Journal: Lancet

Sorted by: date / impact
Abstract

Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, Hanson SW, Chatterji S, Vos T
Background
Rehabilitation has often been seen as a disability-specific service needed by only few of the population. Despite its individual and societal benefits, rehabilitation has not been prioritised in countries and is under-resourced. We present global, regional, and country data for the number of people who would benefit from rehabilitation at least once during the course of their disabling illness or injury.
Methods
To estimate the need for rehabilitation, data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 were used to calculate the prevalence and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) of 25 diseases, impairments, or bespoke aggregations of sequelae that were selected as amenable to rehabilitation. All analyses were done at the country level and then aggregated to seven regions: World Bank high-income countries and the six WHO regions (ie, Africa, the Americas, Southeast Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Pacific).
Findings
Globally, in 2019, 2·41 billion (95% uncertainty interval 2·34-2·50) individuals had conditions that would benefit from rehabilitation, contributing to 310 million [235-392] YLDs. This number had increased by 63% from 1990 to 2019. Regionally, the Western Pacific had the highest need of rehabilitation services (610 million people [588-636] and 83 million YLDs [62-106]). The disease area that contributed most to prevalence was musculoskeletal disorders (1·71 billion people [1·68-1·80]), with low back pain being the most prevalent condition in 134 of the 204 countries analysed.
Interpretation
To our knowledge, this is the first study to produce a global estimate of the need for rehabilitation services and to show that at least one in every three people in the world needs rehabilitation at some point in the course of their illness or injury. This number counters the common view of rehabilitation as a service required by only few people. We argue that rehabilitation needs to be brought close to communities as an integral part of primary health care to reach more people in need.
Funding
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article\'s original URL.

Lancet: 18 Dec 2021; 396:2006-2017
Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, Hanson SW, Chatterji S, Vos T
Lancet: 18 Dec 2021; 396:2006-2017 | PMID: 33275908
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 2 months in adults with HIV-1 infection (ATLAS-2M), 48-week results: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study.

Overton ET, Richmond G, Rizzardini G, Jaeger H, ... Vanveggel S, Spreen W
Background
Phase 3 clinical studies showed non-inferiority of long-acting intramuscular cabotegravir and rilpivirine dosed every 4 weeks to oral antiretroviral therapy. Important phase 2 results of every 8 weeks dosing, and supportive modelling, underpin further evaluation of every 8 weeks dosing in this trial, which has the potential to offer greater convenience. Our objective was to compare the week 48 antiviral efficacy of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting dosed every 8 weeks with that of every 4 weeks dosing.
Methods
ATLAS-2M is an ongoing, randomised, multicentre (13 countries; Australia, Argentina, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, and the USA), open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority study of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting maintenance therapy administered intramuscularly every 8 weeks (cabotegravir 600 mg plus rilpivirine 900 mg) or every 4 weeks (cabotegravir 400 mg plus rilpivirine 600 mg) to treatment-experienced adults living with HIV-1. Eligible newly recruited individuals must have received an uninterrupted first or second oral standard-of-care regimen for at least 6 months without virological failure and be aged 18 years or older. Eligible participants from the ATLAS trial, from both the oral standard-of-care and long-acting groups, must have completed the 52-week comparative phase with an ATLAS-2M screening plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting every 8 weeks or every 4 weeks. The randomisation schedule was generated by means of the GlaxoSmithKline validated randomisation software RANDALL NG. The primary endpoint at week 48 was HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL (Snapshot, intention-to-treat exposed), with a non-inferiority margin of 4%. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03299049 and is ongoing.
Findings
Screening occurred between Oct 27, 2017, and May 31, 2018. Of 1149 individuals screened, 1045 participants were randomised to the every 8 weeks (n=522) or every 4 weeks (n=523) groups; 37% (n=391) transitioned from every 4 weeks cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting in ATLAS. Median participant age was 42 years (IQR 34-50); 27% (n=280) female at birth; 73% (n=763) white race. Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting every 8 weeks was non-inferior to dosing every 4 weeks (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; 2% vs 1%) with an adjusted treatment difference of 0·8 (95% CI -0·6-2·2). There were eight (2%, every 8 weeks group) and two (<1%, every 4 weeks group) confirmed virological failures (two sequential measures ≥200 copies per mL). For the every 8 weeks group, five (63%) of eight had archived non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor resistance-associated mutations to rilpivirine at baseline. The safety profile was similar between dosing groups, with 844 (81%) of 1045 participants having adverse events (excluding injection site reactions); no treatment-related deaths occurred.
Interpretation
The efficacy and safety profiles of dosing every 8 weeks and dosing every 4 weeks were similar. These results support the use of cabotegravir plus rilpivirine long-acting administered every 2 months as a therapeutic option for people living with HIV-1.
Funding
ViiV Healthcare and Janssen.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 18 Dec 2021; 396:1994-2005
Overton ET, Richmond G, Rizzardini G, Jaeger H, ... Vanveggel S, Spreen W
Lancet: 18 Dec 2021; 396:1994-2005 | PMID: 33308425
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine administered in a prime-boost regimen in young and old adults (COV002): a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial.

Ramasamy MN, Minassian AM, Ewer KJ, Flaxman AL, ... Pollard AJ,
Background
Older adults (aged ≥70 years) are at increased risk of severe disease and death if they develop COVID-19 and are therefore a priority for immunisation should an efficacious vaccine be developed. Immunogenicity of vaccines is often worse in older adults as a result of immunosenescence. We have reported the immunogenicity of a novel chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), in young adults, and now describe the safety and immunogenicity of this vaccine in a wider range of participants, including adults aged 70 years and older.
Methods
In this report of the phase 2 component of a single-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2/3 trial (COV002), healthy adults aged 18 years and older were enrolled at two UK clinical research facilities, in an age-escalation manner, into 18-55 years, 56-69 years, and 70 years and older immunogenicity subgroups. Participants were eligible if they did not have severe or uncontrolled medical comorbidities or a high frailty score (if aged ≥65 years). First, participants were recruited to a low-dose cohort, and within each age group, participants were randomly assigned to receive either intramuscular ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (2·2 × 10 virus particles) or a control vaccine, MenACWY, using block randomisation and stratified by age and dose group and study site, using the following ratios: in the 18-55 years group, 1:1 to either two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY; in the 56-69 years group, 3:1:3:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY; and in the 70 years and older, 5:1:5:1 to one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, one dose of MenACWY, two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, or two doses of MenACWY. Prime-booster regimens were given 28 days apart. Participants were then recruited to the standard-dose cohort (3·5-6·5 × 10 virus particles of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) and the same randomisation procedures were followed, except the 18-55 years group was assigned in a 5:1 ratio to two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or two doses of MenACWY. Participants and investigators, but not staff administering the vaccine, were masked to vaccine allocation. The specific objectives of this report were to assess the safety and humoral and cellular immunogenicity of a single-dose and two-dose schedule in adults older than 55 years. Humoral responses at baseline and after each vaccination until 1 year after the booster were assessed using an in-house standardised ELISA, a multiplex immunoassay, and a live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) microneutralisation assay (MNA). Cellular responses were assessed using an ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay. The coprimary outcomes of the trial were efficacy, as measured by the number of cases of symptomatic, virologically confirmed COVID-19, and safety, as measured by the occurrence of serious adverse events. Analyses were by group allocation in participants who received the vaccine. Here, we report the preliminary findings on safety, reactogenicity, and cellular and humoral immune responses. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137.
Findings
Between May 30 and Aug 8, 2020, 560 participants were enrolled: 160 aged 18-55 years (100 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 60 assigned to MenACWY), 160 aged 56-69 years (120 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY), and 240 aged 70 years and older (200 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY). Seven participants did not receive the boost dose of their assigned two-dose regimen, one participant received the incorrect vaccine, and three were excluded from immunogenicity analyses due to incorrectly labelled samples. 280 (50%) of 552 analysable participants were female. Local and systemic reactions were more common in participants given ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 than in those given the control vaccine, and similar in nature to those previously reported (injection-site pain, feeling feverish, muscle ache, headache), but were less common in older adults (aged ≥56 years) than younger adults. In those receiving two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, after the prime vaccination local reactions were reported in 43 (88%) of 49 participants in the 18-55 years group, 22 (73%) of 30 in the 56-69 years group, and 30 (61%) of 49 in the 70 years and older group, and systemic reactions in 42 (86%) participants in the 18-55 years group, 23 (77%) in the 56-69 years group, and 32 (65%) in the 70 years and older group. As of Oct 26, 2020, 13 serious adverse events occurred during the study period, none of which were considered to be related to either study vaccine. In participants who received two doses of vaccine, median anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG responses 28 days after the boost dose were similar across the three age cohorts (standard-dose groups: 18-55 years, 20 713 arbitrary units [AU]/mL [IQR 13 898-33 550], n=39; 56-69 years, 16 170 AU/mL [10 233-40 353], n=26; and ≥70 years 17 561 AU/mL [9705-37 796], n=47; p=0·68). Neutralising antibody titres after a boost dose were similar across all age groups (median MNA at day 42 in the standard-dose groups: 18-55 years, 193 [IQR 113-238], n=39; 56-69 years, 144 [119-347], n=20; and ≥70 years, 161 [73-323], n=47; p=0·40). By 14 days after the boost dose, 208 (>99%) of 209 boosted participants had neutralising antibody responses. T-cell responses peaked at day 14 after a single standard dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (18-55 years: median 1187 spot-forming cells [SFCs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [IQR 841-2428], n=24; 56-69 years: 797 SFCs [383-1817], n=29; and ≥70 years: 977 SFCs [458-1914], n=48).
Interpretation
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 appears to be better tolerated in older adults than in younger adults and has similar immunogenicity across all age groups after a boost dose. Further assessment of the efficacy of this vaccine is warranted in all age groups and individuals with comorbidities.
Funding
UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 18 Jan 2021; 396:1979-1993
Ramasamy MN, Minassian AM, Ewer KJ, Flaxman AL, ... Pollard AJ,
Lancet: 18 Jan 2021; 396:1979-1993 | PMID: 33220855
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses of yellow fever vaccines: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

