Interpreting treatment effects in randomised trials

Effect of 5:2 Regimens: Energy-Restricted Diet or Low-Volume High-Intensity Interval Training Combined With Resistance Exercise on Glycemic Control and Cardiometabolic Health in Adults With Overweight/Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes: A Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine the effects of a 5:2 diet (2 days per week of energy restriction by formula diet) or an exercise (2 days per week of high-intensity interval training and resistance training) intervention compared with routine lifestyle education (control) on glycemic control and cardiometabolic health among adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This two-center, open-label, three-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial recruited 326 participants with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes and randomized them into 12 weeks of diet intervention (n = 109), exercise intervention (n = 108), or lifestyle education (control) (n = 109). The primary outcome was the change of glycemic control measured as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) between the diet or exercise intervention groups and the control group after the 12-week intervention.

RESULTS

The diet intervention significantly reduced HbA1c level (%) after the 12-week intervention (-0.72, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.48) compared with the control group (-0.37, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.15) (diet vs. control -0.34, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.11, P = 0.007). The reduction in HbA1c level in the exercise intervention group (-0.46, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.23) did not significantly differ from the control group (exercise vs. control -0.09, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.15, P = 0.47). The exercise intervention group was superior in maintaining lean body mass. Both diet and exercise interventions induced improvements in adiposity and hepatic steatosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the medically supervised 5:2 energy-restricted diet could provide an alternative strategy for improving glycemic control and that the exercise regimen could improve body composition, although it inadequately improved glycemic control.

The oral and systemic health impact profile for periodontal disease (OSHIP-Perio)-Part 2: Responsiveness and minimal important difference

OBJECTIVES

The Oral and Systemic Health Impact Profile for Periodontal Disease (OSHIP-Perio) was developed to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). This study aimed to determine the responsiveness and minimal importance difference (MID) of the OSHIP-Perio.

METHODS

Subjects with periodontal disease completed the OSHIP-Perio at baseline and six to ten weeks after non-surgical periodontal therapy. Comparisons of the clinical variables and the OSHIP-Perio scores before and after treatment were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, together with the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49, OHIP-14 and OHIP-5) scores. The MIDs for all the instruments were calculated using distribution-based methods.

RESULTS

Fifty-one case subjects who completed periodontal treatment and the OSHIP-Perio instrument were included for analysis. Significant improvement in all clinical variables after treatment (p < 0.001) was observed. The OSHIP-Perio total score as well as its four-dimensional scores (periodontal, oral function, orofacial pain and psychosocial impact) were significantly reduced after treatment (p < 0.001), indicating better OHRQoL. Findings were consistent with the other OHIP instruments. In determining the MID, the percentage point change of the OSHIP-Perio was found to be lower than the shorter OHIP-5 instrument when using both effect sizes (ES) (10.71% vs. 15.0% at 0.5SD) and standard error of measurement (SEM) (5.36% vs. 10.0% at 1SEM; 8.93% vs. 20.0% at 2SEM) calculations.

CONCLUSIONS

The OSHIP-Perio demonstrated good responsiveness which was comparable to the OHIP-49 and its short-form derivatives. Its required percentage point change in determining its MID is smaller than the OHIP-5.

Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Corticosteroids for Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated angioedema), but their benefits and harms are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating acute urticaria or chronic urticaria flares with versus without systemic corticosteroids.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM databases from inception to July 8, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of treating urticaria with versus without systemic corticosteroids. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane 2.0 tool. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of urticaria activity, itch severity, and adverse events. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We identified 12 randomized trials enrolling 944 patients. For patients with low or moderate probability (17.5%-64%) to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improve urticaria activity by a 14% to 15% absolute difference (odds ratio [OR], 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-3.31; number needed to treat [NNT], 7; moderate certainty). Among patients with a high chance (95.8%) for urticaria to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improved urticaria activity by a 2.2% absolute difference (NNT, 45; moderate certainty). Corticosteroids may improve itch severity (OR, 2.44; 95% CI: 0.87-6.83; risk difference, 9%; NNT, 11; low certainty). Systemic corticosteroids also likely increase adverse events (OR, 2.76; 95% CI: 1.00-7.62; risk difference, 15%; number needed to harm, 9; moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic corticosteroids for acute urticaria or chronic urticaria exacerbations likely improve urticaria, depending on antihistamine responsiveness, but also likely increase adverse effects in approximately 15% more.

Piloting co-developed behaviour change interventions to reduce exposure to air pollution and improve self-reported asthma-related health

BACKGROUND

Exposure to air pollution can exacerbate asthma with immediate and long-term health consequences. Behaviour changes can reduce exposure to air pollution, yet its 'invisible' nature often leaves individuals unaware of their exposure, complicating the identification of appropriate behaviour modifications. Moreover, making health behaviour changes can be challenging, necessitating additional support from healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot study used personal exposure monitoring, data feedback, and co-developed behaviour change interventions with individuals with asthma, with the goal of reducing personal exposure to PM2.5 and subsequently improving asthma-related health.

METHODS

Twenty-eight participants conducted baseline exposure monitoring for one-week, simultaneously keeping asthma symptom and medication diaries (previously published in McCarron et al., 2023). Participants were then randomised into control (n = 8) or intervention (n = 9) groups. Intervention participants received PM2.5 exposure feedback and worked with researchers to co-develop behaviour change interventions based on a health behaviour change programme which they implemented during the follow-up monitoring week. Control group participants received no feedback or intervention during the study.

RESULTS

All interventions focused on the home environment. Intervention group participants reduced their at-home exposure by an average of 5.7 µg/m³ over the monitoring week (-23.0 to +3.2 µg/m³), whereas the control group had a reduction of 4.7 µg/m³ (-15.6 to +0.4 µg/m³). Furthermore, intervention group participants experienced a 4.6% decrease in participant-hours with reported asthma symptoms, while the control group saw a 0.5% increase. Similarly, the intervention group's asthma-related quality of life improved compared to the control group.

IMPACT STATEMENT

This pilot study investigated a novel behaviour change intervention, utilising personal exposure monitoring, data feedback, and co-developed interventions guided by a health behaviour change programme. The study aimed to reduce personal exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and improve self-reported asthma-related health. Conducting a randomised controlled trial with 28 participants, co-developed intervention successfully targeted exposure peaks within participants' home microenvironments, resulting in a reduction in at-home personal exposure to PM2.5 and improving self-reported asthma-related health. The study contributes valuable insights into the environmental exposure-health relationship and highlights the potential of the intervention for individual-level decision-making to protect human health.

Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Conditions: Findings from a Homeopathy Teaching Clinic using the MYCaW Instrument

BACKGROUND

 The Academy of Homeopathy Education is a US-based accredited teaching institution offering homeopathy education services to professional and medically licensed homeopathy students. This study reports on clinical outcomes from the teaching clinic from 2020 to 2021.

METHODS

 Data collected using the patient-generated outcome measure, the Measure Yourself Concerns and Wellbeing (MYCaW), were anonymized. Mean MYCaW values for initial and subsequent consultations were analyzed for the degree of change across the intervention period in 38 clients. Each client listed up to two complaints. MYCaW scores between initial and subsequent consultations were analyzed for the degree of change (delta) across the intervention period.

RESULTS

 A total of 95 body system-related symptoms were analyzed for change in intensity following the homeopathic intervention. Statistically significant improvements in the intensity of main symptoms were observed between initial and subsequent follow-ups. The main symptom scores showed a mean change in intensity (delta MYCaW) of -0.79 points (95% confidence interval (CI), -1.29 to -0.29; p = 0.003) at first follow-up, a mean change of -1.67 points (95% CI, -2.34 to -0.99; p = 0.001) at second follow-up compared with the initial visit, and a mean change of -1.93 points (95% CI, -3.0 to -0.86; p = 0.008) at third follow-up compared with the initial visit. For clients with four or more follow-ups, the mean delta MYCaW was -1.57 points (95% CI, -2.86 to -0.28; p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

 Statistically significant improvements as well as some clinically meaningful changes in symptom intensity were found across a diverse group of individuals with a variety of long-term chronic conditions. The improvement was evident across different body systems and different levels of chronicity. There are limitations to the generalizability of the study due to the research design. Further research and investigation are warranted given the promising results of this work.

Cannabis for medical use versus opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of opioids and cannabis for medical use for chronic non-cancer pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised trials comparing any type of cannabis for medical use or opioids, against each other or placebo, with patient follow-up ≥4 weeks.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Paired reviewers independently extracted data. We used Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence and communicate our findings.

RESULTS

Ninety trials involving 22 028 patients were eligible for review, among which the length of follow-up ranged from 28 to 180 days. Moderate certainty evidence showed that opioids provide small improvements in pain, physical functioning and sleep quality versus placebo; low to moderate certainty evidence supported similar effects for cannabis versus placebo. Neither was more effective than placebo for role, social or emotional functioning (all high to moderate certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed there is probably little to no difference between cannabis for medical use and opioids for physical functioning (weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.47 on the 100-point 36-item Short Form Survey physical component summary score, 95% credible interval (CrI) -1.97 to 2.99), and cannabis resulted in fewer discontinuations due to adverse events versus opioids (OR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.83). Low certainty evidence suggested little to no difference between cannabis and opioids for pain relief (WMD 0.23 cm on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 95% CrI -0.06 to 0.53) or sleep quality (WMD 0.49 mm on a 100 mm VAS, 95% CrI -4.72 to 5.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis for medical use may be similarly effective and result in fewer discontinuations than opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020185184.

In trials of physiotherapy for chronic low back pain, clinical relevance is rarely interpreted, with great heterogeneity in the frameworks and thresholds used: a meta-research study

QUESTIONS

How do authors of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) interpret the clinical relevance of the effects of physiotherapy interventions compared with no intervention on pain intensity, physical function and time to recovery in people with chronic low back pain (CLBP)? How can the clinical relevance be re-interpreted based on the available smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) threshold for this comparison? Are the studies in this field adequately powered?

