1
|
Berntsson H, Thien A, Hind D, Stewart L, Mahzabin M, Tung WS, Bradburn M, Kurien M. Interventions for Managing Late Gastrointestinal Symptoms Following Pelvic Radiotherapy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2024; 36:318-334. [PMID: 38431427 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2024.02.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2023] [Revised: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 02/15/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024]
Abstract
AIMS Pelvic radiotherapy can induce gastrointestinal injury and symptoms, which can affect quality of life. We assessed interventions for managing these symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS A review of randomised controlled trials published between January 1990 and June 2023 from databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, clinicaltrials.gov, ISRCTN and grey literature sources was conducted. Meta-analyses were carried out using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model to produce overall treatment differences with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS Twenty-eight studies (2392 participants) of varying methodological quality were included. 4% formalin was superior to sucralfate for improving gastrointestinal symptom score (standardised mean difference [SMD] -1.07, 95% confidence interval -1.48 to -0.65). Argon plasma coagulation (APC) was inferior to sucralfate (SMD 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.59). Counselling positively influenced symptom score (SMD -0.53, 95% confidence interval -0.76 to -0.29), whereas hyperbaric oxygen therapy showed conflicting results. Sucralfate combined with APC increased endoscopic markers of moderate-severe bleeding versus APC alone (risk ratio 2.26, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 4.55). No definite conclusions on pain, incontinence, diarrhoea, tenesmus or quality of life interventions were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS Small study sizes, methodological quality and heterogeneity limit support of any individual intervention. APC and 4% formalin seem to be promising interventions, with further larger randomised controlled trials now warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Berntsson
- Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
| | - A Thien
- Department of General Surgery, Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Hospital, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
| | - D Hind
- Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - L Stewart
- The Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Mahzabin
- The Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - W S Tung
- The Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Bradburn
- Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Kurien
- The Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lindsay JO, Hind D, Swaby L, Berntsson H, Bradburn M, Bannur C U, Byrne J, Clarke C, Desoysa L, Dickins B, Din S, Emsley R, Foulds GA, Gribben J, Hawkey C, Irving PM, Kazmi M, Lee E, Loban A, Lobo A, Mahida Y, Moran GW, Papaioannou D, Parkes M, Peniket A, Pockley AG, Satsangi J, Subramanian S, Travis S, Turton E, Uttenthal B, Rutella S, Snowden JA. Safety and efficacy of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation with low-dose cyclophosphamide mobilisation and reduced intensity conditioning versus standard of care in refractory Crohn's disease (ASTIClite): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024; 9:333-345. [PMID: 38340759 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(23)00460-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2023] [Revised: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A previous controlled trial of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with refractory Crohn's disease did not meet its primary endpoint and reported high toxicity. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity versus standard of care in this patient population. METHODS This open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial was conducted in nine National Health Service hospital trusts across the UK. Adults (aged 18-60 years) with active Crohn's disease on endoscopy (Simplified Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD] ulcer sub-score of ≥2) refractory to two or more classes of biological therapy, with no perianal or intra-abdominal sepsis or clinically significant comorbidity, were recruited. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (2:1) to either HSCT with a reduced dose of cyclophosphamide (intervention group) or standard care (control group). Randomisation was stratified by trial site by use of random permuted blocks of size 3 and 6. Patients in the intervention group underwent stem-cell mobilisation (cyclophosphamide 1 g/m2 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 μg/kg) and stem-cell harvest (minimum 2·0 × 106 CD34+ cells per kg), before conditioning (fludarabine 125 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 120 mg/kg, and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin [thymoglobulin] 7·5 mg/kg in total) and subsequent stem-cell reinfusion supported by G-CSF. Patients in the control group continued any available conventional, biological, or nutritional therapy. The primary outcome was absence of endoscopic ulceration (SES-CD ulcer sub-score of 0) without surgery or death at week 48, analysed in the intention-to-treat population by central reading. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 17160440. FINDINGS Between Oct 18, 2018, and Nov 8, 2019, 49 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 23 (47%) were randomly assigned: 13 (57%) to the intervention group and ten (43%) to the control group. In the intervention group, ten (77%) participants underwent HSCT and nine (69%) reached 48-week follow-up; in the control group, nine (90%) reached 48-week follow-up. The trial was halted in response to nine reported suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions in six (46%) patients in the intervention group, including renal failure due to proven thrombotic microangiopathy in three participants and one death due to pulmonary veno-occlusive disease. At week 48, absence of endoscopic ulceration without surgery or death was reported in three (43%) of seven participants in the intervention group and in none of six participants in the control group with available data. Serious adverse events were more frequent in the intervention group (38 in 13 [100%] patients) than in the control group (16 in four [40%] patients). A second patient in the intervention group died after week 48 of respiratory and renal failure. INTERPRETATION Although HSCT with an immune-ablative regimen of reduced intensity decreased endoscopic disease activity, significant adverse events deem this regimen unsuitable for future clinical use in patients with refractory Crohn's disease. FUNDING Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- James O Lindsay
- Centre for Immunobiology, Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
| | - Daniel Hind
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Lizzie Swaby
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Hannah Berntsson
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Mike Bradburn
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Uday Bannur C
- Department of Radiology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Jennifer Byrne
- Department of Haematology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Christopher Clarke
- Department of Radiology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Lauren Desoysa
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Ben Dickins
- John van Geest Cancer Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
| | - Shahida Din
- Department of Gastroenterology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Richard Emsley
- Department of Biostatistics & Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Gemma A Foulds
- John van Geest Cancer Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
| | - John Gribben
- Barts Cancer Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Christopher Hawkey
- NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Peter M Irving
- Department of Gastroenterology, Guy's and Saint Thomas' Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Majid Kazmi
- King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Ellen Lee
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Amanda Loban