Juan-Giner A, Kimathi D, Grantz KH, Hamaluba M, ... Warimwe GM, Grais RF
Background
Stocks of yellow fever vaccine are insufficient to cover exceptional demands for outbreak response. Fractional dosing has shown efficacy, but evidence is limited to the 17DD substrain vaccine. We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of one-fifth fractional dose compared with standard dose of four WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines produced from three substrains.
Methods
We did this randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at research centres in Mbarara, Uganda, and Kilifi, Kenya. Eligible participants were aged 18-59 years, had no contraindications for vaccination, were not pregnant or lactating, had no history of yellow fever vaccination or infection, and did not require yellow fever vaccination for travel. Eligible participants were recruited from communities and randomly assigned to one of eight groups, corresponding to the four vaccines at standard or fractional dose. The vaccine was administered subcutaneously by nurses who were not masked to treatment, but participants and other study personnel were masked to vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with seroconversion 28 days after vaccination. Seroconversion was defined as post-vaccination neutralising antibody titres at least 4 times pre-vaccination measurement measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT). We defined non-inferiority as less than 10% decrease in seroconversion in fractional compared with standard dose groups 28 days after vaccination. The primary outcome was measured in the per-protocol population, and safety analyses included all vaccinated participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495.
Findings
Between Nov 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2018, 1029 participants were assessed for inclusion. 69 people were ineligible, and 960 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to vaccine manufacturer and dose (120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz standard dose, 120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz fractional dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides standard dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides fractional dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar standard dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar fractional dose, 120 to Sanofi Pasteur standard dose, and 120 to Sanofi Pasteur fractional dose). 49 participants had detectable PRNT at baseline and 11 had missing PRNT results at baseline or 28 days. 900 were included in the per-protocol analysis. 959 participants were included in the safety analysis. The absolute difference in seroconversion between fractional and standard doses by vaccine was 1·71% (95% CI -2·60 to 5·28) for Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz, -0·90% (-4·24 to 3·13) for Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides, 1·82% (-2·75 to 5·39) for Institut Pasteur Dakar, and 0·0% (-3·32 to 3·29) for Sanofi Pasteur. Fractional doses from all four vaccines met the non-inferiority criterion. The most common treatment-related adverse events were headache (22·2%), fatigue (13·7%), myalgia (13·3%) and self-reported fever (9·0%). There were no study-vaccine related serious adverse events.
Interpretation
Fractional doses of all WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines were non-inferior to the standard dose in inducing seroconversion 28 days after vaccination, with no major safety concerns. These results support the use of fractional dosage in the general adult population for outbreak response in situations of vaccine shortage.
Funding
The study was funded by Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation, Wellcome Trust (grant no. 092654), and the UK Department for International Development. Vaccines were donated in kind.

Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 08 Jan 2021; 397:119-127
Juan-Giner A, Kimathi D, Grantz KH, Hamaluba M, ... Warimwe GM, Grais RF
Lancet: 08 Jan 2021; 397:119-127 | PMID: 33422245
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study.

Huang C, Huang L, Wang Y, Li X, ... Zhang D, Cao B
Background
The long-term health consequences of COVID-19 remain largely unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health consequences of patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from hospital and investigate the associated risk factors, in particular disease severity.
Methods
We did an ambidirectional cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 who had been discharged from Jin Yin-tan Hospital (Wuhan, China) between Jan 7, 2020, and May 29, 2020. Patients who died before follow-up, patients for whom follow-up would be difficult because of psychotic disorders, dementia, or re-admission to hospital, those who were unable to move freely due to concomitant osteoarthropathy or immobile before or after discharge due to diseases such as stroke or pulmonary embolism, those who declined to participate, those who could not be contacted, and those living outside of Wuhan or in nursing or welfare homes were all excluded. All patients were interviewed with a series of questionnaires for evaluation of symptoms and health-related quality of life, underwent physical examinations and a 6-min walking test, and received blood tests. A stratified sampling procedure was used to sample patients according to their highest seven-category scale during their hospital stay as 3, 4, and 5-6, to receive pulmonary function test, high resolution CT of the chest, and ultrasonography. Enrolled patients who had participated in the Lopinavir Trial for Suppression of SARS-CoV-2 in China received severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody tests. Multivariable adjusted linear or logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between disease severity and long-term health consequences.
Findings
In total, 1733 of 2469 discharged patients with COVID-19 were enrolled after 736 were excluded. Patients had a median age of 57·0 (IQR 47·0-65·0) years and 897 (52%) were men. The follow-up study was done from June 16, to Sept 3, 2020, and the median follow-up time after symptom onset was 186·0 (175·0-199·0) days. Fatigue or muscle weakness (63%, 1038 of 1655) and sleep difficulties (26%, 437 of 1655) were the most common symptoms. Anxiety or depression was reported among 23% (367 of 1617) of patients. The proportions of median 6-min walking distance less than the lower limit of the normal range were 24% for those at severity scale 3, 22% for severity scale 4, and 29% for severity scale 5-6. The corresponding proportions of patients with diffusion impairment were 22% for severity scale 3, 29% for scale 4, and 56% for scale 5-6, and median CT scores were 3·0 (IQR 2·0-5·0) for severity scale 3, 4·0 (3·0-5·0) for scale 4, and 5·0 (4·0-6·0) for scale 5-6. After multivariable adjustment, patients showed an odds ratio (OR) 1·61 (95% CI 0·80-3·25) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 4·60 (1·85-11·48) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for diffusion impairment; OR 0·88 (0·66-1·17) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and OR 1·77 (1·05-2·97) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for anxiety or depression, and OR 0·74 (0·58-0·96) for scale 4 versus scale 3 and 2·69 (1·46-4·96) for scale 5-6 versus scale 3 for fatigue or muscle weakness. Of 94 patients with blood antibodies tested at follow-up, the seropositivity (96·2% vs 58·5%) and median titres (19·0 vs 10·0) of the neutralising antibodies were significantly lower compared with at the acute phase. 107 of 822 participants without acute kidney injury and with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 mL/min per 1·73 m or more at acute phase had eGFR less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m at follow-up.
Interpretation
At 6 months after acute infection, COVID-19 survivors were mainly troubled with fatigue or muscle weakness, sleep difficulties, and anxiety or depression. Patients who were more severely ill during their hospital stay had more severe impaired pulmonary diffusion capacities and abnormal chest imaging manifestations, and are the main target population for intervention of long-term recovery.
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development of Pulmonary Tuberculosis, and Peking Union Medical College Foundation.

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 07 Jan 2021; epub ahead of print
Huang C, Huang L, Wang Y, Li X, ... Zhang D, Cao B
Lancet: 07 Jan 2021; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33428867
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Four versus six cycles of CHOP chemotherapy in combination with six applications of rituximab in patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma with favourable prognosis (FLYER): a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

Poeschel V, Held G, Ziepert M, Witzens-Harig M, ... ,
Background
Six cycles of R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) are the standard treatment for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In the FLYER trial, we assessed whether four cycles of CHOP plus six applications of rituximab are non-inferior to six cycles of R-CHOP in a population of patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma with favourable prognosis.
Methods
This two-arm, open-label, international, multicentre, prospective, randomised phase 3 non-inferiority trial was done at 138 clinical sites in Denmark, Israel, Italy, Norway, and Germany. We enrolled patients aged 18-60 years, with stage I-II disease, normal serum lactate dehydrogenase concentration, ECOG performance status 0-1, and without bulky disease (maximal tumour diameter <7·5 cm). Randomisation was computer-based and done centrally in a 1:1 ratio using the Pocock minimisation algorithm after stratification for centres, stage (I vs II), and extralymphatic sites (no vs yes). Patients were assigned to receive either six cycles of R-CHOP or four cycles of R-CHOP plus two doses of rituximab. CHOP comprised cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m), doxorubicin (50 mg/m), and vincristine (1·4 mg/m, with a maximum total dose of 2 mg), all administered intravenously on day 1, plus oral prednisone or prednisolone at the discretion of the investigator (100 mg) administered on days 1-5. Rituximab was given at a dose of 375 mg/m of body surface area. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. No radiotherapy was planned except for testicular lymphoma treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival after 3 years. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of assigned treatment. A non-inferiority margin of -5·5% was chosen. The trial, which is completed, was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00278421.
Findings
Between Dec 2, 2005, and Oct 7, 2016, 592 patients were enrolled, of whom 295 patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of R-CHOP and 297 were assigned to receive four cycles of R-CHOP plus two doses of rituximab. Four patients in the four-cycles group withdrew informed consent before the start of treatment, so 588 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. After a median follow-up of 66 months (IQR 42-100), 3-year progression-free survival of patients who had four cycles of R-CHOP plus two doses of rituximab was 96% (95% CI 94-99), which was 3% better (lower limit of the one-sided 95% CI for the difference was 0%) than six cycles of R-CHOP, demonstrating the non-inferiority of the four-cycles regimen. 294 haematological and 1036 non-haematological adverse events were documented in the four-cycles group compared with 426 haematological and 1280 non-haematological adverse events in the six-cycles group. Two patients, both in the six-cycles group, died during study therapy.
Interpretation
In young patients with aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and favourable prognosis, four cycles of R-CHOP is non-inferior to six cycles of R-CHOP, with relevant reduction of toxic effects. Thus, chemotherapy can be reduced without compromising outcomes in this population.
Funding
Deutsche Krebshilfe.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; 394:2271-2281
Poeschel V, Held G, Ziepert M, Witzens-Harig M, ... ,
Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; 394:2271-2281 | PMID: 31868632
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Acute flaccid myelitis: cause, diagnosis, and management.

Murphy OC, Messacar K, Benson L, Bove R, ... Pardo CA,

Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) is a disabling, polio-like illness mainly affecting children. Outbreaks of AFM have occurred across multiple global regions since 2012, and the disease appears to be caused by non-polio enterovirus infection, posing a major public health challenge. The clinical presentation of flaccid and often profound muscle weakness (which can invoke respiratory failure and other critical complications) can mimic several other acute neurological illnesses. There is no single sensitive and specific test for AFM, and the diagnosis relies on identification of several important clinical, neuroimaging, and cerebrospinal fluid characteristics. Following the acute phase of AFM, patients typically have substantial residual disability and unique long-term rehabilitation needs. In this Review we describe the epidemiology, clinical features, course, and outcomes of AFM to help to guide diagnosis, management, and rehabilitation. Future research directions include further studies evaluating host and pathogen factors, including investigations into genetic, viral, and immunological features of affected patients, host-virus interactions, and investigations of targeted therapeutic approaches to improve the long-term outcomes in this population.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Murphy OC, Messacar K, Benson L, Bove R, ... Pardo CA,
Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33357469
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Ultra-early tranexamic acid after subarachnoid haemorrhage (ULTRA): a randomised controlled trial.