DESIGN

Cross-sectional meta-research study.

PARTICIPANTS

People with CLBP.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain intensity, physical function and time to recovery.

RESULTS

This review included 23 RCTs with 1,645 participants. Twenty-two and 18 studies were included in the analysis of pain intensity and physical function, respectively. No studies investigated time to recovery. Sixteen studies reported varying thresholds to interpret clinical relevance for physical function and pain intensity. Discrepancies between interpretation using the minimal important difference and SWE values were observed in five studies. Study power ranged from 9% to 98%, with only four studies having a power > 80%.

CONCLUSION

Little attention is given to the interpretation of clinical relevance in RCTs comparing physiotherapy with no intervention in CLBP, with great heterogeneity in the frameworks and thresholds used. Future trials should inform patients and clinicians on whether the effect of an intervention is large enough to be worthwhile, using a reliable and comprehensive approach like available SWE estimates.

REGISTRATION

medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.14.22283454.

Minimal important change and difference in health outcome: An overview of approaches, concepts, and methods

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of approaches, concepts, and methods used to define and assess minimal important change and difference in health outcome.

METHOD

A narrative review of the literature, guided by a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

We distinguish between (i) interpretation of health outcome in individuals versus groups, (ii) change within individuals or groups versus difference between change within individuals or groups; and (iii) the responder approach (based on the proportion of patients that obtain a defined response) versus the group average approach (based on the average amount of change in a group). We review approaches, concepts, and methods.

CONCLUSION

By bringing together and juxtaposing various approaches, concepts, and methods, we set a precursory step in the direction of consensus building in the field concerned with defining and assessing minimal important change and difference in health outcome. We emphasize the need for conceptual clarification and terminological standardization. We argue that assessing minimal importance of change and difference in health outcome is essentially a value judgment involving a range of considerations and perspectives.

Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s).

RESULTS

The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna).

RESULTS

The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Molnupiravir for the treatment of non-severe COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials with 34 570 patients

BACKGROUND

Molnupiravir has been considered a promising candidate for COVID-19. Its efficacy and safety in non-severe COVID-19 patients and the differences between patients with different risk factors need further evaluation.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that allocated adult patients with non-severe COVID-19 to molnupiravir or a control. We used random-effects models, and conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression for COVID-19 patients with high-risk factors. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 34 570 patients were included. Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed that molnupiravir was associated with a reduction in the risk of hospitalization (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85), risk of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and time to symptom resolution (mean differences [MD] = -2.91 days, 95% CI: -3.66 to -2.16). However, no significant differences were found in adverse events, all-cause mortality, rate of and time to viral clearance, or duration of hospitalization. For the rate of viral clearance, subgroup effects were found between trials with low and high risk of bias (P = 0.001) and between trials with male or female majority (P < 0.001). For admission to hospital, subgroup effects were also found between trials with ≥50% and <50% of the participants being female (P = 0.04). Meta-regression showed a significant association between higher trial mean age and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011), and female majority and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Molnupiravir was found to be effective in non-severe COVID-19, but the efficacy varied with age and sex.

Item response theory may account for unequal item weighting and individual-level measurement error in trials that use PROMs: a psychometric sensitivity analysis of the TOPKAT trial

OBJECTIVES

To apply item response theory as a framework for studying measurement error in superiority trials which use patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

We reanalyzed data from the The Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial, which compared the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) responses of patients undergoing partial or total knee replacement, using traditional sum-scoring, after accounting for OKS item characteristics with expected a posteriori (EAP) scoring, and after accounting for individual-level measurement error with plausible value imputation (PVI). We compared the marginalized mean scores of each group at baseline, 2 months, and yearly for 5 years. We used registry data to estimate the minimal important difference (MID) of OKS scores with sum-scoring and EAP scoring.

RESULTS

With sum-scoring, we found statistically significant differences in mean OKS score at 2 months (P = 0.030) and 1 year (P = 0.030). EAP scores produced slightly different results, with statistically significant differences at 1 year (P = 0.041) and 3 years (P = 0.043). With PVI, there were no statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Psychometric sensitivity analyses can be readily performed for superiority trials using PROMs and may aid the interpretation of results.

A pilot randomised trial comparing individualised physiotherapy versus shockwave therapy for proximal hamstring tendinopathy: a protocol

PURPOSE

Proximal hamstring tendinopathy (PHT) presents as localised lower buttock pain with tasks such as squatting and sitting. It is a condition that occurs at all ages and levels of sporting participation and can cause disability with sport, work, and activities of daily living. This paper details a pilot trial protocol for investigating the effectiveness of individualised physiotherapy compared to extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) on pain and strength in people with PHT.

METHODS

The study is an assessor-blinded, pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT). One hundred participants with PHT will be recruited from the local community and sporting clubs. Participants will be randomised to receive six sessions of either individualised physiotherapy or ESWT, with both groups also receiving standardised education and advice. Primary outcomes will be global rating of change on a 7-point Likert scale, and the Victorian Institute of Sport-Hamstring (VISA-H) scale, measured at 0, 4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include sitting tolerance, the modified Physical Activity Level Scale, eccentric hamstring strength, modified Tampa scale for kinesiophobia, the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire Short Form (ÖMPSQ-SF), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) for average and worst pain, participant adherence, the Pain Catastrophizing scale, satisfaction scores, and quality of life. Data will be analysed on an intention to treat basis, with between-group effects estimated using linear mixed models for continuous data and Mann Whitney U tests for ordinal data.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot RCT will compare individualised physiotherapy versus ESWT for PHT. The trial will determine feasibility and estimated treatment effects to inform a definitive trial in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been prospectively registered with the Australia & New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000846820), registered 1 July 2021, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373085.

Comparison of multiple treatments in the management of transplant-related thrombotic microangiopathy: a network meta-analysis

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation-associated thrombotic microangiopathy (TA-TMA) is a fatal post-transplant complication. It has a high mortality rate and worse prognosis, but treatment strategies remain controversial. We screened 6 out of 3453 studies on the treatment of TA-TMA. These investigations compared 5 treatment strategies with a network meta-analysis approach. The final outcome was the proportion of patients who responded to these therapies. There were significant differences in response rates for each treatment. Achieving analysis through direct and indirect evidence in the rank probabilities shows that rTM (recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin) is most likely to be rank 1 (64.98%), Eculizumab intervention rank 2 (48.66%), ISM (immunosuppression manipulation) rank 3 (32.24%), TPE (therapeutic plasma exchange) intervention rank 4 (69.56%), and supportive care intervention rank 5 (70.20%). Eculizumab and ISM have significantly higher efficacy than supportive care (odds ratio (OR): 18.04, 18.21 respectively); and TPE having lower efficacy than all other TA-TMA therapies exception to supportive care. In our study, rTM and Eculizumab may be the best choice when treating TA-TMA.

Minimal important difference in childhood interstitial lung diseases

Background

Monitoring disease progression in childhood interstitial lung diseases (chILD) is essential. No information for the minimal important difference (MID), which is defined as the smallest change in a parameter that is perceived as important prompting a clinician to change the treatment, is available. We calculated MIDs for vital signs (respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation in room air, Fan severity score) and health-related quality of life (HrQoL) scores.

Methods

This study used data from the Kids Lung Register, which is a web-based management platform that collects data of rare paediatric lung disorders with a focus on chILD. Data of vital signs and HrQoL scores (Health Status Questionnaire, chILD-specific questionnaire and PedsQL V.4.0) were collected. MIDs were calculated according to distribution-based (one-third SD) and anchor-based methods (using forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity) as anchors.

Results

Baseline data of 774 children were used to calculate the following MIDs: respiratory rate 1.3 (z-score), O2saturation in room air 3.0%, Fan severity score 0.2–0.4, Health Status Questionnaire 0.4–0.8, chILD-specific questionnaire 4.4%–8.2%, physical health summary score 7.8%–8.9%, psychosocial health summary score 3.4%–6.9% and total score 5.1%–7.4%. Results of the responsiveness analysis generally agreed with the MIDs calculated.

Conclusions

For the first time, we provide estimates of MIDs for vital signs and HrQoL scores in a large cohort of chILD using different methods.

Determining the Minimal Important Change of Everyday Functioning in Dementia: Pursuing Clinical Meaningfulness

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Decline in everyday functioning is a key clinical change in Alzheimer disease and related disorders (ADRD). An important challenge remains the determination of what constitutes a clinically meaningful change in everyday functioning. We aimed to investigate this by establishing the minimal important change (MIC): the smallest amount of change that has a meaningful effect on patients' lives. We retrospectively investigated meaningful change in a memory clinic cohort.

METHODS

In the first, qualitative part of the study, community-recruited informal caregivers of patients with ADRD and memory clinic clinicians completed a survey in which they judged various situations representing changes in everyday functioning. Their judgments of meaningful change were used to determine thresholds for MIC, both for decline and improvement, on the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Questionnaire. In the second, quantitative part, we applied these values in an independent longitudinal cohort study of unselected memory clinic patients.

RESULTS

MIC thresholds were established at the average threshold of caregivers (N = 1,629; 62.4 ± 9.5 years; 77% female) and clinicians (N = 13): -2.2 points for clinically meaningful decline and +5.0 points for clinically meaningful improvement. Memory clinic patients (N = 230; 64.3 ± 7.7 years; 39% female; 60% dementia diagnosis) were followed for 1 year, 102 (45%) of whom showed a decline larger than the MIC, after a mean of 6.7 ± 3.5 months. Patients with a dementia diagnosis and more atrophy of the medial temporal lobe had larger odds (odds ratio [OR] = 3.4, 95% CI [1.5-7.8] and OR = 5.0, 95% CI [1.2-20.0], respectively) for passing the MIC threshold for decline than those with subjective cognitive complaints and no atrophy.