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alan Lobo
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Yashwant Mahida
- NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Gordon W Moran
- NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Diana Papaioannou
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Miles Parkes
- Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Andrew Peniket
- Department of Haematology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - A Graham Pockley
- John van Geest Cancer Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
| | - Jack Satsangi
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Simon Travis
- NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Translational Gastroenterology Unit, Nuffield Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Emily Turton
- Sheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Ben Uttenthal
- Department of Clinical Haematology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sergio Rutella
- John van Geest Cancer Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
| | - John A Snowden
- Division of Clinical Medicine, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; Department of Haematology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bamford E, Berntsson H, Beale S, Desoysa L, Dias J, Hamer-Kiwacz S, Hind D, Johnson N, Loban A, Molloy K, Morvan E, Rombach I, Selby A, Thokala P, Turtle C, Walters S, Drummond A. Flexor Injury Rehabilitation Splint Trial (FIRST): protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing three splints for finger flexor tendon repairs. Trials 2024; 25:193. [PMID: 38493121 PMCID: PMC10943783 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08013-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/23/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Without surgical repair, flexor tendon injuries do not heal and patients' ability to bend fingers and grip objects is impaired. However, flexor tendon repair surgery also requires optimal rehabilitation. There are currently three custom-made splints used in the rehabilitation of zone I/II flexor tendon repairs, each with different assumed harm/benefit profiles: the dorsal forearm and hand-based splint (long), the Manchester short splint (short), and the relative motion flexion splint (mini). There is, however, no robust evidence as to which splint, if any, is most clinical or cost effective. The Flexor Injury Rehabilitation Splint Trial (FIRST) was designed to address this evidence gap. METHODS FIRST is a parallel group, superiority, analyst-blind, multi-centre, individual participant-randomised controlled trial. Participants will be assigned 1:1:1 to receive either the long, short, or mini splint. We aim to recruit 429 participants undergoing rehabilitation following zone I/II flexor tendon repair surgery. Potential participants will initially be identified prior to surgery, in NHS hand clinics across the UK, and consented and randomised at their splint fitting appointment post-surgery. The primary outcome will be the mean post-randomisation score on the patient-reported wrist and hand evaluation measure (PRWHE), assessed at 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures include blinded grip strength and active range of movement (AROM) assessments, adverse events, adherence to the splinting protocol (measured via temperature sensors inserted into the splints), quality of life assessment, and further patient-reported outcomes. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of each splint, and a qualitative sub-study will evaluate participants' preferences for, and experiences of wearing, the splints. Furthermore, a mediation analysis will determine the relationship between patient preferences, splint adherence, and splint effectiveness. DISCUSSION FIRST will compare the three splints with respect to clinical efficacy, complications, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. FIRST is a pragmatic trial which will recruit from 26 NHS sites to allow findings to be generalisable to current clinical practice in the UK. It will also provide significant insights into patient experiences of splint wear and how adherence to splinting may impact outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN: 10236011.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Bamford
- Pulvertaft Hand Centre, Royal Derby Hospital, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - Hannah Berntsson
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK.
| | - Suzanne Beale
- Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, B15 2GW, Birmingham, UK
| | - Lauren Desoysa
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Joseph Dias
- University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Foundation Trust, LE1, 7RH, Leicester, UK
| | - Sienna Hamer-Kiwacz
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Daniel Hind
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Nick Johnson
- Pulvertaft Hand Centre, Royal Derby Hospital, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - Amanda Loban
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Emma Morvan
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Ines Rombach
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Anna Selby
- Pulvertaft Hand Centre, Royal Derby Hospital, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust, Derby, DE22 3NE, UK
| | - Praveen Thokala
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Chris Turtle
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Stephen Walters
- SCHARR, Division of Population Health, School of Medicine and Population Health, University of Sheffield, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK
| | - Avril Drummond
- School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2QL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bursnall M, Thomas BD, Berntsson H, Strong E, Brayne M, Hind D. Clinician and Patient Experience of Internet-Mediated Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing Therapy. J Psychosoc Rehabil Ment Health 2022; 9:251-262. [PMID: 35136713 PMCID: PMC8812350 DOI: 10.1007/s40737-022-00260-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2021] [Accepted: 01/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Many eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapists moved their practice online during COVID-19. We conducted surveys and interviews to understand the implementation and acceptability of online EMDR therapy. From 17 June to 2nd August 2021 an online survey was open to EMDR therapists from the EMDR Association UK & Ireland and EMDR International Association email lists, and, through them, their clients. Questions related to determinants of implementation (for therapists) and acceptability (for clients) of online EMDR. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of therapist respondents to provide a deeper understanding of survey responses. Survey responses were received from therapists (n = 562) from five continents, and their clients (n = 148). 88% of clients responded as being extremely or very comfortable receiving EMDR therapy online. At the initial point of ‘social distancing’, 54% of therapists indicated strong or partial reluctance to deliver online EMDR therapy compared to 11% just over one year later. Four fifths of therapists intended to continue offering online therapy after restrictions were lifted. Free-text responses and interview data showed that deprivation and clinical severity could lead to exclusion from online EMDR. Internet connectivity could disrupt sessions, lead to cancellations, or affect the therapy process. Therapists benefited from training in online working. Online EMDR is generally acceptable to therapists and clients, with reservations about digital exclusion, case severity, poor internet connectivity and the need for training. Further research is needed to confirm that online EMDR is clinically non-inferior to in-person working.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Bursnall
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield. Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Benjamin D. Thomas
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield. Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | - Hannah Berntsson
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield. Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| | | | | | - Daniel Hind
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield. Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA UK
| |
Collapse
|