Post R, Germans MR, Tjerkstra MA, Vergouwen MDI, ... Verbaan D,
Background
In patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, short-term antifibrinolytic therapy with tranexamic acid has been shown to reduce the risk of rebleeding. However, whether this treatment improves clinical outcome is unclear. We investigated whether ultra-early, short-term treatment with tranexamic acid improves clinical outcome at 6 months.
Methods
In this multicentre prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label trial with masked outcome assessment, adult patients with spontaneous CT-proven subarachnoid haemorrhage in eight treatment centres and 16 referring hospitals in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to treatment with tranexamic acid in addition to care as usual (tranexamic acid group) or care as usual only (control group). Tranexamic acid was started immediately after diagnosis in the presenting hospital (1 g bolus, followed by continuous infusion of 1 g every 8 h, terminated immediately before aneurysm treatment, or 24 h after start of the medication, whichever came first). The primary endpoint was clinical outcome at 6 months, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale, dichotomised into a good (0-3) or poor (4-6) clinical outcome. Both primary and safety analyses were according to intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02684812.
Findings
Between July 24, 2013, and July 29, 2019, we enrolled 955 patients; 480 patients were randomly assigned to tranexamic acid and 475 patients to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, good clinical outcome was observed in 287 (60%) of 475 patients in the tranexamic acid group, and 300 (64%) of 470 patients in the control group (treatment centre adjusted odds ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·66-1·12). Rebleeding after randomisation and before aneurysm treatment occurred in 49 (10%) patients in the tranexamic acid and in 66 (14%) patients in the control group (odds ratio 0·71, 95% CI 0·48-1·04). Other serious adverse events were comparable between groups.
Interpretation
In patients with CT-proven subarachnoid haemorrhage, presumably caused by a ruptured aneurysm, ultra-early, short-term tranexamic acid treatment did not improve clinical outcome at 6 months, as measured by the modified Rankin Scale.
Funding
Fonds NutsOhra.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Post R, Germans MR, Tjerkstra MA, Vergouwen MDI, ... Verbaan D,
Lancet: 20 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33357465
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Oral rimegepant for preventive treatment of migraine: a phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Croop R, Lipton RB, Kudrow D, Stock DA, ... Coric V, Goadsby PJ
Background
Rimegepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that has shown efficacy and safety in the acute treatment of migraine. We aimed to compare the efficacy of rimegepant with placebo for preventive treatment of migraine.
Methods
We did a multicentre, phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 92 sites in the USA. Adults with at least a 1-year history of migraine were recruited. After a 4-week observation period, eligible participants were randomised using an interactive web response system to oral rimegepant 75 mg or matching placebo every other day for 12 weeks (double-blind treatment phase). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from the 4-week observation period in the mean number of migraine days per month in the last 4 weeks of the double-blind treatment phase (weeks 9-12). Participants who received at least one dose of their assigned study medication and who had 14 days or more of data in the observation period and 14 days or more of data for at least one 4-week interval during the double-blind treatment phase were analysed for efficacy. Those who received at least one dose of study medication were analysed for safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732638.
Findings
Between Nov 14, 2018, and Aug 30, 2019, 1591 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility, of whom 747 were randomly allocated either rimegepant (n=373) or placebo (n=374). 695 participants were included in the analysis for efficacy, of whom 348 were assigned rimegepant and 347 were allocated placebo. Rimegepant was superior to placebo on the primary endpoint of change in the mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9-12. The change from the observation period in mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9-12 was -4·3 days (95% CI -4·8 to -3·9) with rimegepant and -3·5 days (-4·0 to -3·0) with placebo (least squares mean difference -0·8 days, 95% CI -1·46 to -0·20; p=0·0099). 741 participants received study medication and were included in the safety analysis. 133 (36%) of 370 patients who received rimegepant reported an adverse event, compared with 133 (36%) of 371 who received placebo. Seven (2%) participants who received rimegepant and four (1%) who received placebo discontinued the study due to an adverse event; no patients died.
Interpretation
Taken every other day, rimegepant was effective for preventive treatment of migraine. Tolerability was similar to that of placebo, and no unexpected or serious safety issues were noted.
Funding
Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 14 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Croop R, Lipton RB, Kudrow D, Stock DA, ... Coric V, Goadsby PJ
Lancet: 14 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33338437
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Retinal vascular occlusions.

Scott IU, Campochiaro PA, Newman NJ, Biousse V

Acute retinal vascular occlusions are common causes of visual impairment. Although both retinal artery occlusions and retinal vein occlusions are associated with increased age and cardiovascular risk factors, their pathophysiology, systemic implications, and management differ substantially. Acute management of retinal artery occlusions involves a multidisciplinary approach including neurologists with stroke expertise, whereas treatment of retinal vein occlusions is provided by ophthalmologists. Optimisation of systemic risk factors by patients\' primary care providers is an important component of the management of these two disorders.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1927-1940
Scott IU, Campochiaro PA, Newman NJ, Biousse V
Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1927-1940 | PMID: 33308475
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Primary biliary cholangitis.

Lleo A, Wang GQ, Gershwin ME, Hirschfield GM

Primary biliary cholangitis is an autoimmune liver disease that predominantly affects women. It is characterised by a chronic and destructive, small bile duct, granulomatous lymphocytic cholangitis, with typical seroreactivity for antimitochondrial antibodies. Patients have variable risks of progressive ductopenia, cholestasis, and biliary fibrosis. Considerations for the cause of this disease emphasise an interaction of chronic immune damage with biliary epithelial cell responses and encompass complex, poorly understood genetic risks and environmental triggers. Licensed disease-modifying treatment focuses on amelioration of cholestasis, with weight-dosed oral ursodeoxycholic acid. For patients who do not respond sufficiently, or patients with ursodeoxycholic acid intolerance, conditionally licensed add-on therapy is with the FXR (NR1H4) agonist, obeticholic acid. Off-label therapy is recognised as an alternative, notably with the pan-PPAR agonist bezafibrate; clinical trial agents are also under development. Baseline characteristics, such as young age, male sex, and advanced disease, and serum markers of liver injury, particularly bilirubin and ALP, are used to stratify risk and assess treatment responsiveness. Parallel attention to the burden of patient symptoms is paramount, including pruritus and fatigue.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1915-1926
Lleo A, Wang GQ, Gershwin ME, Hirschfield GM
Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1915-1926 | PMID: 33308474
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

First-attempt success rate of video laryngoscopy in small infants (VISI): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Garcia-Marcinkiewicz AG, Kovatsis PG, Hunyady AI, Olomu PN, ... Fiadjoe JE,
Background
Orotracheal intubation of infants using direct laryngoscopy can be challenging. We aimed to investigate whether video laryngoscopy with a standard blade done by anaesthesia clinicians improves the first-attempt success rate of orotracheal intubation and reduces the risk of complications when compared with direct laryngoscopy. We hypothesised that the first-attempt success rate would be higher with video laryngoscopy than with direct laryngoscopy.
Methods
In this multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial, we recruited infants without difficult airways abnormalities requiring orotracheal intubation in operating theatres at four quaternary children\'s hospitals in the USA and one in Australia. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to video laryngoscopy or direct laryngoscopy using random permuted blocks of size 2, 4, and 6, and stratified by site and clinician role. Guardians were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of infants with a successful first attempt at orotracheal intubation. Analysis (modified intention-to-treat [mITT] and per-protocol) used a generalised estimating equation model to account for clustering of patients treated by the same clinician and institution, and adjusted for gestational age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, weight, clinician role, and institution. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03396432.
Findings
Between June 4, 2018, and Aug 19, 2019, 564 infants were randomly assigned: 282 (50%) to video laryngoscopy and 282 (50%) to direct laryngoscopy. The mean age of infants was 5·5 months (SD 3·3). 274 infants in the video laryngoscopy group and 278 infants in the direct laryngoscopy group were included in the mITT analysis. In the video laryngoscopy group, 254 (93%) infants were successfully intubated on the first attempt compared with 244 (88%) in the direct laryngoscopy group (adjusted absolute risk difference 5·5% [95% CI 0·7 to 10·3]; p=0·024). Severe complications occurred in four (2%) infants in the video laryngoscopy group compared with 15 (5%) in the direct laryngoscopy group (-3·7% [-6·5 to -0·9]; p=0·0087). Fewer oesophageal intubations occurred in the video laryngoscopy group (n=1 [<1%]) compared with in the direct laryngoscopy group (n=7 [3%]; -2·3 [-4·3 to -0·3]; p=0·028).
Interpretation
Among anaesthetised infants, using video laryngoscopy with a standard blade improves the first-attempt success rate and reduces complications.
Funding
Anaesthesia Patient Safety Foundation, Society for Airway Management, and Karl Storz Endoscopy.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1905-1913
Garcia-Marcinkiewicz AG, Kovatsis PG, Hunyady AI, Olomu PN, ... Fiadjoe JE,
Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1905-1913 | PMID: 33308472
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Genome-edited, donor-derived allogeneic anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells in paediatric and adult B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: results of two phase 1 studies.

Benjamin R, Graham C, Yallop D, Jozwik A, ... Qasim W,
Background
Genome-edited donor-derived allogeneic anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells offer a novel form of CAR-T-cell product that is available for immediate clinical use, thereby broadening access and applicability. UCART19 is one such product investigated in children and adults with relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Two multicentre phase 1 studies aimed to investigate the feasibility, safety, and antileukaemic activity of UCART19 in children and adults with relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
Methods
We enrolled paediatric or adult patients in two ongoing, multicentre, phase 1 clinical trials to evaluate the safety and antileukaemic activity of UCART19. All patients underwent lymphodepletion with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide with or without alemtuzumab, then children received UCART19 at 1·1-2·3 × 10 cells per kg and adults received UCART19 doses of 6 × 10 cells, 6-8 × 10 cells, or 1·8-2·4 × 10 cells in a dose-escalation study. The primary outcome measure was adverse events in the period between first infusion and data cutoff. These studies were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02808442 and NCT02746952.
Findings
Between June 3, 2016, and Oct 23, 2018, seven children and 14 adults were enrolled in the two studies and received UCART19. Cytokine release syndrome was the most common adverse event and was observed in 19 patients (91%); three (14%) had grade 3-4 cytokine release syndrome. Other adverse events were grade 1 or 2 neurotoxicity in eight patients (38%), grade 1 acute skin graft-versus-host disease in two patients (10%), and grade 4 prolonged cytopenia in six patients (32%). Two treatment-related deaths occurred; one caused by neutropenic sepsis in a patient with concurrent cytokine release syndrome and one from pulmonary haemorrhage in a patient with persistent cytopenia. 14 (67%) of 21 patients had a complete response or complete response with incomplete haematological recovery 28 days after infusion. Patients not receiving alemtuzumab (n=4) showed no UCART19 expansion or antileukaemic activity. The median duration of response was 4·1 months with ten (71%) of 14 responders proceeding to a subsequent allogeneic stem-cell transplant. Progression-free survival at 6 months was 27%, and overall survival was 55%.
Interpretation
These two studies show, for the first time, the feasibility of using allogeneic, genome-edited CAR T cells to treat patients with aggressive leukaemia. UCART19 exhibited in-vivo expansion and antileukaemic activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated paediatric and adult patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. The results this study are an encouraging step forward for the field of allogeneic CAR T cells, and UCART19 offers the opportunity to treat patients with rapidly progressive disease and where autologous CAR-T-cell therapy is unavailable.
Funding
Servier.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1885-1894
Benjamin R, Graham C, Yallop D, Jozwik A, ... Qasim W,
Lancet: 11 Dec 2020; 396:1885-1894 | PMID: 33308471
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Male infertility.

Agarwal A, Baskaran S, Parekh N, Cho CL, ... Panner Selvam MK, Shah R

It is estimated that infertility affects 8-12% of couples globally, with a male factor being a primary or contributing cause in approximately 50% of couples. Causes of male subfertility vary highly, but can be related to congenital, acquired, or idiopathic factors that impair spermatogenesis. Many health conditions can affect male fertility, which underscores the need for a thorough evaluation of patients to identify treatable or reversible lifestyle factors or medical conditions. Although semen analysis remains the cornerstone for evaluating male infertility, advanced diagnostic tests to investigate sperm quality and function have been developed to improve diagnosis and management. The use of assisted reproductive techniques has also substantially improved the ability of couples with infertility to have biological children. This Seminar aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the assessment and management of men with infertility, along with current controversies and future endeavours.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 09 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Agarwal A, Baskaran S, Parekh N, Cho CL, ... Panner Selvam MK, Shah R
Lancet: 09 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33308486
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Safety and immunogenicity of two novel type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine candidates compared with a monovalent type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine in healthy adults: two clinical trials.