DISCUSSION

We were able to operationalize clinically meaningful decline in IADL by determining the MIC. The usefulness of the MIC was supported by our findings from the clinical sample that nearly half of a sample of unselected memory clinic patients showed a meaningful decline in less than a year. Disease stage and medial temporal atrophy were predictors of functional decline greater than the MIC. Our findings provide guidance in interpreting changes in IADL and may help evaluate treatment effects and monitor disease progression.

WOMAC Meaningful Within-patient Change: Results From 3 Studies of Tanezumab in Patients With Moderate-to-severe Osteoarthritis of the Hip or Knee

OBJECTIVE

To define meaningful within-patient change (MWPC) in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

METHODS

Data were analyzed separately from 3 phase III clinical trials (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02697773, NCT02709486, NCT02528188) of tanezumab, a novel treatment intended for the relief of signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis (OA), administered subcutaneously every 8 weeks. Patients with moderate-to-severe OA of the hip or knee completed the WOMAC and patient global assessment of OA (PGA-OA) at regular timepoints. A repeated measures longitudinal model with change in WOMAC Pain, Physical Function, or Stiffness domain score as the outcome and change in PGA-OA as the anchor was used to establish MWPC for WOMAC domains.

RESULTS

In the 3 studies, there were 688, 844, and 2948 subjects available for analyses, respectively. Analysis showed that a linear relationship between changes in WOMAC domains and changes in PGA-OA was supported and justified. Moreover, the relationships between these changes were very similar for 2 trials and close for the third. The estimated MWPC for the 3 WOMAC domains were from 0.84-1.16 (0-10 numerical rating scale) and from 12.50-16.23%, depending on study and domain, that corresponded to a 1-category change on PGA-OA. For a 2-category change those values were from 1.68-2.31 and from 25.01-32.46%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These results establish MWPCs for WOMAC domains, at the individual patient level, for patients with moderate-to-severe OA of the hip or knee. [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02697773, NCT02709486, and NCT02528188].

Breathing Exercises for Asthma Patients in Specialist Care: A Multicenter Randomized Trial

Rationale

Moderate to severe asthma is associated with impaired asthma control and quality of life (QoL) despite access to specialist care and modern pharmacotherapy. Breathing exercises (BrEX) improve QoL in incompletely controlled mild asthma, but impact in moderate to severe asthma is unknown.

Objectives

To investigate the effectiveness of BrEX as adjuvant treatment on QoL in patients with uncontrolled moderate to severe asthma.

Methods

Adult patients with incompletely controlled asthma attending respiratory specialist clinics were randomized to usual specialist care (UC) or UC and BrEX (UC + BrEX) with three individual physiotherapist-delivered sessions and home exercises. Primary outcome was asthma-related QoL (Mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire [Mini-AQLQ]) at 6 months on the basis of intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes: Mini-AQLQ at 12 months, lung function, 6-minute-walk test, physical activity level, Nijmegen Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and adverse events. Repeated-measures mixed-effects models were used to analyze data. Poisson regression models were used to analyze adverse event incidence rate ratio.

Results

A total of 193 participants were allocated to UC + BrEX (n = 94) or UC (n = 99). UC + BrEX was superior in the primary outcome (adjusted mean change difference, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.62). Superiority in Mini-AQLQ was sustained at 12 months (0.38; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.65). A minor improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression score at 6 months favoring UC + BrEX (−0.90; 95% CI, −1.67 to −0.14) was observed. Asthma-related adverse events occurred similarly in UC + BrEX and UC participants: 14.9% versus 18.1% (P = 0.38).

Conclusions

BrEX as add-on to usual care improve asthma-related QoL in incompletely controlled asthma regardless of severity and with no evidence of harm.

Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 03127059).

Minimal important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain and the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) for patients with osteoarthritis at the base of thumb

Background

The Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) are patient-reported outcomes frequently used for evaluating pain and function of the wrist and hand. The aim of this study was to determine thresholds for minimal important difference (MID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for NRS pain and PRWHE instruments in patients with base of thumb osteoarthritis.

Methods

Fifty-two patients with symptomatic base of thumb osteoarthritis wore a splint for six weeks before undergoing trapeziectomy. NRS pain (0 to 10) and PRWHE (0 to 100) were collected at the time of recruitment (baseline), after splint immobilization prior to surgery, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after surgery. Four anchor-based methods were used to determine MID for NRS pain and PRWHE: the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve, the mean difference of change (MDC), the mean change (MC) and the predictive modelling methods. Two approaches were used to determine PASS for NRS pain and PRWHE: the 75^th percentile and the ROC curve methods. The anchor question for MID was the change perceived by the patient compared with baseline; the anchor question for PASS was whether the patient would be satisfied if the condition were to stay similar. The correlation between the transition anchor at baseline and the outcome at all time points combined was calculated using the Spearman’s rho analysis.

Results

The MID for NRS pain was 2.5 using the ROC curve method, 2.0 using the MDC method, 2.8 using the MC method, and 2.5 using the predictive modelling method. The corresponding MIDs for PRWHE were 22, 24, 10, and 20. The PASS values for NRS pain and PRWHE were 2.5 and 30 using the ROC curve method, and 2.0 and 22 using the 75th percentile method, respectively. The area under curve (AUC) analyses showed excellent discrimination for all measures.

Conclusion

We found credible MID estimates for NRS and PRWHE (including its subscales), although the MID estimates varied depending on the method used. The estimates were 20-30% of the range of scores of the instruments. The cut-offs for MID and PASS showed good or excellent discrimination, lending support for their use in future studies.

Trial registration

This clinimetrics study was approved by the Helsinki University ethical review board (HUS1525/2017).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01600-1.

Comprehensive Quality-of-Life Outcomes With Invasive Versus Conservative Management of Chronic Coronary Disease in ISCHEMIA

BACKGROUND

ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) compared an initial invasive treatment strategy (INV) with an initial conservative strategy in 5179 participants with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia. The ISCHEMIA research program included a comprehensive quality-of-life (QOL) substudy.

METHODS

In 1819 participants (907 INV, 912 conservative strategy), we collected a battery of disease-specific and generic QOL instruments by structured interviews at baseline; at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months postrandomization; and at study closeout. Assessments included angina-related QOL (19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire), generic health status (EQ-5D), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-8), and, for North American patients, cardiac functional status (Duke Activity Status Index).

RESULTS

Median age was 67 years, 19.2% were female, and 15.9% were non-White. The estimated mean difference for the 19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary score favored INV (1.4 points [95% CI, 0.2-2.5] over all follow-up). No differences were observed in patients with rare/absent baseline angina (SAQ Angina Frequency score >80). Among patients with more frequent angina at baseline (SAQ Angina Frequency score <80, 744 patients, 41%), those randomly assigned to INV had a mean 3.7-point higher 19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary score than conservative strategy (95% CI, 1.6-5.8) with consistent effects across SAQ subscales: Physical Limitations 3.2 points (95% CI, 0.2-6.1), Angina Frequency 3.2 points (95% CI, 1.2-5.1), Quality of Life/Health Perceptions 5.3 points (95% CI, 2.8-7.8). For the Duke Activity Status Index, no difference was estimated overall by treatment, but in patients with baseline SAQ Angina Frequency scores <80, Duke Activity Status Index scores were higher for INV (3.2 points [95% CI, 0.6-5.7]), whereas patients with rare/absent baseline angina showed no treatment-related differences. Moderate to severe depression was infrequent at randomization (11.5%-12.8%) and was unaffected by treatment assignment.

CONCLUSIONS

In the ISCHEMIA comprehensive QOL substudy, patients with more frequent baseline angina reported greater improvements in the symptom, physical functioning, and psychological well-being dimensions of QOL when treated with an invasive strategy, whereas patients who had rare/absent angina at baseline reported no consistent treatment-related QOL differences.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

Comparative efficacy of 19 drug therapies for patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: a multiple-treatments network meta-analysis

Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is the most common clinical bleeding disorder with a high mortality rate and poor long-term survival quality in severe patients. There is controversy on how to choose the appropriate treatment. We systematically reviewed 19 randomized controlled trials (including 2615 participants) from January 1, 2015, to April 20, 2021. These investigations compared multiple drugs or their combinations in the therapeutic dose range for the treatment of ITP. The primary endpoint was based on the proportion of patients who responded to these therapies. The efficacy of eltrombopag plus rituximab, avatrombopag, dexamethasone plus anti-HP, and dexamethasone plus rhTPO was significantly higher than placebo (OR: 46.66, 29.44, 2.66, 1.86) or dexamethasone alone (OR: 46.22, 29.01, 2.22, 1.40). Placebo, oral immunosuppressants, and dexamethasone plus oseltamivir were less effective than the other ITP therapies tested. Eltrombopag plus rituximab may be the best choice when starting treatment for ITP.

Clinical important improvement of chronic pain patients in randomized controlled trials and the DATAPAIN cohort

BACKGROUND

Change on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) is based on subjective pain experience, hampering the establishment of clinically important improvement. An anchor-based method, the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC), is often added to determine whether a patient has improved. A two-point change on the NRS has been shown to be equivalent to a moderate clinically important improvement in randomized controlled trials (RCT's) on medication effects. We contemplated whether these findings could be reproduced in cohort and data and in non-drug interventional RCT's.

METHODS

The NRS change was quantified by subtracting the NRS of baseline from the NRS at 6-month follow-up. Categorization of success/nonsuccess was applied on the PGIC, and their average NRS raw changes were calculated. The Spearman correlation coefficient quantified the overall relationship, while the discriminative ability was explored through the receiver operating characteristic curve. Data were stratified on design, sex, and pain intensity at baseline. Besides, the cohort evaluated treatment status at follow-up.

