 to 36 years with a median of 8 years. Median Goldmann visual field areas decreased by 10.0% per year (95% CI 7.5%-12.4%) with target IV4e, 7.9% (95% CI 4.5% - 11.2%) with target III4e, and 9.3% (95% CI: 7.0% -11.5%) when combining target sizes. Individuals with RP11 maintained good visual acuity until late stage of disease. Legal blindness was reached at a median age of 57 years (95% CI 50-75 years). CONCLUSIONS: PRPF31 variants cause autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa that most commonly manifests in childhood with a variable disease progression. Visual field area deteriorates faster than visual acuity and was the major cause of legal blindness in our study population. This study characterizes disease progression in retinitis pigmentosa caused by PRPF31-variants and demonstrates the importance of differentiation between specific genotypes when counselling patients and conducting natural history studies of RP.

Early antibiotic use and incidence of necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm infants: a protocol for a UK based observational study using routinely recorded data.

INTRODUCTION: Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) remains a major contributor to preterm mortality and morbidity. Prolonged duration of antibiotic therapy after delivery is associated with later NEC development but recent evidence suggests that absence of antibiotic treatment after delivery may also increase NEC risk. We will explore this controversy using a large pre-existing dataset of preterm infants in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a retrospective cohort study using data from UK National Neonatal Research Database (NNRD) for infants born 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2020. Eligible infants will be <32 weeks gestation, alive on day 3. Primary outcome is development of severe NEC, compared in infants receiving early antibiotics (days 1-2 after birth) and those not. Subgroup analysis on duration of early antibiotic exposure will also occur. Secondary outcomes are: late onset sepsis, total antibiotic use, predischarge mortality, retinopathy of prematurity, intraventricular haemorrhage, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, focal intestinal perforation and any abdominal surgery. To address competing risks, incidence of death before day 7, 14 and 28 will be analysed. We will perform logistic regression and propensity score matched analyses. Statistical analyses will be guided by NEC risk factors, exposures and outcome presented in a causal diagram. These covariates include but are not limited to gestational age, birth weight, small for gestational age, sex, ethnicity, delivery mode, delivery without labour, Apgar score, early feeding and probiotic use. Sensitivity analyses of alternate NEC definitions, specific antibiotics and time of initiation will occur. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will use deidentified data from NNRD, which holds permissions for the original data, from which parents can opt out and seek study-specific research ethics approval. The results will help to determine optimal use of early antibiotics for very preterm infants. IMPLICATIONS: This data will help optimise early antibiotic use in preterm infants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN55101779.

Immediate versus postponed single blastocyst transfer in modified natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (mNC-FET): a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Today, it is widespread practice to postpone frozen embryo transfer (FET) in a modified natural cycle (mNC) for at least one menstrual cycle after oocyte retrieval and failed fresh embryo transfer or freeze-all. The rationale behind this practice is the concern that suboptimal ovarian, endometrial or endocrinological conditions following ovarian stimulation may have a negative impact on endometrial receptivity and implantation. However, two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses based on retrospective data did not support this practice. As unnecessary delay in time to transfer and pregnancy should be avoided, the aim of this study is to investigate if immediate single blastocyst transfer in mNC-FET is non-inferior to standard postponed single blastocyst transfer in mNC-FET in terms of live birth rate. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre randomised controlled non-blinded trial including 464 normo-ovulatory women aged 18-40 years undergoing single blastocyst mNC-FET after a failed fresh or freeze-all cycle. Participants are randomised 1:1 to either FET in the first menstrual cycle following the stimulated cycle (immediate FET) or FET in the second or subsequent cycle following the stimulated cycle (postponed FET). The study is designed as a non-inferiority trial and primary analyses will be performed as intention to treat and per protocol. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Scientific Ethical Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (J-nr.: H-19086300). Data will be handled according to Danish law on personal data protection in accordance with the general data protection regulation. Participants will complete written consent forms regarding participation in the study and storage of blood samples in a biobank for future research. The study will be monitored by a Good Clinical Practice (GCP)-trained study nurse not otherwise involved in the study. The results of this study will be disseminated by publication in international peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04748874; Pre-results.

Protocol for a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, double-dummy 6-week clinical trial comparing the treatment effects of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide versus the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam on bile acid malabsorption.

INTRODUCTION: Bile acid malabsorption (BAM) is a socially debilitating disease characterised by high stool frequency and urgency caused by a spillover of bile acids into the colon. Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) have limited therapeutic effect but represent the only available treatment option. Cases reporting total remission of BAM-related symptoms after treatment with liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, prompted us to design a clinical trial investigating the therapeutic effect of this compound in patients with BAM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty adult individuals with moderate or severe BAM as assessed by the 75selenium-homotaurocholic acid test (SeHCAT) will, after a run-in period of 10 days with no BAM treatment, be randomised to either treatment with the BAS colesevelam or liraglutide (double blinded) for 6 weeks. Daily symptom diaries and questionnaires will be filled in. Blood and faecal samples will be collected and SeHCAT will be performed at baseline, after week 3 and at end of trial. The primary endpoint is change in daily stool frequency. Secondary endpoints include changes from baseline in questionnaires, biochemistry, SeHCAT and faecal bile acid content and microbial composition. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study complies with Danish and European Union legislation and is approved by the Danish Medicines Agency, the Regional Scientific Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark and the Danish Data Protection Agency. The study is monitored by the Capital Region of Denmark's good clinical practice unit. All results, positive, negative and inconclusive, will be disseminated at national and/or international scientific meetings and in peer-reviewed scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCA: 2018-003575-34; Pre-results.