De Coster I, Leroux-Roels I, Bandyopadhyay AS, Gast C, ... Bachtiar NS, Van Damme P
Background
Two novel type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2) candidates, novel OPV2-c1 and novel OPV2-c2, designed to be more genetically stable than the licensed Sabin monovalent OPV2, have been developed to respond to ongoing polio outbreaks due to circulating vaccine-derived type 2 polioviruses.
Methods
We did two randomised studies at two centres in Belgium. The first was a phase 4 historical control study of monovalent OPV2 in Antwerp, done before global withdrawal of OPV2, and the second was a phase 2 study in Antwerp and Ghent with novel OPV2-c1 and novel OPV2-c2. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18-50 years with documented history of at least three polio vaccinations, including OPV in the phase 4 study and either OPV or inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in the novel OPV2 phase 2 study, with no dose within 12 months of study start. In the historical control trial, participants were randomly assigned to either one dose or two doses of monovalent OPV2. In the novel OPV2 trial, participants with previous OPV vaccinations were randomly assigned to either one or two doses of novel OPV2-c1 or to one or two doses of novel OPV2-c2. IPV-vaccinated participants were randomly assigned to receive two doses of either novel OPV2-c1, novel OPV2-c2, or placebo. Vaccine administrators were unmasked to treatment; medical staff performing safety and reactogenicity assessments or blood draws for immunogenicity assessments were masked. Participants received the first vaccine dose on day 0, and a second dose on day 28 if assigned to receive a second dose. Primary objectives were assessments and comparisons of safety up to 28 days after each dose, including solicited adverse events and serious adverse events, and immunogenicity (seroprotection rates on day 28 after the first vaccine dose) between monovalent OPV2 and the two novel OPV2 candidates. Primary immunogenicity analyses were done in the per-protocol population. Safety was assessed in the total vaccinated population-ie, all participants who received at least one dose of their assigned vaccine. The phase 4 control study is registered with EudraCT (2015-003325-33) and the phase 2 novel OPV2 study is registered with EudraCT (2018-001684-22) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04544787).
Findings
In the historical control study, between Jan 25 and March 18, 2016, 100 volunteers were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive one or two doses of monovalent OPV2 (n=50 in each group). In the novel OPV2 study, between Oct 15, 2018, and Feb 27, 2019, 200 previously OPV-vaccinated volunteers were assigned to the four groups to receive one or two doses of novel OPV2-c1 or novel OPV2-c2 (n=50 per group); a further 50 participants, previously vaccinated with IPV, were assigned to novel OPV2-c1 (n=17), novel OPV2-c2 (n=16), or placebo (n=17). All participants received the first dose of assigned vaccine or placebo and were included in the total vaccinated population. All vaccines appeared safe; no definitely vaccine-related withdrawals or serious adverse events were reported. After first doses in previously OPV-vaccinated participants, 62 (62%) of 100 monovalent OPV2 recipients, 71 (71%) of 100 recipients of novel OPV2-c1, and 74 (74%) of 100 recipients of novel OPV2-c2 reported solicited systemic adverse events, four (monovalent OPV2), three (novel OPV2-c1), and two (novel OPV2-c2) of which were considered severe. In IPV-vaccinated participants, solicited adverse events occurred in 16 (94%) of 17 who received novel OPV2-c1 (including one severe) and 13 (81%) of 16 who received novel OPV2-c2 (including one severe), compared with 15 (88%) of 17 placebo recipients (including two severe). In previously OPV-vaccinated participants, 286 (97%) of 296 were seropositive at baseline; after one dose, 100% of novel OPV2 vaccinees and 97 (97%) of monovalent OPV2 vaccinees were seropositive.
Interpretation
Novel OPV2 candidates were as safe, well tolerated, and immunogenic as monovalent OPV2 in previously OPV-vaccinated and IPV-vaccinated adults. These data supported the further assessment of the vaccine candidates in children and infants.
Funding
University of Antwerp and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 08 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
De Coster I, Leroux-Roels I, Bandyopadhyay AS, Gast C, ... Bachtiar NS, Van Damme P
Lancet: 08 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33308429
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Safety and immunogenicity of two novel type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine candidates compared with a monovalent type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine in children and infants: two clinical trials.

Sáez-Llorens X, Bandyopadhyay AS, Gast C, Leon T, ... Costa Clemens SA, Rüttimann R
Background
Continued emergence and spread of circulating vaccine-derived type 2 polioviruses and vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis from Sabin oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs) has stimulated development of two novel type 2 OPV candidates (OPV2-c1 and OPV2-c2) designed to have similar immunogenicity, improved genetic stability, and less potential to reacquire neurovirulence. We aimed to assess safety and immunogenicity of the two novel OPV candidates compared with a monovalent Sabin OPV in children and infants.
Methods
We did two single-centre, multi-site, partly-masked, randomised trials in healthy cohorts of children (aged 1-4 years) and infants (aged 18-22 weeks) in Panama: a control phase 4 study with monovalent Sabin OPV2 before global cessation of monovalent OPV2 use, and a phase 2 study with low and high doses of two novel OPV2 candidates. All participants received one OPV2 vaccination and subsets received two doses 28 days apart. Parents reported solicited and unsolicited adverse events. Type 2 poliovirus neutralising antibodies were measured at days 0, 7, 28, and 56, and stool viral shedding was assessed up to 28 days post-vaccination. Primary objectives were to assess safety in all participants and non-inferiority of novel OPV2 day 28 seroprotection versus monovalent OPV2 in infants (non-inferiority margin 10%). These studies were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02521974 and NCT03554798.
Findings
The control study took place between Oct 23, 2015, and April 29, 2016, and the subsequent phase 2 study between Sept 19, 2018, and Sept 30, 2019. 150 children (50 in the control study and 100 of 129 assessed for eligibility in the novel OPV2 study) and 684 infants (110 of 114 assessed for eligibility in the control study and 574 of 684 assessed for eligibility in the novel OPV2 study) were enrolled and received at least one study vaccination. Vaccinations were safe and well tolerated with no causally associated serious adverse events or important medical events in any group. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were overwhelmingly mild or moderate irrespective of vaccine or dose. Nearly all children were seroprotected at baseline, indicating high baseline immunity. In children, the seroprotection rate 28 days after one dose was 100% for monovalent OPV2 and both novel OPV2 candidates. In infants at day 28, 91 (94% [95% CI 87-98]) of 97 were seroprotected after receiving monovalent OPV2, 134 (94% [88-97]) of 143 after high-dose novel OPV2-c1, 122 (93% [87-97]) of 131 after low-dose novel OPV2-c1, 138 (95% [90-98]) of 146 after high-dose novel OPV2-c2, and 115 (91% [84-95]) of 127 after low-dose novel OPV2-c2. Non-inferiority was shown for low-dose and high-dose novel OPV2-c1 and high-dose novel OPV2-c2 despite monovalent OPV2 recipients having higher baseline immunity.
Interpretation
Both novel OPV2 candidates were safe, well tolerated, and immunogenic in children and infants. Novel OPV2 could be an important addition to our resources against poliovirus given the current epidemiological situation.
Funding
Fighting Infectious Diseases in Emerging Countries and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 08 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Sáez-Llorens X, Bandyopadhyay AS, Gast C, Leon T, ... Costa Clemens SA, Rüttimann R
Lancet: 08 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33308427
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

Voysey M, Clemens SAC, Madhi SA, Weckx LY, ... Pollard AJ,
Background
A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials.
Methods
This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 10 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674.
Findings
Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation.
Interpretation
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials.
Funding
UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D\'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland\'s NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 07 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Voysey M, Clemens SAC, Madhi SA, Weckx LY, ... Pollard AJ,
Lancet: 07 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33306989
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Advanced reperfusion strategies for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and refractory ventricular fibrillation (ARREST): a phase 2, single centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Yannopoulos D, Bartos J, Raveendran G, Walser E, ... Tolar J, Aufderheide TP
Background
Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and ventricular fibrillation, more than half present with refractory ventricular fibrillation unresponsive to initial standard advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) treatment. We did the first randomised clinical trial in the USA of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-facilitated resuscitation versus standard ACLS treatment in patients with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation.
Methods
For this phase 2, single centre, open-label, adaptive, safety and efficacy randomised clinical trial, we included adults aged 18-75 years presenting to the University of Minnesota Medical Center (MN, USA) with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation, no return of spontaneous circulation after three shocks, automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a Lund University Cardiac Arrest System, and estimated transfer time shorter than 30 min. Patients were randomly assigned to early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation or standard ACLS treatment on hospital arrival by use of a secure schedule generated with permuted blocks of randomly varying block sizes. Allocation concealment was achieved by use of a randomisation schedule that required scratching off an opaque layer to reveal assignment. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were safety, survival, and functional assessment at hospital discharge and at 3 months and 6 months after discharge. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The study qualified for exception from informed consent (21 Code of Federal Regulations 50.24). The ARREST trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03880565.
Findings
Between Aug 8, 2019, and June 14, 2020, 36 patients were assessed for inclusion. After exclusion of six patients, 30 were randomly assigned to standard ACLS treatment (n=15) or to early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation (n=15). One patient in the ECMO-facilitated resuscitation group withdrew from the study before discharge. The mean age was 59 years (range 36-73), and 25 (83%) of 30 patients were men. Survival to hospital discharge was observed in one (7%) of 15 patients (95% credible interval 1·6-30·2) in the standard ACLS treatment group versus six (43%) of 14 patients (21·3-67·7) in the early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation group (risk difference 36·2%, 3·7-59·2; posterior probability of ECMO superiority 0·9861). The study was terminated at the first preplanned interim analysis by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute after unanimous recommendation from the Data Safety Monitoring Board after enrolling 30 patients because the posterior probability of ECMO superiority exceeded the prespecified monitoring boundary. Cumulative 6-month survival was significantly better in the early ECMO group than in the standard ACLS group. No unanticipated serious adverse events were observed.
Interpretation
Early ECMO-facilitated resuscitation for patients with OHCA and refractory ventricular fibrillation significantly improved survival to hospital discharge compared with standard ACLS treatment.
Funding
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1807-1816
Yannopoulos D, Bartos J, Raveendran G, Walser E, ... Tolar J, Aufderheide TP
Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1807-1816 | PMID: 33197396
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Bipolar disorders.