RESULTS

The records of 1661 patients were examined. Overall, the observed NRS change needed for moderate clinically important improvement was larger than the average two points. Yet, the changes in the cohort were smaller compared with the RCT's. Moreover, it modified with pain intensity at baseline and treatment statuses indicated differences in mean clinical importance of -4.15 (2.70) when finalized at 6 months and -2.16 (2.48) when treatment was ongoing.

CONCLUSION

The moderate clinically important improvement varied substantially, representing heterogeneity in pain relief and its relation to treatment success in chronic pain patients.

Ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators for depression in adults with bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Glutamergic system dysfunction has been implicated in the pathophysiology of bipolar depression. This is an update of the 2015 Cochrane Review for the use of glutamate receptor modulators for depression in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the effects of ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators in alleviating the acute symptoms of depression in people with bipolar disorder. 2. To review the acceptability of ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators in people with bipolar disorder who are experiencing depressive symptoms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO all years to July 2020.  We did not apply any restrictions to date, language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing ketamine or other glutamate receptor modulators with other active psychotropic drugs or saline placebo in adults with bipolar depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. Primary outcomes were response rate and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included remission rate, depression severity change scores, suicidality, cognition, quality of life, and dropout rate. The GRADE framework was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (647 participants) were included in this review (an additional five studies compared to the 2015 review). There were no additional studies added to the comparisons identified in the 2015 Cochrane review on ketamine, memantine and cytidine versus placebo. However, three new comparisons were found: ketamine versus midazolam, N-acetylcysteine versus placebo, and riluzole versus placebo. The glutamate receptor modulators studied were ketamine (three trials), memantine (two), cytidine (one), N-acetylcysteine (three), and riluzole (one). Eight of these studies were placebo-controlled and two-armed. In seven trials the glutamate receptor modulators had been used as add-on drugs to mood stabilisers. Only one trial compared ketamine with an active comparator, midazolam. The treatment period ranged from a single intravenous administration (all ketamine studies), to repeated administration for riluzole, memantine, cytidine, and N-acetylcysteine (with a follow-up of eight weeks, 8 to 12 weeks, 12 weeks, and 16 to 20 weeks, respectively). Six of the studies included sites in the USA, one in Taiwan, one in Denmark, one in Australia, and in one study the location was unclear. All participants had a primary diagnosis of bipolar disorder and were experiencing an acute bipolar depressive episode, diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition (IV) or fourth edition text revision (IV-TR). Among all glutamate receptor modulators included in this review, only ketamine appeared to be more efficacious than placebo 24 hours after infusion for response rate (odds ratio (OR) 11.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 107.74; P = 0.03; participants = 33; studies = 2; I² = 0%, low-certainty evidence). Ketamine seemed to be more effective in reducing depression rating scale scores (MD -11.81, 95% CI -20.01 to -3.61; P = 0.005; participants = 32; studies = 2; I² = 0%, very low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of ketamine's efficacy in producing remission over placebo at 24 hours (OR 5.16, 95% CI 0.51 to 52.30; P = 0.72; participants = 33; studies = 2; I² = 0%, very low-certainty evidence). Evidence on response, remission or depression rating scale scores between ketamine and midazolam was uncertain at 24 hours due to very low-certainty evidence (OR 3.20, 95% CI 0.23 to 45.19). In the one trial assessing ketamine and midazolam, there were no dropouts due to adverse effects or for any reason (very low-certainty evidence). Placebo may have been more effective than N-acetylcysteine in reducing depression rating scale scores at three months, although this was based on very low-certainty evidence (MD 1.28, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.31; participants = 58; studies = 2). Very uncertain evidence found no difference in response at three months (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.14; participants = 69; studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for remission or acceptability. Extremely limited data were available for riluzole vs placebo, finding only very-low certainty evidence of no difference in dropout rates (OR 2.00, 95% CI 0.31 to 12.84; P = 0.46; participants = 19; studies = 1; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is difficult to draw reliable conclusions from this review due to the certainty of the evidence being low to very low, and the relatively small amount of data usable for analysis in bipolar disorder, which is considerably less than the information available for unipolar depression. Nevertheless, we found uncertain evidence in favour of a single intravenous dose of ketamine (as add-on therapy to mood stabilisers) over placebo in terms of response rate up to 24 hours, however ketamine did not show any better efficacy for remission in bipolar depression. Even though ketamine has the potential to have a rapid and transient antidepressant effect, the efficacy of a single intravenous dose may be limited. We did not find conclusive evidence on adverse events with ketamine, and there was insufficient evidence to draw meaningful conclusions for the remaining glutamate receptor modulators. However, ketamine's psychotomimetic effects (such as delusions or delirium) may have compromised study blinding in some studies, and so we cannot rule out the potential bias introduced by inadequate blinding procedures. To draw more robust conclusions, further methodologically sound RCTs (with adequate blinding) are needed to explore different modes of administration of ketamine, and to study different methods of sustaining antidepressant response, such as repeated administrations.

An implantable restorative-neurostimulator for refractory mechanical chronic low back pain: a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial

ABSTRACT

Chronic low back pain can be caused by impaired control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles and consequent functional instability of the lumbar spine. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and prognosis is unfavorable. We conducted an international randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial at 26 multidisciplinary centers to determine safety and efficacy of an implantable, restorative neurostimulator designed to restore multifidus neuromuscular control and facilitate relief of symptoms (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02577354). Two hundred four eligible participants with refractory mechanical (musculoskeletal) chronic LBP and a positive prone instability test indicating impaired multifidus control were implanted and randomized to therapeutic (N = 102) or low-level sham (N = 102) stimulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus nerve (multifidus nerve supply) for 30 minutes twice daily. The primary endpoint was the comparison of responder proportions (≥30% relief on the LBP visual analogue scale without analgesics increase) at 120 days. After the primary endpoint assessment, participants in the sham-control group switched to therapeutic stimulation and the combined cohort was assessed through 1 year for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The primary endpoint was inconclusive in terms of treatment superiority (57.1% vs 46.6%; difference: 10.4%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3% to 24.1%, P = 0.138). Prespecified secondary outcomes and analyses were consistent with a modest but clinically meaningful treatment benefit at 120 days. Improvements from baseline, which continued to accrue in all outcome measures after conclusion of the double-blind phase, were clinically important at 1 year. The incidence of serious procedure- or device-related adverse events (3.9%) compared favorably with other neuromodulation therapies for chronic pain.

Ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators for depression in adults with unipolar major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Many studies have recently been conducted to assess the antidepressant efficacy of glutamate modification in mood disorders. This is an update of a review first published in 2015 focusing on the use of glutamate receptor modulators in unipolar depression.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects - and review the acceptability and tolerability - of ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators in alleviating the acute symptoms of depression in people with unipolar major depressive disorder.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO all years to July 2020.  We did not apply any restrictions to date, language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double- or single-blinded randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ketamine, memantine, esketamine or other glutamate receptor modulators with placebo (pill or saline infusion), other active psychotropic drugs, or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in adults with unipolar major depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently identified studies, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were response rate (50% reduction on a standardised rating scale) and adverse events. We decided a priori to measure the efficacy outcomes at different time points and run sensitivity/subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool, and certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-one new studies were identified for inclusion in this updated review. Overall, we included 64 studies (5299 participants) on ketamine (31 trials), esketamine (9), memantine (5), lanicemine (4), D-cycloserine (2), Org26576 (2), riluzole (2), atomoxetine (1), basimglurant (1), citicoline (1), CP-101,606 (1), decoglurant (1), MK-0657 (1), N-acetylcysteine (1), rapastinel (1), and sarcosine (1). Forty-eight studies were placebo-controlled, and 48 were two-arm studies. The majority of trials defined an inclusion criterion for the severity of depressive symptoms at baseline: 29 at least moderate depression; 17 severe depression; and five mild-to-moderate depression. Nineteen studies recruited only patients with treatment-resistant depression, defined as inadequate response to at least two antidepressants. The majority of studies investigating ketamine administered as a single dose, whilst all of the included esketamine studies used a multiple dose regimen (most frequently twice a week for four weeks). Most studies looking at ketamine used intravenous administration, whilst the majority of esketamine trials used intranasal routes. The evidence suggests that ketamine may result in an increase in response and remission compared with placebo at 24 hours odds ratio (OR) 3.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54 to 10.10; n = 185, studies = 7, very low-certainty evidence). Ketamine may reduce depression rating scale scores over placebo at 24 hours, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.87, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.48; n = 231, studies = 8, very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in the number of participants assigned to ketamine or placebo who dropped out for any reason (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.28; n = 201, studies = 6, very low-certainty evidence). When compared with midazolam, the evidence showed that ketamine increases remission rates at 24 hours (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.67 to 7.32; n = 122,studies = 2, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the response efficacy of ketamine at 24 hours in comparison with midazolam, and its ability to reduce depression rating scale scores at the same time point (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.00 to 6.18; n = 296, studies = 4,very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in the number of participants who dropped out of studies for any reason between ketamine and placebo (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.09; n = 72, studies = 1, low-certainty evidence). Esketamine treatment likely results in a large increase in participants achieving remission at 24 hours compared with placebo (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.40; n = 894, studies = 5, moderate-certainty evidence). Esketamine probably results in decreases in depression rating scale scores at 24 hours compared with placebo (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.17; n = 824, studies = 4, moderate-certainty evidence). Our findings show that esketamine increased response rates, although this evidence is uncertain (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.68; n = 1071, studies = 5, low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence that participants assigned to esketamine treatment dropped out of trials more frequently than those assigned to placebo for any reason (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.73; n = 773, studies = 4,moderate-certainty evidence). We found very little evidence for the remaining glutamate receptor modulators. We rated the risk of bias as low or unclear for most domains, though lack of detail regarding masking of treatment in the studies reduced our certainty in the effect for all outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that ketamine and esketamine may be more efficacious than placebo at 24 hours. How these findings translate into clinical practice, however, is not entirely clear. The evidence for use of the remaining glutamate receptor modulators is limited as very few trials were included in the meta-analyses for each comparison and the majority of comparisons included only one study. Long term non-inferiority RCTs comparing repeated ketamine and esketamine, and rigorous real-world monitoring are needed to establish comprehensive data on safety and efficacy.

Medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic non-cancer and cancer related pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the benefits and harms of medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos, and trial registries up to January 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised clinical trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids versus any non-cannabis control for chronic pain at ≥1 month follow-up.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We performed random-effects models meta-analyses and used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 32 trials with 5174 adult patients were included, 29 of which compared medical cannabis or cannabinoids with placebo. Medical cannabis was administered orally (n=30) or topically (n=2). Clinical populations included chronic non-cancer pain (n=28) and cancer related pain (n=4). Length of follow-up ranged from 1 to 5.5 months. Compared with placebo, non-inhaled medical cannabis probably results in a small increase in the proportion of patients experiencing at least the minimally important difference (MID) of 1 cm (on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS)) in pain relief (modelled risk difference (RD) of 10% (95% confidence interval 5% to 15%), based on a weighted mean difference (WMD) of -0.50 cm (95% CI -0.75 to -0.25 cm, moderate certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally results in a very small improvement in physical functioning (4% modelled RD (0.1% to 8%) for achieving at least the MID of 10 points on the 100-point SF-36 physical functioning scale, WMD of 1.67 points (0.03 to 3.31, high certainty)), and a small improvement in sleep quality (6% modelled RD (2% to 9%) for achieving at least the MID of 1 cm on a 10 cm VAS, WMD of -0.35 cm (-0.55 to -0.14 cm, high certainty)). Medical cannabis taken orally does not improve emotional, role, or social functioning (high certainty). Moderate certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis taken orally probably results in a small increased risk of transient cognitive impairment (RD 2% (0.1% to 6%)), vomiting (RD 3% (0.4% to 6%)), drowsiness (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), impaired attention (RD 3% (1% to 8%)), and nausea (RD 5% (2% to 8%)), but not diarrhoea; while high certainty evidence shows greater increased risk of dizziness (RD 9% (5% to 14%)) for trials with <3 months follow-up versus RD 28% (18% to 43%) for trials with ≥3 months follow-up; interaction test P=0.003; moderate credibility of subgroup effect).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids results in a small to very small improvement in pain relief, physical functioning, and sleep quality among patients with chronic pain, along with several transient adverse side effects, compared with placebo. The accompanying BMJ Rapid Recommendation provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/3pwn2.

A feasibility trial of a digital mindfulness-based intervention to improve asthma-related quality of life for primary care patients with asthma

Asthma outcomes remain suboptimal, despite effective pharmacotherapy. Psychological dysfunction (such as anxiety) is common, and associated with poorer outcomes. We evaluated a digital mindfulness programme as an intervention to improve asthma-related quality of life for primary care patients, in a prospectively registered randomized-controlled feasibility study. We offered ‘Headspace’, a widely-used digital mindfulness intervention, to adults with asthma through 16 UK GP practices. Participants were randomized on a 2:1 basis to the mindfulness intervention, or waitlist control. Participants completed questionnaires (including asthma symptom control, asthma-related quality of life, anxiety, depression) at baseline, 6-week and 3-month follow-up. 116 participants completed primary outcomes at 3-month follow-up: intervention 73 (79%), control 43 (84%). Compared to baseline, the intervention group but not the control group reported significantly improved asthma-related quality of life, with a between-group difference favoring the intervention group that was not significant (Mean difference = 0.15, 95%CI − 0.13 to 0.42). Intervention use varied (ranging from 0 to 192 times) but was generally high. Digital mindfulness interventions are feasible and acceptable adjunct treatments for mild and moderate asthma to target quality of life. Further research should adapt ‘generic’ mindfulness-based stress-reduction to maximize effectiveness for asthma, and validate our findings in a fully-powered randomized controlled trial.

Trial registration Prospectively registered: ISRCTN52212323.

Exploratory clinical trial on the safety and capability of dMD-001 in lumbar disc herniation: Study protocol for a first-in-human pilot study

Herniated nucleus pulposus (NP), one of the most common diseases of the spine, is surgically treated by removing the sequestered NP. However, intervertebral disc (IVD) defects may remain after discectomy, leading to inadequate tissue healing and predisposing patients to IVD degeneration. An acellular, bioresorbable, ultra-purified alginate (UPAL) gel (dMD-001) implantation system can be used to fill any IVD defects in order to prevent IVD degeneration after discectomy. This first-in-human pilot study aims to determine the feasibility, safety, and perceived patient response to a combined treatment involving discectomy and UPAL gel implantation for herniated NP. We designed a one-arm, double-centre, open-label, pilot trial. The study started in November 2018 and will run until a sample of 40 suitable participants is established. Patients aged 20-49 years, diagnosed with isolated lumbar IVD herniation and scheduled for discectomy represent suitable candidates. All eligible participants who provide informed consent undergo standard discectomy followed by UPAL gel implantation. The primary outcomes of the trial will be the feasibility and safety of the procedure. Secondary outcomes will include self-assessed clinical scores and magnetic resonance imaging-based measures of morphological and compositional quality of the IVD tissue. Initial outcomes will be published at 24 weeks. Analysis of feasibility and safety will be performed using descriptive statistics. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses of treatment trends of effectiveness will be conducted.

Managing postoperative pain in adult outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing codeine with NSAIDs

BACKGROUND

Analgesics that contain codeine are commonly prescribed for postoperative pain, but it is unclear how they compare with nonopioid alternatives. We sought to compare the effectiveness of codeine and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for adults who underwent outpatient surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing codeine and NSAIDs for postoperative pain in outpatient surgery. We searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to October 2019 for eligible studies. Our primary outcome was the patient pain score, converted to a standard 10-point intensity scale. Our secondary outcomes were patient-reported global assessments and adverse effects. We used random-effects models and grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Forty studies, including 102 trial arms and 5116 patients, met inclusion criteria. The studies had low risk of bias and low-to-moderate heterogeneity. Compared with codeine, NSAIDs were associated with better pain scores at 6 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.93 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71 to 1.15) and at 12 hours (WMD 0.79, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.19). Stronger NSAID superiority at 6 hours was observed among trials where acetaminophen was coadministered at equivalent doses between groups (WMD 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48). NSAIDs were associated with better global assessments at 6 hours (WMD -0.88, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.72) and at 24 hours (WMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.40), and were associated with fewer adverse effects, including bleeding events.

INTERPRETATION

We found that adult outpatients report better pain scores, better global assessments and fewer adverse effects when their postoperative pain is treated with NSAIDs than with codeine. Clinicians across all specialties can use this information to improve both pain management and opioid stewardship.

Efficacy of interventions to reduce coercive treatment in mental health services: umbrella review of randomised evidence

BACKGROUND

Coercive treatment comprises a broad range of practices, ranging from implicit or explicit pressure to accept certain treatment to the use of forced practices such as involuntary admission, seclusion and restraint. Coercion is common in mental health services.

AIMS

To evaluate the strength and credibility of evidence on the efficacy of interventions to reduce coercive treatment in mental health services. Protocol registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S76T3.

METHOD

Systematic literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Campbell Collaboration, and Epistemonikos from January 2010 to January 2020 for meta-analyses of randomised studies. Summary effects were recalculated using a common metric and random-effects models. We assessed between-study heterogeneity, predictive intervals, publication bias, small-study effects and whether the results of the observed positive studies were more than expected by chance. On the basis of these calculations, strength of associations was classified using quantitative umbrella review criteria, and credibility of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

A total of 23 primary studies (19 conducted in European countries and 4 in the USA) enrolling 8554 participants were included. The evidence on the efficacy of staff training to reduce use of restraint was supported by the most robust evidence (relative risk RR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.87; suggestive association, GRADE: moderate), followed by evidence on the efficacy of shared decision-making interventions to reduce involuntary admissions of adults with severe mental illness (RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.92; weak association, GRADE: moderate) and by the evidence on integrated care interventions (RR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.46-0.95; weak association, GRADE: low). By contrast, community treatment orders and adherence therapy had no effect on involuntary admission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Different levels of evidence indicate the benefit of staff training, shared decision-making interventions and integrated care interventions to reduce coercive treatment in mental health services. These different levels of evidence should be considered in the development of policy, clinical and implementation initiatives to reduce coercive practices in mental healthcare, and should lead to further studies in both high- and low-income countries to improve the strength and credibility of the evidence base.

Long-Term Follow-Up of a Lifestyle Intervention for Late-Midlife, Rural-Dwelling Latinos in Primary Care

Importance: Rural-dwelling Latinos are an underresourced population in need of accessible and effective wellness programs.

Objective: To evaluate patients’ long-term health-related outcomes after lifestyle intervention.

Design: An uncontrolled pilot trial assessing change in health from pretreatment to long-term follow-up (12 mo after intervention completion, no contact) and from posttreatment to long-term follow-up.

Setting: Rural, community-based primary care.

Participants: Latino and Hispanic safety-net primary care patients, ages 50 to 64 yr.

Intervention: A culturally tailored, 4-mo lifestyle intervention co-led by occupational therapy practitioners and Latino community health workers that features telehealth and in-home sessions covering topics such as healthy eating and navigating health care.

Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported and physiological outcomes: symptom–well-being (primary), stress, sleep disturbance, social satisfaction, physical activity, patient activation, blood pressure, and weight. Exit interviews addressed health experiences and intervention impact on participants’ lives.

