Acupuncture for hot flashes in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: A pooled analysis of individual patient data from parallel randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Hot flashes are a common side effect of endocrine therapy (ET) that contribute to poor quality of life and decreased treatment adherence. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer wo were receiving ET and experiencing hot flashes were enrolled through three parallel, randomized trials conducted in the United States, China, and South Korea. Participants were randomized to either immediate acupuncture (IA) or delayed acupuncture control (DAC). IA participants received 20 acupuncture sessions over 10 weeks, whereas DAC participants received usual care, then crossed over to acupuncture with a reduced intensity. The primary end point was a change in score on the endocrine symptom subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT)-Endocrine Symptoms between baseline and week 10. Secondary end points included the hot flash score and the FACT-Breast score. A planned pooled analysis of individual patient data was performed using longitudinal mixed models. RESULTS: In total, 158 women with stage 0-III breast cancer were randomized (United States, n = 78; China, n = 40; South Korea, n = 40). At week 10, IA participants reported statistically significant improvements in the endocrine symptom subscale score (mean change ± standard error: 5.1 ± 0.9 vs. 0.2 ± 1.0; p = .0003), the hot flash score (-5.3 ± 0.9 vs. -1.4 ± 0.9; p < .003), and the FACT-Breast total score (8.0 ± 1.6 vs. -0.01 ± 1.6; p = .0005) compared with DAC participants. The effect of the acupuncture intervention differed by site (p = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture led to statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in hot flashes, endocrine symptoms, and breast cancer-specific quality of life in women undergoing ET for breast cancer in the United States, China, and South Korea.

A Federally Qualified Health Center-led Ethics & Equity Framework & Workflow Checklist: An Invited Commentary in Response to a Relational Public Health Framing of FQHCs During COVID-19.

With disparate rates of morbidity and mortality among minoritized communities, COVID-19 illuminated the need for equity-informed practices in public health. Pacia et al posit FQHCs as entities that addressed inequity when others failed. This commentary further situates how FQHCs address the public health crisis of institutional racism and related health inequities every day and presents a FQHC-led Ethics and Equity Framework and Workflow Checklist to guide ethical and equitable engagement with FQHCs.

Heritability estimates identify a substantial genetic contribution to risk and outcome of intracerebral hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies suggest that genetic variation plays a substantial role in occurrence and evolution of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Genetic contribution to disease can be determined by calculating heritability using family-based data, but such an approach is impractical for ICH because of lack of large pedigree-based studies. However, a novel analytic tool based on genome-wide data allows heritability estimation from unrelated subjects. We sought to apply this method to provide heritability estimates for ICH risk, severity, and outcome. METHODS: We analyzed genome-wide genotype data for 791 ICH cases and 876 controls, and determined heritability as the proportion of variation in phenotype attributable to captured genetic variants. Contribution to heritability was separately estimated for the APOE (encoding apolipoprotein E) gene, an established genetic risk factor, and for the rest of the genome. Analyzed phenotypes included ICH risk, admission hematoma volume, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: ICH risk heritability was estimated at 29% (SE, 11%) for non-APOE loci and at 15% (SE, 10%) for APOE. Heritability for 90-day ICH mortality was 41% for non-APOE loci and 10% (SE, 9%) for APOE. Genetic influence on hematoma volume was also substantial: admission volume heritability was estimated at 60% (SE, 70%) for non-APOEloci and at 12% (SE, 4%) for APOE. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variation plays a substantial role in ICH risk, outcome, and hematoma volume. Previously reported risk variants account for only a portion of inherited genetic influence on ICH pathophysiology, pointing to additional loci yet to be identified.

Effect of Ezogabine on Cortical and Spinal Motor Neuron Excitability in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease of the motor nervous system. Clinical studies have demonstrated cortical and spinal motor neuron hyperexcitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation and threshold tracking nerve conduction studies, respectively, although metrics of excitability have not been used as pharmacodynamic biomarkers in multi-site clinical trials. Objective: To ascertain whether ezogabine decreases cortical and spinal motor neuron excitability in ALS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 randomized clinical trial sought consent from eligible participants from November 3, 2015, to November 9, 2017, and was conducted at 12 US sites within the Northeast ALS Consortium. Participants were randomized in equal numbers to a higher or lower dose of ezogabine or to an identical matched placebo, and they completed in-person visits at screening, baseline, week 6, and week 8 for clinical assessment and neurophysiological measurements. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive 600 mg/d or 900 mg/d of ezogabine or a matched placebo for 10 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI; SICI-1 was used in analysis to reflect stronger inhibition from an increase in amplitude) from pretreatment mean at screening and baseline to the full-dose treatment mean at weeks 6 and 8. The secondary outcomes included levels of cortical motor neuron excitability (including resting motor threshold) measured by transcranial magnetic stimulation and spinal motor neuron excitability (including strength-duration time constant) measured by threshold tracking nerve conduction studies. Results: A total of 65 participants were randomized to placebo (23), 600 mg/d of ezogabine (23), and 900 mg/d of ezogabine (19 participants); 45 were men (69.2%) and the mean (SD) age was 58.3 (8.8) years. The SICI-1 increased by 53% (mean ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.09; P = .009) in the 900-mg/d ezogabine group vs placebo group. The SICI-1 did not change in the 600-mg/d ezogabine group vs placebo group (mean ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.87-1.52; P = .31). The resting motor threshold increased in the 600-mg/d ezogabine group vs placebo group (mean ratio, 4.61; 95% CI, 0.21-9.01; P = .04) but not in the 900-mg/d ezogabine group vs placebo group (mean ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, -2.64 to 6.54; P = .40). Ezogabine caused a dose-dependent decrease in excitability by several other metrics, including strength-duration time constant in the 900-mg/d ezogabine group vs placebo group (mean ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.87; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Ezogabine decreased cortical and spinal motor neuron excitability in participants with ALS, suggesting that such neurophysiological metrics may be used as pharmacodynamic biomarkers in multisite clinical trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02450552.

Research participant-centered outcomes at NIH-supported clinical research centers.

BACKGROUND: Although research participation is essential for clinical investigation, few quantitative outcome measures exist to assess participants' experiences. To address this, we developed and deployed a survey at 15 NIH-supported clinical research centers to assess participant-centered outcomes; we report responses from 4,961 participants. METHODS: Survey questions addressed core aspects of the research participants' experience, including their overall rating, motivation, trust, and informed consent. We describe participant characteristics, responses to individual questions, and correlations among responses. RESULTS: Respondents broadly represented the research population in sex, race, and ethnicity. Seventy-three percent awarded top ratings to their overall research experience and 94% reported no pressure to enroll. Top ratings correlated with feeling treated with respect, listened to, and having access to the research team (R(2) = 0.80-0.96). White participants trusted researchers more (88%) than did nonwhite participants collectively (80%; p < 0.0001). Many participants felt fully prepared by the informed consent process (67%) and wanted to receive research results (72%). CONCLUSIONS: Our survey demonstrates that a majority of participants at NIH-supported clinical research centers rate their research experience very positively and that participant-centered outcome measures identify actionable items for improvement of participant's experiences, research protections, and the conduct of clinical investigation.