McIntyre RS, Berk M, Brietzke E, Goldstein BI, ... Young AH, Mansur RB

Bipolar disorders are a complex group of severe and chronic disorders that includes bipolar I disorder, defined by the presence of a syndromal, manic episode, and bipolar II disorder, defined by the presence of a syndromal, hypomanic episode and a major depressive episode. Bipolar disorders substantially reduce psychosocial functioning and are associated with a loss of approximately 10-20 potential years of life. The mortality gap between populations with bipolar disorders and the general population is principally a result of excess deaths from cardiovascular disease and suicide. Bipolar disorder has a high heritability (approximately 70%). Bipolar disorders share genetic risk alleles with other mental and medical disorders. Bipolar I has a closer genetic association with schizophrenia relative to bipolar II, which has a closer genetic association with major depressive disorder. Although the pathogenesis of bipolar disorders is unknown, implicated processes include disturbances in neuronal-glial plasticity, monoaminergic signalling, inflammatory homoeostasis, cellular metabolic pathways, and mitochondrial function. The high prevalence of childhood maltreatment in people with bipolar disorders and the association between childhood maltreatment and a more complex presentation of bipolar disorder (eg, one including suicidality) highlight the role of adverse environmental exposures on the presentation of bipolar disorders. Although mania defines bipolar I disorder, depressive episodes and symptoms dominate the longitudinal course of, and disproportionately account for morbidity and mortality in, bipolar disorders. Lithium is the gold standard mood-stabilising agent for the treatment of people with bipolar disorders, and has antimanic, antidepressant, and anti-suicide effects. Although antipsychotics are effective in treating mania, few antipsychotics have proven to be effective in bipolar depression. Divalproex and carbamazepine are effective in the treatment of acute mania and lamotrigine is effective at treating and preventing bipolar depression. Antidepressants are widely prescribed for bipolar disorders despite a paucity of compelling evidence for their short-term or long-term efficacy. Moreover, antidepressant prescription in bipolar disorder is associated, in many cases, with mood destabilisation, especially during maintenance treatment. Unfortunately, effective pharmacological treatments for bipolar disorders are not universally available, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. Targeting medical and psychiatric comorbidity, integrating adjunctive psychosocial treatments, and involving caregivers have been shown to improve health outcomes for people with bipolar disorders. The aim of this Seminar, which is intended mainly for primary care physicians, is to provide an overview of diagnostic, pathogenetic, and treatment considerations in bipolar disorders. Towards the foregoing aim, we review and synthesise evidence on the epidemiology, mechanisms, screening, and treatment of bipolar disorders.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1841-1856
McIntyre RS, Berk M, Brietzke E, Goldstein BI, ... Young AH, Mansur RB
Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1841-1856 | PMID: 33278937
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Effectiveness of seasonal malaria chemoprevention at scale in west and central Africa: an observational study.


Background
Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) aims to prevent malaria in children during the high malaria transmission season. The Achieving Catalytic Expansion of SMC in the Sahel (ACCESS-SMC) project sought to remove barriers to the scale-up of SMC in seven countries in 2015 and 2016. We evaluated the project, including coverage, effectiveness of the intervention, safety, feasibility, drug resistance, and cost-effectiveness.
Methods
For this observational study, we collected data on the delivery, effectiveness, safety, influence on drug resistance, costs of delivery, impact on malaria incidence and mortality, and cost-effectiveness of SMC, during its administration for 4 months each year (2015 and 2016) to children younger than 5 years, in Burkina Faso, Chad, The Gambia, Guinea, Mali, Niger, and Nigeria. SMC was administered monthly by community health workers who visited door-to-door. Drug administration was monitored via tally sheets and via household cluster-sample coverage surveys. Pharmacovigilance was based on targeted spontaneous reporting and monitoring systems were strengthened. Molecular markers of resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine in the general population before and 2 years after SMC introduction was assessed from community surveys. Effectiveness of monthly SMC treatments was measured in case-control studies that compared receipt of SMC between patients with confirmed malaria and neighbourhood-matched community controls eligible to receive SMC. Impact on incidence and mortality was assessed from confirmed outpatient cases, hospital admissions, and deaths associated with malaria, as reported in national health management information systems in Burkina Faso and The Gambia, and from data from selected outpatient facilities (all countries). Provider costs of SMC were estimated from financial costs, costs of health-care staff time, and volunteer opportunity costs, and cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as the total cost of SMC in each country divided by the predicted number of cases averted.
Findings
12 467 933 monthly SMC treatments were administered in 2015 to a target population of 3 650 455 children, and 25 117 480 were administered in 2016 to a target population of 7 551 491. In 2015, among eligible children, mean coverage per month was 76·4% (95% CI 74·0-78·8), and 54·5% children (95% CI 50·4-58·7) received all four treatments. Similar coverage was achieved in 2016 (74·8% [72·2-77·3] treated per month and 53·0% [48·5-57·4] treated four times). In 779 individual case safety reports over 2015-16, 36 serious adverse drug reactions were reported (one child with rash, two with fever, 31 with gastrointestinal disorders, one with extrapyramidal syndrome, and one with Quincke\'s oedema). No cases of severe skin reactions (Stevens-Johnson or Lyell syndrome) were reported. SMC treatment was associated with a protective effectiveness of 88·2% (95% CI 78·7-93·4) over 28 days in case-control studies (2185 cases of confirmed malaria and 4370 controls). In Burkina Faso and The Gambia, implementation of SMC was associated with reductions in the number of malaria deaths in hospital during the high transmission period, of 42·4% (95% CI 5·9 to 64·7) in Burkina Faso and 56·6% (28·9 to 73·5) in The Gambia. Over 2015-16, the estimated reduction in confirmed malaria cases at outpatient clinics during the high transmission period in the seven countries ranged from 25·5% (95% CI 6·1 to 40·9) in Nigeria to 55·2% (42·0 to 65·3) in The Gambia. Molecular markers of resistance occurred at low frequencies. In individuals aged 10-30 years without SMC, the combined mutations associated with resistance to amodiaquine (pfcrt CVIET haplotype and pfmdr1 mutations [86Tyr and 184Tyr]) had a prevalence of 0·7% (95% CI 0·4-1·2) in 2016 and 0·4% (0·1-0·8) in 2018 (prevalence ratio 0·5 [95% CI 0·2-1·2]), and the quintuple mutation associated with resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (triple mutation in pfdhfr and pfdhps mutations [437Gly and 540Glu]) had a prevalence of 0·2% (0·1-0·5) in 2016 and 1·0% (0·6-1·6) in 2018 (prevalence ratio 4·8 [1·7-13·7]). The weighted average economic cost of administering four monthly SMC treatments was US$3·63 per child.
Interpretation
SMC at scale was effective in preventing morbidity and mortality from malaria. Serious adverse reactions were rarely reported. Coverage varied, with some areas consistently achieving high levels via door-to-door campaigns. Markers of resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine remained uncommon, but with some selection for resistance to sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, and the situation needs to be carefully monitored. These findings should support efforts to ensure high levels of SMC coverage in west and central Africa.
Funding
Unitaid.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1829-1840
Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1829-1840 | PMID: 33278936
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (KEYNOTE-355): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial.

Cortes J, Cescon DW, Rugo HS, Nowecki Z, ... Schmid P,
Background
Pembrolizumab monotherapy showed durable antitumour activity and manageable safety in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. We aimed to examine whether the addition of pembrolizumab would enhance the antitumour activity of chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.
Methods
In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, done in 209 sites in 29 countries, we randomly assigned patients 2:1 with untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer using a block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice-response system with integrated web-response to pembrolizumab (200 mg) every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel; paclitaxel; or gemcitabine plus carboplatin) or placebo plus chemotherapy. Randomisation was stratified by type of on-study chemotherapy (taxane or gemcitabine-carboplatin), PD-L1 expression at baseline (combined positive score [CPS] ≥1 or <1), and previous treatment with the same class of chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting (yes or no). Eligibility criteria included age at least 18 years, centrally confirmed triple-negative breast cancer; at least one measurable lesion; provision of a newly obtained tumour sample for determination of triple-negative breast cancer status and PD-L1 status by immunohistochemistry at a central laboratory; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 0 or 1; and adequate organ function. The sponsor, investigators, other study site staff (except for the unmasked pharmacist), and patients were masked to pembrolizumab versus saline placebo administration. In addition, the sponsor, the investigators, other study site staff, and patients were masked to patient-level tumour PD-L1 biomarker results. Dual primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival assessed in the PD-L1 CPS of 10 or more, CPS of 1 or more, and intention-to-treat populations. The definitive assessment of progression-free survival was done at this interim analysis; follow-up to assess overall survival is continuing. For progression-free survival, a hierarchical testing strategy was used, such that testing was done first in patients with CPS of 10 or more (prespecified statistical criterion was α=0·00411 at this interim analysis), then in patients with CPS of 1 or more (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis, with partial alpha from progression-free survival in patients with CPS of 10 or more passed over), and finally in the intention-to-treat population (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518, and is ongoing.
Findings
Between Jan 9, 2017, and June 12, 2018, of 1372 patients screened, 847 were randomly assigned to treatment, with 566 patients in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 281 patients in the placebo-chemotherapy group. At the second interim analysis (data cutoff, Dec 11, 2019), median follow-up was 25·9 months (IQR 22·8-29·9) in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 26·3 months (22·7-29·7) in the placebo-chemotherapy group. Among patients with CPS of 10 or more, median progression-free survival was 9·7 months with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy and 5·6 months with placebo-chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for progression or death, 0·65, 95% CI 0·49-0·86; one-sided p=0·0012 [primary objective met]). Median progression-free survival was 7·6 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·74, 0·61-0·90; one-sided p=0·0014 [not significant]) among patients with CPS of 1 or more and 7·5 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·82, 0·69-0·97 [not tested]) among the intention-to-treat population. The pembrolizumab treatment effect increased with PD-L1 enrichment. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse event rates were 68% in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 67% in the placebo-chemotherapy group, including death in <1% in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 0% in the placebo-chemotherapy group.
Interpretation
Pembrolizumab-chemotherapy showed a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival versus placebo-chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer with CPS of 10 or more. These findings suggest a role for the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.
Funding
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1817-1828
Cortes J, Cescon DW, Rugo HS, Nowecki Z, ... Schmid P,
Lancet: 04 Dec 2020; 396:1817-1828 | PMID: 33278935
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Enhancing anti-tumour efficacy with immunotherapy combinations.

Meric-Bernstam F, Larkin J, Tabernero J, Bonini C

Several tumour types are responsive to immunotherapy, as shown by regulatory approvals for immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, many patients either do not respond or do not have durable clinical benefit. Thus, there is great interest in developing predictors of response to immunotherapy and rational combination therapies that can enhance efficacy by overcoming primary and acquired resistance. In this Review, we provide an assessment of immunotherapy response biomarkers that can identify patients who will benefit from monotherapy rather than from combinations. We review the rationale for combination therapy and different strategies, including combinations with chemotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation therapy, intratumoural therapies, other immunomodulators, and adaptive cell therapy, including chimeric antigen T-cell receptors and other novel T-cell receptor-based therapies. There are many combination partners in development; therefore, a programmatic approach is needed to develop a framework for biomarker-driven combination therapy selection.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 03 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Meric-Bernstam F, Larkin J, Tabernero J, Bonini C
Lancet: 03 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33285141
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Iron deficiency.