Results: Participants (N = 27) demonstrated clinically significant pretreatment to long-term follow-up benefits in all symptom–well-being dimensions (Cohen’s d ≥ 0.8, p ≤ .004), with additional gains from posttreatment to long-term follow-up (d ≥ 0.4, p ≤ .05). Significant improvements from pre- to posttreatment in systolic blood pressure, stress, and social role and activity satisfaction were maintained at long-term follow-up. No changes were observed in weight, physical activity, or diastolic blood pressure. Participants described the intervention’s sustained positive effect on their wellness.

Conclusions and Relevance: A lifestyle intervention led by occupational therapy practitioners and community health workers in a primary care context has potential to achieve long-term health benefits in rural-dwelling, late-midlife Latinos.

What This Article Adds: This study reveals that rural, late-midlife Latinos showed long-lasting improvements in psychological and physical health after finishing a program that helped them make healthy lifestyle choices. This finding supports the unique contribution of occupational therapy in primary care settings.

Patient reported outcome measures in clinical trials should be initially analyzed as continuous outcomes for statistical significance and responder analyses should be reserved as secondary analyses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the power of responder analyses in a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Simulations were based on the Chronic Kidney Disease Antidepressant Sertraline Trial (CAST), which compared sertraline to placebo for the treatment of depression in kidney disease. Baseline disease severity, placebo response, effect size, and the proportion of responders were varied across 72 scenarios. Power was assessed using a t-test for change scores, and the chi-square test for dichotomized outcomes of the minimal important difference (MID), improvement and remission in 10,000 datasets with a fixed sample size of 193.

RESULTS

The t-test had >80% power except for scenarios with the lowest sertraline effect size. The chi-square test using the MID had <7% power in all scenarios while improvement and remission of achieved >80% power only at higher effect sizes and/or when the proportion of responders was highest at 0.5. The chi-square test for improvement had marginal power increases compared to the t-test (4/72 scenarios = 5.6%) and that for remission did not outperform the t-test in any scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

The t-test outperforms the chi-square test for dichotomized outcomes regardless of baseline disease severity, placebo response, effect size and the proportion of responders to the intervention.

Minimal important change for the visual analogue scale foot and ankle (VAS-FA)

BACKGROUND

Visual analogue scale foot and ankle (VAS-FA) is a patient-reported outcome measure for foot and ankle disorders. The VAS-FA is validated into several languages and well adopted into use. Nonetheless, minimal important change (MIC) for the VAS-FA has not been estimated thus far.

METHODS

The VAS-FA score was obtained from 106 patients undergoing surgery for various foot and ankle complaints. MIC was estimated using an anchor-based predictive method.

RESULTS

The adjusted MIC was 6.8 for total VAS-FA score, and 9.3 for the Pain, 5.8 for the Function, and 5.7 for the Other complaints subscales. The VAS-FA score was found to separate improvement and deterioration in patients' foot and ankle condition.

CONCLUSIONS

MIC was successfully defined for the VAS-FA in the current study. The VAS-FA can be used to evaluate foot and ankle patients' clinical foot and ankle status and its change. Further research on estimating disease-specific MICs is recommended.

Efficacy and safety of low and very low carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes remission: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomized trial data

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of low carbohydrate diets (LCDs) and very low carbohydrate diets (VLCDs) for people with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Searches of CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CAB, and grey literature sources from inception to 25 August 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials evaluating LCDs (<130 g/day or <26% of a 2000 kcal/day diet) and VLCDs (<10% calories from carbohydrates) for at least 12 weeks in adults with type 2 diabetes were eligible.

DATA EXTRACTION

Primary outcomes were remission of diabetes (HbA1c <6.5% or fasting glucose <7.0 mmol/L, with or without the use of diabetes medication), weight loss, HbA1c, fasting glucose, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life and biochemical laboratory data. All articles and outcomes were independently screened, extracted, and assessed for risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence at six and 12 month follow-up. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Outcomes were assessed according to a priori determined minimal important differences to determine clinical importance, and heterogeneity was investigated on the basis of risk of bias and seven a priori subgroups. Any subgroup effects with a statistically significant test of interaction were subjected to a five point credibility checklist.

RESULTS

Searches identified 14 759 citations yielding 23 trials (1357 participants), and 40.6% of outcomes were judged to be at low risk of bias. At six months, compared with control diets, LCDs achieved higher rates of diabetes remission (defined as HbA1c <6.5%) (76/133 (57%) v 41/131 (31%); risk difference 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.47; 8 studies, n=264, I2=58%). Conversely, smaller, non-significant effect sizes occurred when a remission definition of HbA1c <6.5% without medication was used. Subgroup assessments determined as meeting credibility criteria indicated that remission with LCDs markedly decreased in studies that included patients using insulin. At 12 months, data on remission were sparse, ranging from a small effect to a trivial increased risk of diabetes. Large clinically important improvements were seen in weight loss, triglycerides, and insulin sensitivity at six months, which diminished at 12 months. On the basis of subgroup assessments deemed credible, VLCDs were less effective than less restrictive LCDs for weight loss at six months. However, this effect was explained by diet adherence. That is, among highly adherent patients on VLCDs, a clinically important reduction in weight was seen compared with studies with less adherent patients on VLCDs. Participants experienced no significant difference in quality of life at six months but did experience clinically important, but not statistically significant, worsening of quality of life and low density lipoprotein cholesterol at 12 months. Otherwise, no significant or clinically important between group differences were found in terms of adverse events or blood lipids at six and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of moderate to low certainty evidence, patients adhering to an LCD for six months may experience remission of diabetes without adverse consequences. Limitations include continued debate around what constitutes remission of diabetes, as well as the efficacy, safety, and dietary satisfaction of longer term LCDs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020161795.

Essential statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments

This article presents an overview of fundamental statistical principles of clinical trials of pain treatments. Statistical considerations relevant to phase 2 proof of concept and phase 3 confirmatory randomized trials investigating efficacy and safety are discussed, including (1) research design; (2) endpoints and analyses; (3) sample size determination and statistical power; (4) missing data and trial estimands; (5) data monitoring and interim analyses; and (6) interpretation of results. Although clinical trials of pharmacologic treatments are emphasized, the key issues raised by these trials are also directly applicable to clinical trials of other types of treatments, including biologics, devices, nonpharmacologic therapies (eg, physical therapy and cognitive-behavior therapy), and complementary and integrative health interventions.

Benralizumab improves patient reported outcomes and functional parameters in difficult-to-treat patients with severe asthma: Data from a real-life cohort

In the last decade, an increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on biologic therapy in patients with severe asthma have included patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as secondary efficacy measures. The majority of these RCTs showed a benefit in symptoms and quality of life. However, the magnitude of this benefit remains uncertain, because it rarely exceeded the minimal important difference (MID), owing to a significant improvement in the control group (placebo effect). Real-life studies on biologic therapies assessing PRO are scarce. They may support and integrate RCT results through their different experimental design. This real-life retrospective study provides data on 15 patients with difficult-to-treat severe eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab up to 6 months. Asthma quality of life questionnaire (AQLQ) and asthma control test (ACT) were assessed and administered at each visit to minimize the Hawthorne effect. Changes in general accepted efficacy measures, such as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁), peak expiratory flux (PEF), exacerbation rate and blood eosinophils, from baseline were also assessed. AQLQ and ACT improved from 3.9 ± 0.4 to 5.2 ± 0.4 and from 15.6 ± 5.7 to 18.1 ± 5.6, respectively. FEV₁ increased of about 250 ml (+14%). PEF increased from 288 ± 107 to 333 ± 133 l/min. The number of exacerbations requiring OCS courses decreased from 2.8 ± 2.2 to 0.5 ± 0.8. Eosinophil counts dropped to 25.6 ± 15 cells/microliter. In conclusion, most patients reported improvements in AQLQ and ACT greater than MID, suggesting that these outcome represent a sensitive tool in real-life effectiveness studies. Our approach reduced the limitations of transition questions and the Hawthorne effect, increasing findings reliability.

Interpretation of chronic pain clinical trial outcomes: IMMPACT recommended considerations

Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is crucial to making decisions regarding the use of analgesic treatments in clinical practice. In this article, we report on an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks, the purpose of which was to recommend approaches that facilitate interpretation of analgesic RCTs. We review issues to consider when drawing conclusions from RCTs, as well as common methods for reporting RCT results and the limitations of each method. These issues include the type of trial, study design, statistical analysis methods, magnitude of the estimated beneficial and harmful effects and associated precision, availability of alternative treatments and their benefit-risk profile, clinical importance of the change from baseline both within and between groups, presentation of the outcome data, and the limitations of the approaches used.

Platinum-containing regimens for triple-negative metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In a previous Cochrane Review, we found that for women with metastatic breast cancer unselected for triple-negative disease, there is little or no survival benefit and excess toxicity from platinum-based regimens. In subgroup analyses, however, we found preliminary low-quality evidence of a survival benefit from platinum-based regimens for women with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This review updates the evidence from the mTNBC subgroup analyses in the previous Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens with regimens not containing platinum in the management of women with mTNBC.