Pasricha SR, Tye-Din J, Muckenthaler MU, Swinkels DW

Iron deficiency is one of the leading contributors to the global burden of disease, and particularly affects children, premenopausal women, and people in low-income and middle-income countries. Anaemia is one of many consequences of iron deficiency, and clinical and functional impairments can occur in the absence of anaemia. Iron deprivation from erythroblasts and other tissues occurs when total body stores of iron are low or when inflammation causes withholding of iron from the plasma, particularly through the action of hepcidin, the main regulator of systemic iron homoeostasis. Oral iron therapy is the first line of treatment in most cases. Hepcidin upregulation by oral iron supplementation limits the absorption efficiency of high-dose oral iron supplementation, and of oral iron during inflammation. Modern parenteral iron formulations have substantially altered iron treatment and enable rapid, safe total-dose iron replacement. An underlying cause should be sought in all patients presenting with iron deficiency: screening for coeliac disease should be considered routinely, and endoscopic investigation to exclude bleeding gastrointestinal lesions is warranted in men and postmenopausal women presenting with iron deficiency anaemia. Iron supplementation programmes in low-income countries comprise part of the solution to meeting WHO Global Nutrition Targets.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 03 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print
Pasricha SR, Tye-Din J, Muckenthaler MU, Swinkels DW
Lancet: 03 Dec 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33285139
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Fragmented health systems in COVID-19: rectifying the misalignment between global health security and universal health coverage.

Lal A, Erondu NA, Heymann DL, Gitahi G, Yates R

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed enormous strain on countries around the world, exposing long-standing gaps in public health and exacerbating chronic inequities. Although research and analyses have attempted to draw important lessons on how to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response, few have examined the effect that fragmented governance for health has had on effectively mitigating the crisis. By assessing the ability of health systems to manage COVID-19 from the perspective of two key approaches to global health policy-global health security and universal health coverage-important lessons can be drawn for how to align varied priorities and objectives in strengthening health systems. This Health Policy paper compares three types of health systems (ie, with stronger investments in global health security, stronger investments in universal health coverage, and integrated investments in global health security and universal health coverage) in their response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and synthesises four essential recommendations (ie, integration, financing, resilience, and equity) to reimagine governance, policies, and investments for better health towards a more sustainable future.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Nov 2020; epub ahead of print
Lal A, Erondu NA, Heymann DL, Gitahi G, Yates R
Lancet: 30 Nov 2020; epub ahead of print | PMID: 33275906
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Long-term cardiovascular safety of febuxostat compared with allopurinol in patients with gout (FAST): a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial.

Mackenzie IS, Ford I, Nuki G, Hallas J, ... MacDonald TM,
Background
Febuxostat and allopurinol are urate-lowering therapies used to treat patients with gout. Following concerns about the cardiovascular safety of febuxostat, the European Medicines Agency recommended a post-licensing study assessing the cardiovascular safety of febuxostat compared with allopurinol.
Methods
We did a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, non-inferiority trial of febuxostat versus allopurinol in patients with gout in the UK, Denmark, and Sweden. Eligible patients were 60 years or older, already receiving allopurinol, and had at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. Those who had myocardial infarction or stroke in the previous 6 months or who had severe congestive heart failure or severe renal impairment were excluded. After a lead-in phase in which allopurinol dose was optimised towards achieving a serum urate concentration of less than 0·357 mmol/L (<6 mg/dL), patients were randomly assigned (1:1, with stratification according to previous cardiovascular events) to continue allopurinol (at the optimised dose) or start febuxostat at 80 mg/day, increasing to 120 mg/day if necessary to achieve the target serum urate concentration. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction or biomarker-positive acute coronary syndrome; non-fatal stroke; or cardiovascular death. The hazard ratio (HR) for febuxostat versus allopurinol in a Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted for the stratification variable and country) was assessed for non-inferiority (HR limit 1·3) in an on-treatment analysis. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2011-001883-23) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN72443728) and is now closed.
Findings
From Dec 20, 2011, to Jan 26, 2018, 6128 patients (mean age 71·0 years [SD 6·4], 5225 [85·3%] men, 903 [14·7%] women, 2046 [33·4%] with previous cardiovascular disease) were enrolled and randomly allocated to receive allopurinol (n=3065) or febuxostat (n=3063). By the study end date (Dec 31, 2019), 189 (6·2%) patients in the febuxostat group and 169 (5·5%) in the allopurinol group withdrew from all follow-up. Median follow-up time was 1467 days (IQR 1029-2052) and median on-treatment follow-up was 1324 days (IQR 870-1919). For incidence of the primary endpoint, on-treatment, febuxostat (172 patients [1·72 events per 100 patient-years]) was non-inferior to allopurinol (241 patients [2·05 events per 100 patient-years]; adjusted HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·70-1·03], p<0·0001). In the febuxostat group, 222 (7·2%) of 3063 patients died and 1720 (57·3%) of 3001 in the safety analysis set had at least one serious adverse event (with 23 events in 19 [0·6%] patients related to treatment). In the allopurinol group, 263 (8·6%) of 3065 patients died and 1812 (59·4%) of 3050 had one or more serious adverse events (with five events in five [0·2%] patients related to treatment). Randomised therapy was discontinued in 973 (32·4%) patients in the febuxostat group and 503 (16·5%) patients in the allopurinol group.
Interpretation
Febuxostat is non-inferior to allopurinol therapy with respect to the primary cardiovascular endpoint, and its long-term use is not associated with an increased risk of death or serious adverse events compared with allopurinol.
Funding
Menarini, Ipsen, and Teijin Pharma Ltd.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1745-1757
Mackenzie IS, Ford I, Nuki G, Hallas J, ... MacDonald TM,
Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1745-1757 | PMID: 33181081
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.

Silvain J, Lattuca B, Beygui F, Rangé G, ... Montalescot G,
Background
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related myonecrosis is frequent and can affect the long-term prognosis of patients. To our knowledge, ticagrelor has not been evaluated in elective PCI and could reduce periprocedural ischaemic complications compared with clopidogrel, the currently recommended treatment. The aim of the ALPHEUS study was to examine if ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in reducing periprocedural myocardial necrosis in stable coronary patients undergoing high-risk elective PCI.
Methods
The ALPHEUS study, a phase 3b, randomised, open-label trial, was done at 49 hospitals in France and Czech Republic. Patients with stable coronary artery disease were eligible for the study if they had an indication for PCI and at least one high-risk characteristic. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor (180 mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter for 30 days) or clopidogrel (300-600 mg loading dose, 75 mg daily thereafter for 30 days) by use of an interactive web response system, and stratified by centre. The primary outcome was a composite of PCI-related type 4 (a or b) myocardial infarction or major myocardial injury and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding, both of which were evaluated within 48 h of PCI (or at hospital discharge if earlier). The primary analysis was based on all events that occurred in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02617290.
Findings
Between Jan 9, 2017, and May 28, 2020, 1910 patients were randomly assigned at 49 sites, 956 to the ticagrelor group and 954 to the clopidogrel group. 15 patients were excluded from the ticagrelor group and 12 from the clopidogrel group. At 48 h, the primary outcome was observed in 334 (35%) of 941 patients in the ticagrelor group and 341 (36%) of 942 patients in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio [OR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·80-1·17; p=0·75). The primary safety outcome did not differ between the two groups, but minor bleeding events were more frequently observed with ticagrelor than clopidogrel at 30 days (105 [11%] of 941 patients in the ticagrelor group vs 71 [8%] of 942 patients in the clopidogrel group; OR 1·54, 95% CI 1·12-2·11; p=0·0070).
Interpretation
Ticagrelor was not superior to clopidogrel in reducing periprocedural myocardial necrosis after elective PCI and did not cause an increase in major bleeding, but did increase the rate of minor bleeding at 30 days. These results support the use of clopidogrel as the standard of care for elective PCI.
Funding
ACTION Study Group and AstraZeneca.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1737-1744
Silvain J, Lattuca B, Beygui F, Rangé G, ... Montalescot G,
Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1737-1744 | PMID: 33202219
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Direct oral anticoagulants: evidence and unresolved issues.

Chan N, Sobieraj-Teague M, Eikelboom JW

Currently licenced direct oral anticoagulants selectively target thrombin (eg, dabigatran) or coagulation factor Xa (eg, apixaban, betrixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban). Designed to be given in fixed doses without routine monitoring, direct oral anticoagulants have a lower propensity for food and drug interactions than do vitamin K antagonists, and in randomised controlled trials involving around 250 000 patients, they were at least as effective for prevention and treatment of thrombosis and were associated with a lower risk of life-threatening bleeding. The absolute benefits of direct oral anticoagulants over vitamin K antagonists are modest; however, guidelines recommend them in preference to vitamin K antagonists for most indications because of their ease of use and superior safety. The greatest benefits of direct oral anticoagulants are likely to be in patients who were previously deemed unsuitable for vitamin K antagonist therapy. The emergence of generic preparations is expected to further increase the uptake of direct oral anticoagulants, particularly in countries where they are currently not widely used because of cost. Direct oral anticoagulants are contraindicated in patients with mechanical heart valves and should be used with caution or avoided in patients with advanced kidney or liver disease. In this Therapeutics paper, we review the pharmacology of direct oral anticoagulants, summarise the evidence that led to their approval and incorporation into treatment guidelines, and explore key unresolved issues. We also briefly discuss future perspectives for the development of oral anticoagulants.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1767-1776
Chan N, Sobieraj-Teague M, Eikelboom JW
Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1767-1776 | PMID: 33248499
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

First human facial retransplantation: 30-month follow-up.

Lantieri L, Cholley B, Lemogne C, Guillemain R, ... Thervet E, Lellouch AG
Background
Since the first successful facial transplantation in 2005, the benefits of this procedure in terms of aesthetics, functionality, and quality of life have been firmly established. However, despite immunosuppressive treatment, long-term survival of the allograft might be compromised by chronic antibody-mediated rejection (CAMR), leading to irreversible necrosis of the tissue. In the absence of therapeutic options, this complication is inevitably life-threatening.
Methods
We report facial retransplantation in a man, 8 years after his first facial transplantation because of extensive disfigurement from type 1 neurofibromatosis and 6 weeks after complete loss of his allograft due to severe CAMR. We describe the chronology of immune-related problems that culminated in allograft necrosis and the eventual loss of the facial transplant, the desensitisation protocol used for this highly immunosensitised recipient, the surgical technicalities of the procedure, the specific psychological management of this patient, and the results from follow-up at 30 months.
Findings
Although the patient had a complicated postoperative course with numerous immunological, infectious, cardiorespiratory, and psychological events, he was discharged after a hospital stay of almost 1 year. He has since been able to re-integrate into his community with acceptable restoration of his quality of life.
Interpretation
This clinical report of the first documented human facial retransplantation is proof-of-concept that the loss of a facial transplant after CAMR can be mitigated successfully by retransplantation combined with an aggressive desensitisation process.
Funding
Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1758-1765
Lantieri L, Cholley B, Lemogne C, Guillemain R, ... Thervet E, Lellouch AG
Lancet: 27 Nov 2020; 396:1758-1765 | PMID: 33248497
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Height and body-mass index trajectories of school-aged children and adolescents from 1985 to 2019 in 200 countries and territories: a pooled analysis of 2181 population-based studies with 65 million participants.


Background
Comparable global data on health and nutrition of school-aged children and adolescents are scarce. We aimed to estimate age trajectories and time trends in mean height and mean body-mass index (BMI), which measures weight gain beyond what is expected from height gain, for school-aged children and adolescents.
Methods
For this pooled analysis, we used a database of cardiometabolic risk factors collated by the Non-Communicable Disease Risk Factor Collaboration. We applied a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends from 1985 to 2019 in mean height and mean BMI in 1-year age groups for ages 5-19 years. The model allowed for non-linear changes over time in mean height and mean BMI and for non-linear changes with age of children and adolescents, including periods of rapid growth during adolescence.
Findings
We pooled data from 2181 population-based studies, with measurements of height and weight in 65 million participants in 200 countries and territories. In 2019, we estimated a difference of 20 cm or higher in mean height of 19-year-old adolescents between countries with the tallest populations (the Netherlands, Montenegro, Estonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina for boys; and the Netherlands, Montenegro, Denmark, and Iceland for girls) and those with the shortest populations (Timor-Leste, Laos, Solomon Islands, and Papua New Guinea for boys; and Guatemala, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Timor-Leste for girls). In the same year, the difference between the highest mean BMI (in Pacific island countries, Kuwait, Bahrain, The Bahamas, Chile, the USA, and New Zealand for both boys and girls and in South Africa for girls) and lowest mean BMI (in India, Bangladesh, Timor-Leste, Ethiopia, and Chad for boys and girls; and in Japan and Romania for girls) was approximately 9-10 kg/m. In some countries, children aged 5 years started with healthier height or BMI than the global median and, in some cases, as healthy as the best performing countries, but they became progressively less healthy compared with their comparators as they grew older by not growing as tall (eg, boys in Austria and Barbados, and girls in Belgium and Puerto Rico) or gaining too much weight for their height (eg, girls and boys in Kuwait, Bahrain, Fiji, Jamaica, and Mexico; and girls in South Africa and New Zealand). In other countries, growing children overtook the height of their comparators (eg, Latvia, Czech Republic, Morocco, and Iran) or curbed their weight gain (eg, Italy, France, and Croatia) in late childhood and adolescence. When changes in both height and BMI were considered, girls in South Korea, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and some central Asian countries (eg, Armenia and Azerbaijan), and boys in central and western Europe (eg, Portugal, Denmark, Poland, and Montenegro) had the healthiest changes in anthropometric status over the past 3·5 decades because, compared with children and adolescents in other countries, they had a much larger gain in height than they did in BMI. The unhealthiest changes-gaining too little height, too much weight for their height compared with children in other countries, or both-occurred in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, New Zealand, and the USA for boys and girls; in Malaysia and some Pacific island nations for boys; and in Mexico for girls.
Interpretation
The height and BMI trajectories over age and time of school-aged children and adolescents are highly variable across countries, which indicates heterogeneous nutritional quality and lifelong health advantages and risks.
Funding
Wellcome Trust, AstraZeneca Young Health Programme, EU.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 06 Nov 2020; 396:1511-1524
Lancet: 06 Nov 2020; 396:1511-1524 | PMID: 33160572
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Adjuvant or early salvage radiotherapy for the treatment of localised and locally advanced prostate cancer: a prospectively planned systematic review and meta-analysis of aggregate data.

Vale CL, Fisher D, Kneebone A, Parker C, ... Tierney JF,
Background
It is unclear whether adjuvant or early salvage radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy is more appropriate for men who present with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. We aimed to prospectively plan a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these radiotherapy approaches.
Methods
We used a prospective framework for adaptive meta-analysis (FAME), starting the review process while eligible trials were ongoing. RCTs were eligible if they aimed to compare immediate adjuvant radiotherapy versus early salvage radiotherapy, following radical prostatectomy in men (age ≥18 years) with intermediate-risk or high-risk, localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. We searched trial registers and conference proceedings until July 8, 2020, to identify eligible RCTs. By establishing the ARTISTIC collaboration with relevant trialists, we were able to anticipate when eligible trial results would emerge, and we developed and registered a protocol with PROSPERO before knowledge of the trial results (CRD42019132669). We used a harmonised definition of event-free survival, as the time from randomisation until the first evidence of either biochemical progression (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥0·4 ng/mL and rising after completion of any postoperative radiotherapy), clinical or radiological progression, initiation of a non-trial treatment, death from prostate cancer, or a PSA level of at least 2·0 ng/mL at any time after randomisation. We predicted when we would have sufficient power to assess whether adjuvant radiotherapy was superior to early salvage radiotherapy. Investigators supplied results for event-free survival, both overall and within predefined patient subgroups. Hazard ratios (HRs) for the effects of radiotherapy timing on event-free survival and subgroup interactions were combined using fixed-effect meta-analysis.
Findings
We identified three eligible trials and were able to obtain updated results for event-free survival for 2153 patients recruited between November, 2007, and December, 2016. Median follow-up ranged from 60 months to 78 months, with a maximum follow-up of 132 months. 1075 patients were randomly assigned to receive adjuvant radiotherapy and 1078 to a policy of early salvage radiotherapy, of whom 421 (39·1%) had commenced treatment at the time of analysis. Patient characteristics were balanced within trials and overall. Median age was similar between trials at 64 or 65 years (with IQRs ranging from 59 to 68 years) across the three trials and most patients (1671 [77·6%]) had a Gleason score of 7. All trials were assessed as having low risk of bias. Based on 270 events, the meta-analysis showed no evidence that event-free survival was improved with adjuvant radiotherapy compared with early salvage radiotherapy (HR 0·95, 95% CI 0·75-1·21; p=0·70), with only a 1 percentage point (95% CI -2 to 3) change in 5-year event-free survival (89% vs 88%). Results were consistent across trials (heterogeneity p=0·18; I=42%).
Interpretation
This collaborative and prospectively designed systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that adjuvant radiotherapy does not improve event-free survival in men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer. Until data on long-term outcomes are available, early salvage treatment would seem the preferable treatment policy as it offers the opportunity to spare many men radiotherapy and its associated side-effects.
Funding
UK Medical Research Council.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1422-1431
Vale CL, Fisher D, Kneebone A, Parker C, ... Tierney JF,
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1422-1431 | PMID: 33002431
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, Kynaston HG, ... Parmar MKB, Sydes MR
Background
The optimal timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer is uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy versus an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical progression.
Methods
We did a randomised controlled trial enrolling patients with at least one risk factor (pathological T-stage 3 or 4, Gleason score of 7-10, positive margins, or preoperative PSA ≥10 ng/mL) for biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT). The study took place in trial-accredited centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to adjuvant radiotherapy or an observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression (PSA ≥0·1 ng/mL or three consecutive rises). Masking was not deemed feasible. Stratification factors were Gleason score, margin status, planned radiotherapy schedule (52·5 Gy in 20 fractions or 66 Gy in 33 fractions), and centre. The primary outcome measure was freedom from distant metastases, designed with 80% power to detect an improvement from 90% with salvage radiotherapy (control) to 95% at 10 years with adjuvant radiotherapy. We report on biochemical progression-free survival, freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Standard survival analysis methods were used. A hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1 favoured adjuvant radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047.
Findings
Between Nov 22, 2007, and Dec 30, 2016, 1396 patients were randomly assigned, 699 (50%) to salvage radiotherapy and 697 (50%) to adjuvant radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced with a median age of 65 years (IQR 60-68). Median follow-up was 4·9 years (IQR 3·0-6·1). 649 (93%) of 697 participants in the adjuvant radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 6 months; 228 (33%) of 699 in the salvage radiotherapy group reported radiotherapy within 8 years after randomisation. With 169 events, 5-year biochemical progression-free survival was 85% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 88% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 1·10, 95% CI 0·81-1·49; p=0·56). Freedom from non-protocol hormone therapy at 5 years was 93% for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 92% for those in the salvage radiotherapy group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·58-1·33; p=0·53). Self-reported urinary incontinence was worse at 1 year for those in the adjuvant radiotherapy group (mean score 4·8 vs 4·0; p=0·0023). Grade 3-4 urethral stricture within 2 years was reported in 6% of individuals in the adjuvant radiotherapy group versus 4% in the salvage radiotherapy group (p=0·020).
Interpretation
These initial results do not support routine administration of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy increases the risk of urinary morbidity. An observation policy with salvage radiotherapy for PSA biochemical progression should be the current standard after radical prostatectomy.
Funding
Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit, and Canadian Cancer Society.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1413-1421
Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, Kynaston HG, ... Parmar MKB, Sydes MR
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1413-1421 | PMID: 33002429
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Redevelopment and validation of the SYNTAX score II to individualise decision making between percutaneous and surgical revascularisation in patients with complex coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAXES trial with external cohort validation.

Takahashi K, Serruys PW, Fuster V, Farkouh ME, ... van Klaveren D,
Background
Randomised controlled trials are considered the gold standard for testing the efficacy of novel therapeutic interventions, and typically report the average treatment effect as a summary result. As the result of treatment can vary between patients, basing treatment decisions for individual patients on the overall average treatment effect could be suboptimal. We aimed to develop an individualised decision making tool to select an optimal revascularisation strategy in patients with complex coronary artery disease.
Methods
The SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) study is an investigator-driven extension follow-up of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 85 hospitals across 18 North American and European countries between March, 2005, and April, 2007. Patients with de-novo three-vessel and left main coronary artery disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) group. The SYNTAXES study ascertained 10-year all-cause deaths. We used Cox regression to develop a clinical prognostic index for predicting death over a 10-year period, which was combined, in a second stage, with assigned treatment (PCI or CABG) and two prespecified effect-modifiers, which were selected on the basis of previous evidence: disease type (three-vessel disease or left main coronary artery disease) and anatomical SYNTAX score. We used similar techniques to develop a model to predict the 5-year risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal stroke, or non-fatal myocardial infarction) in patients receiving PCI or CABG. We then assessed the ability of these models to predict the risk of death or a major adverse cardiovascular event, and their differences (ie, the estimated benefit of CABG versus PCI by calculating the absolute risk difference between the two strategies) by cross-validation with the SYNTAX trial (n=1800 participants) and external validation in the pooled population (n=3380 participants) of the FREEDOM, BEST, and PRECOMBAT trials. The concordance (C)-index was used to measure discriminative ability, and calibration plots were used to assess the degree of agreement between predictions and observations.
Findings
At cross-validation, the newly developed SYNTAX score II, termed SYNTAX score II 2020, showed a helpful discriminative ability in both treatment groups for predicting 10-year all-cause deaths (C-index=0·73 [95% CI 0·69-0·76] for PCI and 0·73 [0·69-0·76] for CABG) and 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events (C-index=0·65 [0·61-0·69] for PCI and C-index=0·71 [0·67-0·75] for CABG). At external validation, the SYNTAX score II 2020 showed helpful discrimination (C-index=0·67 [0·63-0·70] for PCI and C-index=0·62 [0·58-0·66] for CABG) and good calibration for predicting 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events. The estimated treatment benefit of CABG over PCI varied substantially among patients in the trial population, and the benefit predictions were well calibrated.
Interpretation
The SYNTAX score II 2020 for predicting 10-year deaths and 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events can help to identify individuals who will benefit from either CABG or PCI, thereby supporting heart teams, patients, and their families to select optimal revascularisation strategies.
Funding
The German Heart Research Foundation and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1399-1412
Takahashi K, Serruys PW, Fuster V, Farkouh ME, ... van Klaveren D,
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1399-1412 | PMID: 33038944
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Stroke rehabilitation in low-income and middle-income countries: a call to action.