SEARCH METHODS

We obtained relevant studies published prior to 2015 and their extracted results from the mTNBC subgroup analysis in the previous Cochrane Review. We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov between 2015 and 27 September 2019. We identified further potentially relevant studies from previous trial reports, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens with regimens not containing platinum in women with mTNBC. Individual trials could compare one or more platinum-based regimens to one or more non-platinum regimens; hence there could be more 'treatment-comparisons' (i.e. platinum regimen versus non-platinum regimen comparison) than trials. Trial participants may have been purposely selected for mTNBC or inadvertently selected as a subgroup.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two independent reviewers assessed studies for eligibility and quality, and extracted all relevant data from each study. We derived hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes, where possible, and used fixed-effect models for meta-analyses. We analysed objective tumour response rates (OTRRs) and toxicities as binary (dichotomous) outcomes with risk ratios (RRs) used as measures of effects. We extracted quality of life data, if available. We used GRADE to rate the quality of evidence for time-to-event and tumour response outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 13 treatment-comparisons involving 1349 women from 10 studies. Twelve of the 13 treatment-comparisons were included in one or more meta-analyses. Of the 13 treatment-comparisons, six and eight had published or provided time-to-event data on overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival/time to progression (PFS/TTP), respectively, that could be included in meta-analyses. Ten treatment-comparisons published or provided OTRR data that could be included in meta-analyses. Eight of the 13 treatment-comparisons were from studies that selected participants on the basis of mTNBC status, while the other five treatment-comparisons were from studies that reported mTNBC results as part of subgroup analyses. Analysis of six treatment-comparisons indicated that platinum-containing regimens may have provided a small survival benefit to mTNBC patients (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.00; 958 women; moderate-quality evidence) with no evidence of heterogeneity (P = 0.41; I2 = 1%). Data from eight treatment-comparisons showed that platinum regimens may improve PFS/TTP (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.88; 1077 women; very low-quality evidence). There was marked evidence of heterogeneity (P < 0.0001; I2 = 80%). There was also low-quality evidence of better tumour response for platinum recipients (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.59; 1205 women) with some evidence of heterogeneity (P = 0.01; I2 = 58%). The observed heterogeneity for the PFS/TTP and OTRR outcomes may reflect between-study differences and general difficulties in assessing tumour response, as well as the varying potencies of the comparators. Compared with women receiving non-platinum regimens: rates of grade 3 and 4 nausea/vomiting were higher for platinum recipients (RR 4.77, 95% CI 1.93 to 11.81; 655 women; low-quality evidence) and rates of grade 3 and 4 anaemia were higher for platinum recipients (RR 3.80, 95% CI 2.25 to 6.42; 843 women; low-quality evidence). In general, however, relatively few intervention-comparisons could be included in meta-analyses for adverse events. None of the studies reported quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For women with mTNBC, there was moderate-quality evidence of a small survival benefit from platinum-based regimens compared to non-platinum regimens. This finding is consistent with findings of a PFS/TTP benefit and improved tumour response from platinum-based regimens. These potential benefits, however, should be weighed against previously identified excess toxicities from platinum-based regimens, particularly regimens containing cisplatin. Further randomised trials of platinum-based regimens among women with mTNBC are required.

Minimum clinically important differences for the Functioning Assessment Short Test and a battery of neuropsychological tests in bipolar disorders: results from the FACE-BD cohort

AIMS

Establishing the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in functioning and cognition is essential to the interpretation of the research and clinical work conducted in bipolar disorders (BD). The present study aimed to estimate the MCID for the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) and a battery of neuropsychological tests in BD.

METHODS

Anchor-based and distributive methods were used to estimate the MCID for the FAST and cognition using data from a large, multicentre, observational cohort of individuals with BD. The FAST and cognition were linked with the Clinical Global Impressions Scale-Severity (CGI-S) and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) using an equipercentile method. The magnitude of the standard error measurement (s.e.m.) provided another estimate of the MCID.

RESULTS

In total, 570 participants were followed for 2 years. Cross-sectional CGI-S and GAF scores were linked to a threshold ⩽7 on the FAST for functional remission. The MCID for the FAST equalled 8- or 9-points change from baseline using the CGI-S and GAF. One s.e.m. on the FAST corresponded to 7.6-points change from baseline. Cognitive variables insufficiently correlated with anchor variables (all ρ <0.3). One s.e.m. for cognitive variables corresponded to a range of 0.45 to 0.93-s.d. change from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the value of the estimated MCID for the FAST and cognition and may be a useful tool to evaluate cognitive and functional remediation effects and improve patient functional outcomes in BD. The CGI-S and GAF were inappropriate anchors for cognition. Further studies may use performance-based measures of functioning instead.

Effect of information and exercise programmes after lumbar disc surgery: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare two physiotherapy interventions following lumber disc surgery regarding effect on pain, functioning and fear of movement.

METHODS

This study is a prospective randomized controlled study. When admitted to hospital for first time lumbar disc surgery, the participants were randomized to one of two post-operative intervention groups: one group received information only and the other exercise in combination with information. Outcomes were collected at baseline, 6-8 weeks and 12-months post-surgery. The primary outcome was to record changes in back/hip pain and leg pain. Secondary outcomes were evaluation of changes in function, fear-avoidance beliefs and kinesiophobia.

RESULTS

Seventy patients completed the study and were included in the analysis, of which 37 were randomized to the group receiving information only and the remaining 33 receiving both exercise and information. For primary outcomes, at 12 months postoperatively, the group receiving both exercise and information had significantly lower leg pain compared with those receiving only information (p < .033). For secondary outcomes, at 12 months postoperatively, a significant difference (p < .027) was detected for function, which favoured those that received both exercise and information. There was no significant difference in the results for the other secondary outcomes. Both groups showed clinically important changes in relation to pain and function from baseline to 12 months. The effect of treatment showed a statistically significant difference in favour of exercise and information, but the difference was not clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

Exercise in combination with information reduced leg pain and improved function, which was statistically more evident over a period of time. Postoperative physiotherapy after lumbar disc surgery could include exercises in addition to information, but perhaps not for all patients, as both groups improved, and the difference between the two groups was not clinically relevant.

Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability study

OBJECTIVE

To develop an instrument to evaluate the credibility of anchor based minimal important differences (MIDs) for outcome measures reported by patients, and to assess the reliability of the instrument.

DESIGN

Instrument development and reliability study.

DATA SOURCES

Initial criteria were developed for evaluating the credibility of anchor based MIDs based on a literature review (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycInfo databases) and the experience of the authors in the methodology for estimation of MIDs. Iterative discussions by the team and pilot testing with experts and potential users facilitated the development of the final instrument.

PARTICIPANTS

With the newly developed instrument, pairs of masters, doctoral, or postdoctoral students with a background in health research methodology independently evaluated the credibility of a sample of MID estimates.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Core credibility criteria applicable to all anchor types, additional criteria for transition rating anchors, and inter-rater reliability coefficients were determined.

RESULTS

The credibility instrument has five core criteria: the anchor is rated by the patient; the anchor is interpretable and relevant to the patient; the MID estimate is precise; the correlation between the anchor and the outcome measure reported by the patient is satisfactory; and the authors select a threshold on the anchor that reflects a small but important difference. The additional criteria for transition rating anchors are: the time elapsed between baseline and follow-up measurement for estimation of the MID is optimal; and the correlations of the transition rating with the baseline, follow-up, and change score in the patient reported outcome measures are satisfactory. Inter-rater reliability coefficients (ĸ) for the core criteria and for one item from the additional criteria ranged from 0.70 to 0.94. Reporting issues prevented the evaluation of the reliability of the three other additional criteria for the transition rating anchors.

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers, clinicians, and healthcare policy decision makers can consider using this instrument to evaluate the design, conduct, and analysis of studies estimating anchor based minimal important differences.

Examining the Usage, User Experience, and Perceived Impact of an Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program for Adolescents With Anxiety: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) increases treatment access for adolescents with anxiety; however, completion rates of iCBT programs are typically low. Understanding adolescents' experiences with iCBT, what program features and changes in anxiety (minimal clinically important difference [MCID]) are important to them, may help explain and improve iCBT program use and impact.

OBJECTIVE

Within a randomized controlled trial comparing a six-session iCBT program for adolescent anxiety, Being Real, Easing Anxiety: Tools Helping Electronically (Breathe), with anxiety-based resource webpages, we aimed to (1) describe intervention use among adolescents allocated to Breathe or webpages and those who completed postintervention assessments (Breathe or webpage respondents); (2) describe and compare user experiences between groups; and (3) calculate an MCID for anxiety and explore relationships between iCBT use, experiences, and treatment response among Breathe respondents.

METHODS

Enrolled adolescents with self-reported anxiety, aged 13 to 19 years, were randomly allocated to Breathe or webpages. Self-reported demographics and anxiety symptoms (Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children-2nd edition [MASC-2]) were collected preintervention. Automatically-captured Breathe or webpage use and self-reported symptoms and experiences (User Experience Questionnaire for Internet-based Interventions) were collected postintervention. Breathe respondents also reported their perceived change in anxiety (Global Rating of Change Scale [GRCS]) following program use. Descriptive statistics summarized usage and experience outcomes, and independent samples t tests and correlations examined relationships between them. The MCID was calculated using the mean MASC-2 change score among Breathe respondents reporting somewhat better anxiety on the GRCS.

RESULTS

Adolescents were mostly female (382/536, 71.3%), aged 16.6 years (SD 1.7), with very elevated anxiety (mean 92.2, SD 18.1). Intervention use was low for adolescents allocated to Breathe (mean 2.2 sessions, SD 2.3; n=258) or webpages (mean 2.1 visits, SD 2.7; n=278), but was higher for Breathe (median 6.0, range 1-6; 81/258) and webpage respondents (median 2.0, range 1-9; 148/278). Total user experience was significantly more positive for Breathe than webpage respondents (P<.001). Breathe respondents reported program design and delivery factors that may have challenged (eg, time constraints and program support) or facilitated (eg, demonstration videos, self-management activities) program use. The MCID was a mean MASC-2 change score of 13.8 (SD 18.1). Using the MCID, a positive treatment response was generated for 43% (35/81) of Breathe respondents. Treatment response was not correlated with respondents' experiences or use of Breathe (P=.32 to P=.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents reported positive experiences and changes in their anxiety with Breathe; however, their reports were not correlated with program use. Breathe respondents identified program design and delivery factors that help explain their experiences and use of iCBT and inform program improvements. Future studies can apply our measures to compare user experiences between internet-based interventions, interpret treatment outcomes and improve treatment decision making for adolescents with anxiety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02970734 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02970734.

Efficacy of psychosocial interventions for mental health outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Mental health conditions are leading causes of disability worldwide. Psychosocial interventions for these conditions might have a key role in their treatment, although applicability of findings to poor-resource settings might be a challenge. We aimed to evaluate the strength and credibility of evidence generated in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for various mental health outcomes.