Bernhardt J, Urimubenshi G, Gandhi DBC, Eng JJ

The WHO Rehabilitation 2030 agenda recognises the importance of rehabilitation in the value chain of quality health care. Developing and delivering cost-effective, equitable-access rehabilitation services to the right people at the right time is a challenge for health services globally. These challenges are amplified in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), in which the unmet need for rehabilitation and recovery treatments is high. In this Series paper, we outline what is happening more broadly as part of the WHO Rehabilitation 2030 agenda, then focus on the specific challenges to development and implementation of effective stroke rehabilitation services in LMICs. We use stroke rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines from both high-income countries and LMICs to highlight opportunities for rapid uptake of evidence-based practice. Finally, we call on educators and the stroke rehabilitation clinical, research, and not-for-profit communities to work in partnership for greater effect and to accelerate progress.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1452-1462
Bernhardt J, Urimubenshi G, Gandhi DBC, Eng JJ
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1452-1462 | PMID: 33129396
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Stroke systems of care in low-income and middle-income countries: challenges and opportunities.

Pandian JD, Kalkonde Y, Sebastian IA, Felix C, Urimubenshi G, Bosch J

The burden of stroke is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) than in high-income countries and is rising. Even though there are global policies and guidelines for implementing stroke care, there are many challenges in setting up stroke services in LMICs. Despite these challenges, there are many models of stroke care available in LMICs-eg, multidisciplinary team care led by a stroke neurologist, specialist-led care by neurologists, physician-led care, hub and spoke models incorporating stroke telemedicine (ie, telestroke), and task sharing involving community health workers. Alternative strategies have been developed, such as reorganising the existing hospital infrastructure by training health professionals to implement protocol-driven care. The future challenge is to identify what elements of organised stroke care can be implemented to make the largest gain. Simple interventions such as swallowing assessments, bowel and bladder care, mobility assessments, and consistent secondary prevention can prove to be key elements to improving post-discharge morbidity and mortality in LMICs.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1443-1451
Pandian JD, Kalkonde Y, Sebastian IA, Felix C, Urimubenshi G, Bosch J
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1443-1451 | PMID: 33129395
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Stroke systems of care in high-income countries: what is optimal?

Langhorne P, Audebert HJ, Cadilhac DA, Kim J, Lindsay P

Stroke is a complex, time-sensitive, medical emergency that requires well functioning systems of care to optimise treatment and improve patient outcomes. Education and training campaigns are needed to improve both the recognition of stroke among the general public and the response of emergency medical services. Specialised stroke ambulances (mobile stroke units) have been piloted in many cities to speed up the diagnosis, triage, and emergency treatment of people with acute stroke symptoms. Hospital-based interdisciplinary stroke units remain the central feature of a modern stroke service. Many have now developed a role in the very early phase (hyperacute units) plus outreach for patients who return home (early supported discharge services). Different levels (comprehensive and primary) of stroke centre and telemedicine networks have been developed to coordinate the various service components with specialist investigations and interventions including rehabilitation. Major challenges include the harmonisation of resources for stroke across the whole patient journey (including the rapid, accurate triage of patients who require highly specialised treatment in comprehensive stroke centres) and the development of technology to improve communication across different parts of a service.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1433-1442
Langhorne P, Audebert HJ, Cadilhac DA, Kim J, Lindsay P
Lancet: 30 Oct 2020; 396:1433-1442 | PMID: 33129394
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.


Background
Rigorous analysis of levels and trends in exposure to leading risk factors and quantification of their effect on human health are important to identify where public health is making progress and in which cases current efforts are inadequate. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a standardised and comprehensive assessment of the magnitude of risk factor exposure, relative risk, and attributable burden of disease.
Methods
GBD 2019 estimated attributable mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years of life lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 87 risk factors and combinations of risk factors, at the global level, regionally, and for 204 countries and territories. GBD uses a hierarchical list of risk factors so that specific risk factors (eg, sodium intake), and related aggregates (eg, diet quality), are both evaluated. This method has six analytical steps. (1) We included 560 risk-outcome pairs that met criteria for convincing or probable evidence on the basis of research studies. 12 risk-outcome pairs included in GBD 2017 no longer met inclusion criteria and 47 risk-outcome pairs for risks already included in GBD 2017 were added based on new evidence. (2) Relative risks were estimated as a function of exposure based on published systematic reviews, 81 systematic reviews done for GBD 2019, and meta-regression. (3) Levels of exposure in each age-sex-location-year included in the study were estimated based on all available data sources using spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression, DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression method, or alternative methods. (4) We determined, from published trials or cohort studies, the level of exposure associated with minimum risk, called the theoretical minimum risk exposure level. (5) Attributable deaths, YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs were computed by multiplying population attributable fractions (PAFs) by the relevant outcome quantity for each age-sex-location-year. (6) PAFs and attributable burden for combinations of risk factors were estimated taking into account mediation of different risk factors through other risk factors. Across all six analytical steps, 30 652 distinct data sources were used in the analysis. Uncertainty in each step of the analysis was propagated into the final estimates of attributable burden. Exposure levels for dichotomous, polytomous, and continuous risk factors were summarised with use of the summary exposure value to facilitate comparisons over time, across location, and across risks. Because the entire time series from 1990 to 2019 has been re-estimated with use of consistent data and methods, these results supersede previously published GBD estimates of attributable burden.
Findings
The largest declines in risk exposure from 2010 to 2019 were among a set of risks that are strongly linked to social and economic development, including household air pollution; unsafe water, sanitation, and handwashing; and child growth failure. Global declines also occurred for tobacco smoking and lead exposure. The largest increases in risk exposure were for ambient particulate matter pollution, drug use, high fasting plasma glucose, and high body-mass index. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor globally for attributable deaths was high systolic blood pressure, which accounted for 10·8 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 9·51-12·1) deaths (19·2% [16·9-21·3] of all deaths in 2019), followed by tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 8·71 million (8·12-9·31) deaths (15·4% [14·6-16·2] of all deaths in 2019). The leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable DALYs globally in 2019 was child and maternal malnutrition, which largely affects health in the youngest age groups and accounted for 295 million (253-350) DALYs (11·6% [10·3-13·1] of all global DALYs that year). The risk factor burden varied considerably in 2019 between age groups and locations. Among children aged 0-9 years, the three leading detailed risk factors for attributable DALYs were all related to malnutrition. Iron deficiency was the leading risk factor for those aged 10-24 years, alcohol use for those aged 25-49 years, and high systolic blood pressure for those aged 50-74 years and 75 years and older.
Interpretation
Overall, the record for reducing exposure to harmful risks over the past three decades is poor. Success with reducing smoking and lead exposure through regulatory policy might point the way for a stronger role for public policy on other risks in addition to continued efforts to provide information on risk factor harm to the general public.
Funding
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 16 Oct 2020; 396:1223-1249
Lancet: 16 Oct 2020; 396:1223-1249 | PMID: 33069327
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:
Abstract

Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.


Background
In an era of shifting global agendas and expanded emphasis on non-communicable diseases and injuries along with communicable diseases, sound evidence on trends by cause at the national level is essential. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) provides a systematic scientific assessment of published, publicly available, and contributed data on incidence, prevalence, and mortality for a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of diseases and injuries.
Methods
GBD estimates incidence, prevalence, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to 369 diseases and injuries, for two sexes, and for 204 countries and territories. Input data were extracted from censuses, household surveys, civil registration and vital statistics, disease registries, health service use, air pollution monitors, satellite imaging, disease notifications, and other sources. Cause-specific death rates and cause fractions were calculated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model and spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression. Cause-specific deaths were adjusted to match the total all-cause deaths calculated as part of the GBD population, fertility, and mortality estimates. Deaths were multiplied by standard life expectancy at each age to calculate YLLs. A Bayesian meta-regression modelling tool, DisMod-MR 2.1, was used to ensure consistency between incidence, prevalence, remission, excess mortality, and cause-specific mortality for most causes. Prevalence estimates were multiplied by disability weights for mutually exclusive sequelae of diseases and injuries to calculate YLDs. We considered results in the context of the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and fertility rate in females younger than 25 years. Uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated for every metric using the 25th and 975th ordered 1000 draw values of the posterior distribution.
Findings
Global health has steadily improved over the past 30 years as measured by age-standardised DALY rates. After taking into account population growth and ageing, the absolute number of DALYs has remained stable. Since 2010, the pace of decline in global age-standardised DALY rates has accelerated in age groups younger than 50 years compared with the 1990-2010 time period, with the greatest annualised rate of decline occurring in the 0-9-year age group. Six infectious diseases were among the top ten causes of DALYs in children younger than 10 years in 2019: lower respiratory infections (ranked second), diarrhoeal diseases (third), malaria (fifth), meningitis (sixth), whooping cough (ninth), and sexually transmitted infections (which, in this age group, is fully accounted for by congenital syphilis; ranked tenth). In adolescents aged 10-24 years, three injury causes were among the top causes of DALYs: road injuries (ranked first), self-harm (third), and interpersonal violence (fifth). Five of the causes that were in the top ten for ages 10-24 years were also in the top ten in the 25-49-year age group: road injuries (ranked first), HIV/AIDS (second), low back pain (fourth), headache disorders (fifth), and depressive disorders (sixth). In 2019, ischaemic heart disease and stroke were the top-ranked causes of DALYs in both the 50-74-year and 75-years-and-older age groups. Since 1990, there has been a marked shift towards a greater proportion of burden due to YLDs from non-communicable diseases and injuries. In 2019, there were 11 countries where non-communicable disease and injury YLDs constituted more than half of all disease burden. Decreases in age-standardised DALY rates have accelerated over the past decade in countries at the lower end of the SDI range, while improvements have started to stagnate or even reverse in countries with higher SDI.
Interpretation
As disability becomes an increasingly large component of disease burden and a larger component of health expenditure, greater research and development investment is needed to identify new, more effective intervention strategies. With a rapidly ageing global population, the demands on health services to deal with disabling outcomes, which increase with age, will require policy makers to anticipate these changes. The mix of universal and more geographically specific influences on health reinforces the need for regular reporting on population health in detail and by underlying cause to help decision makers to identify success stories of disease control to emulate, as well as opportunities to improve.
Funding
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Lancet: 16 Oct 2020; 396:1204-1222
Lancet: 16 Oct 2020; 396:1204-1222 | PMID: 33069326
Go to: DOI | PubMed | PDF | Google Scholar |
Impact:

This program is still in alpha version.