METHODS

We did an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised studies done in LMICs. Literature searches were done in Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos from Jan 1, 2010, until May 31, 2019. Systematic reviews of randomised studies investigating the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for mental health conditions in LMICs were included. Systematic reviews of promotion, prevention, and protection interventions were excluded, because the focus was on treatment interventions only. Information on first author, year of publication, outcomes, number of included studies, and reported summary meta-analytic estimates was extracted from included meta-analyses. Summary effects were recalculated using a common metric and random-effects models. We assessed between-study heterogeneity, predictive intervals, publication bias, small-study effects, and whether the results of the observed positive studies were more than expected by chance. On the basis of these calculations, strength of associations was assessed using quantitative umbrella review criteria, and credibility of evidence using the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42019135711.

FINDINGS

123 primary studies from ten systematic reviews were included. The evidence on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in adults with depression in humanitarian settings (standardised mean difference 0·87, 95% CI 0·67-1·07; highly suggestive association, GRADE: moderate) and in adults with common mental disorders (0·49, 0·36-0·62; highly suggestive association, GRADE: moderate) was supported by the most robust evidence. Highly suggestive strength of association was found for psychosocial interventions in adults with schizophrenia for functional outcomes, in adults with depression, and in adults with post-traumatic stress disorder in humanitarian settings. In children in humanitarian settings, and in children with disruptive behaviour, psychosocial interventions were supported by suggestive evidence of efficacy.

INTERPRETATION

A relatively large amount of evidence suggests the benefit of psychosocial interventions on various mental health outcomes in LMICs. However, strength of associations and credibility of evidence were quite variable, depending on the target mental health condition, type of population and setting, and outcome of interest. This varied evidence should be considered in the development of clinical, policy, and implementation programmes in LMICs and should prompt further studies to improve the strength and credibility of the evidence base.

FUNDING

University of Verona.

Tasuki for neck pain: An individually-randomized, open-label, waiting-list-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Neck pain ranks 4th highest in terms of disability as measured by years lived with disabilities. This study was conducted to determine whether Tasuki-style posture supporter improves neck pain compared to waiting-list.

METHODS

This trial was an individually-randomized, open-label, waiting-list-controlled study. Adults (20 years or older) with non-specific chronic neck pain who reported 10 points or more on modified Neck Disability Index (mNDI: range, 0-50; higher points indicate worse condition) were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to the intervention group or waiting-list. Prespecified primary outcome was the change in mNDI at 1 week. The principle of intention-to-treat analyses (as randomized) was applied. This trial was prospectively registered with UMIN (UMIN000034825).

RESULTS

In total, 50 participants (mean age, 40.9 [standard deviation (SD) = 9.6]; 32 participants [64%] were female, mean mNDI, 14.3 [SD = 2.9]) were enrolled. Of these participants, 26 (52%) were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 24 (48%) to the waiting-list. Attrition rate was low in both groups (1/50). The mean mNDI change score at 1 week was more favorable for Tasuki than waiting-list (between-group difference, -3.5 points (95% confidence interval (CI), -5.3 to -1.8); P = .0002). More participants (58%) had moderate benefit (at least 30% improvement) with Tasuki than waiting-list (13%) (relative risk 4.6 (95% CI 1.5 to 14); risk difference 0.45 (0.22 to 0.68)).

CONCLUSION

This trial suggests that wearing Tasuki might moderately improve neck pain. With its low-cost, low-risk, and easy-to-use nature, Tasuki could be an option for those who suffer from neck pain.

The Clinical Relevance of Pain Severity Changes: Is There Any Difference Between Asian and Caucasian Patients With Osteoarthritis Pain?

The objective of the present analysis was to determine whether changes in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain scores by patient global impression of improvement (PGI‐I) category and the cut‐off for clinically important difference (CID) were different between Asian and Caucasian patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis. This analysis used data from 3 (Caucasian) and 2 (Asian) randomized, placebo‐controlled, 10‐ to 14‐week duloxetine studies for the treatment of patients ≥40 years of age with osteoarthritis pain. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to characterize the association between changes in BPI average pain scores and PGI‐I levels at study endpoint. The CID was characterized by PGI‐I, and the cut‐off point for CID in BPI average pain scores was determined by the intersection of a 45‐degree tangent line with each ROC curve. Data from 668 Asian and 868 Caucasian patients were available for analysis. Baseline BPI average pain ratings including worst and least pain were comparable between Asians and Caucasians. Ratings for percentage change from baseline to endpoint for BPI average pain scores in Asian patients and Caucasian patients were similar across the 7 PGI‐I categories, regardless of age, gender, study, and treatment. The ROC analysis results of cut‐off points in BPI average pain scores demonstrated the raw change cut‐off was −3.0, and percentage change cut‐off was −40% for both Asian and Caucasian patients. Overall, the present analysis concludes changes in BPI average pain scores by PGI‐I category and the cut‐off for CID were similar for Asian and Caucasian patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis.

Comparative effectiveness of triple therapy versus dual bronchodilation in COPD

This real-world study compared the effectiveness of triple therapy (TT; long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs)/long-acting inhaled β-agonists (LABAs)/inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs)) versus dual bronchodilation (DB; LAMAs/LABAs) among patients with frequently exacerbating COPD. A matched historical cohort study was conducted using United Kingdom primary care data. Patients with COPD aged ≥40 years with a history of smoking were included if they initiated TT or DB from no maintenance/LAMA therapy and had two or more exacerbations in the preceding year. The primary outcome was time to first COPD exacerbation. Secondary outcomes included time to treatment failure, first acute respiratory event, and first acute oral corticosteroid (OCS) course. Potential treatment effect modifiers were investigated. In 1647 matched patients, initiation of TT reduced exacerbation risk (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95% CI 0.76–0.99), risk of acute respiratory event (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66–0.84) and treatment failure (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73–0.95) compared with DB. Risk reduction for acute respiratory events was greater for patients with higher rates of previous exacerbations. At baseline blood eosinophil counts (BECs) ≥ 0.35×10⁹ cells·L⁻¹, TT was associated with lower risk of OCS prescriptions than DB. This study provides real-life evidence of TT being more effective in reducing exacerbation risk than DB, which became more accentuated with increasing BEC and previous exacerbation rate.

In a real-world population of COPD patients with history of exacerbations, initiation of triple therapy was associated with a larger reduction in future risk of exacerbation, acute respiratory event, and treatment failure compared with dual bronchodilationhttp://bit.ly/2xA1Xut

AAOS Systematic Literature Review: Summary on the Management of Surgical Site Infections

The purpose of this systematic review is to improve outcomes for the care of surgical site infections by presenting the current best evidence on important diagnostic and care issues. The findings led to ten recommendations and five consensus statements that address diagnosis and treatment of orthopaedic surgical site infections. There is strong evidence to supports anemia, obesity, HIV/AIDS, depression, dementia, immunosuppressive medications, duration of hospital stay, history of alcohol abuse, and history of congestive heart failure as factors that increased the risk of infection, some of which are modifiable before surgical intervention. Diagnostically, synovial fluid and tissue cultures were found to be strong "rule-in" tests for the diagnosis of infection, but negative synovial fluid and tissue cultures do not reliably exclude infection. C-reactive protein was found to be a strong rule-in and rule-out marker for patients with suspected surgical site infections. Therapeutically, only for patients with retained implants, antimicrobial protocols of 8 weeks of duration were found to be associated with outcomes that are not inferior to outcomes from protocols of 3- to 6-month duration. Also only for patients with retained implants, rifampin, used as a second antimicrobial, increases the probability of treatment success for staphylococcal infections. The surgical site infection work group identified a lack of high-level outcomes data, highlighting the need for high-quality clinical trials in the treatment of surgical site infections.

Continuous outcome measures: conundrums and conversions contributing to clinical application

Many patient-relevant outcomes, particularly quality of life measures such as pain or function, are routinely measured on a continuous scale. However, the interpretation of continuous outcomes is difficult, particularly when considering application to clinical practice and shared decision-making. Making matters worse is the frequent existence of multiple scales for any given construct. Therefore, quantitative syntheses of literature must find a way to combine different scales into a 'common language', and the most frequently used and longest-standing method to do so is the standardised mean difference. Unfortunately, the standardised mean difference is even more difficult to interpret clinically. However, there are validated methods to make these measures easier to understand and apply clinically. This analysis explores these issues and offers a resource to help make these continuous measures more clinically useful.

Health-related quality of life in blood pressure control and blood lipid-lowering therapies: results from the CHIEF randomized controlled trial

Our study aimed to explore changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) during blood pressure control and blood lipid-lowering therapies. We conducted a 2 × 2 factorial-designed randomized controlled trial in 180 clinical centers in China. At baseline, participants were randomly assigned to an amlodipine + amiloride/hydrochlorothiazide group or an amlodipine + telmisartan group for the blood pressure control treatment and to a statin group or a routine intervention group for the blood lipid-lowering treatment. The allocation ratio was 1:1 for both treatments. Follow-up lasted for 4 years. HRQoL was assessed using the EuroQol five dimensions three levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire every year. Of 13,542 hypertensive patients enrolled in the clinical trial, 9885 were eligible for the analysis. The problems for all dimensions of the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system were slight at baseline and were well preserved in the follow-up period. The EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ VAS) score and the EQ-5D-3L index improved over time (P_trend < 0.001), with improvements similar among interventions but different between patients who reached the treatment targets or not. Decreases in systolic/diastolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were independently correlated with increases in the EQ VAS score and the EQ-5D-3L index. In conclusion, HRQoL is associated with blood pressure/lipid levels but not with specific antihypertensive or lipid-lowering interventions. Blood pressure control and blood lipid-lowering therapies should not be denied to Chinese patients in consideration of their negative effects on quality of life.