Search

Importance: Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete.Objective: As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances.Evidence: A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders.Findings: The rapid review yielded 41 673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses.Conclusions and Relevance: CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To make preliminary recommendations for defining a flare of atopic dermatitis (AD) in clinical research based on a systematic review of the literature and experience in running clinical trials. Data Sources: A sensitive electronic search of MEDLINE biographic database was conducted on April 19, 2005, using the following search terms: flare$, exacerbation$, relaps$, remission$, worse$, and *recurrence. The search was restricted to all prospective studies of AD in humans, using the Cochrane search terms for AD and prospective studies. In addition, we searched the literature on 3 chronic intermittent diseases (asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and multiple sclerosis) to gain insight as to how other disciplines had tackled the definition of flares. Data Synthesis: A total of 401 citations were reviewed, of which 16 articles (15 studies) were relevant. All were clinical trials. The definitions of disease flare or relapse in retrieved articles could be categorized into 3 broad themes: (1) composite definitions that include at least 2 different factors (eg, symptoms, severity duration, or treatment) (4 studies); (2) score thresholds or changes in severity scores (8 studies); and (3) behavioral definitions, such as the use of rescue therapy (3 studies). Only 1 investigative group (3 studies) used the same definition. None of the included studies were primarily designed to develop a definition of "flare." Evidence from other disciplines suggested at least 2 measures--totally controlled weeks and well-controlled weeks from asthma research--that could be used successfully in AD research. Conclusions: Defining an AD flare is a complex process, and this review has highlighted the need for standardization in defining measures of long-term disease control. We propose that a flare of AD be simply defined as an episode requiring escalation of treatment or seeking additional medical advice. Consideration should also be given to totally controlled weeks and well-controlled weeks to assess overall disease activity in patients with AD. Together, these definitions are intuitive, simple to use, and easy to understand. Future work is required to test the applicability of these recommendations in a variety of research settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Editorial. Comments on A. Firooz and colleagues' (1999) study of the validity of Great Britain Working Party's Diagnostic Criteria for Atopic Dermatitis (AD). Attributes of a good validation study for diagnostic criteria; Implications of the study for making international epidemiological comparisons of AD; Other ways of defining the clinical concept of AD.

Considers race in the comparison of groups of people in research studies. Evaluation of the hypothesis that atopic dermatitis was more common in Black Caribbeans or Black Africans; Problems with defining race in scientific research; Criticism of the use of race as a euphemism for skin color in the research, diagnosis and treatment of skin disease.

Editorial. Comments on the article by Shirisha R. Janumpally et. al. focusing on the health care utilization for atopic dermatitis among different ethnic groups in the U.S. Effects of race and ethnicity on the utlitization of medical care; Dangers of lumping ethnic groups; Key issues relevant to ethnicity in dermatology.

Importance: The increasing burden due to cancer and other noncommunicable diseases poses a threat to human development, which has resulted in global political commitments reflected in the Sustainable Development Goals as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan on Non-Communicable Diseases. To determine if these commitments have resulted in improved cancer control, quantitative assessments of the cancer burden are required., Objective: To assess the burden for 29 cancer groups over time to provide a framework for policy discussion, resource allocation, and research focus., Evidence Review: Cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were evaluated for 195 countries and territories by age and sex using the Global Burden of Disease study estimation methods. Levels and trends were analyzed over time, as well as by the Sociodemographic Index (SDI). Changes in incident cases were categorized by changes due to epidemiological vs demographic transition., Findings: In 2016, there were 17.2 million cancer cases worldwide and 8.9 million deaths. Cancer cases increased by 28% between 2006 and 2016. The smallest increase was seen in high SDI countries. Globally, population aging contributed 17%; population growth, 12%; and changes in age-specific rates, -1% to this change. The most common incident cancer globally for men was prostate cancer (1.4 million cases). The leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer (1.2 million deaths and 25.4 million DALYs). For women, the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths and DALYs was breast cancer (1.7 million incident cases, 535 000 deaths, and 14.9 million DALYs). In 2016, cancer caused 213.2 million DALYs globally for both sexes combined. Between 2006 and 2016, the average annual age-standardized incidence rates for all cancers combined increased in 130 of 195 countries or territories, and the average annual age-standardized death rates decreased within that timeframe in 143 of 195 countries or territories., Conclusions and Relevance: Large disparities exist between countries in cancer incidence, deaths, and associated disability. Scaling up cancer prevention and ensuring universal access to cancer care are required for health equity and to fulfill the global commitments for noncommunicable disease and cancer control.

Importance: Comprehensive and timely monitoring of disease burden in all age groups, including children and adolescents, is essential for improving population health., Objective: To quantify and describe levels and trends of mortality and nonfatal health outcomes among children and adolescents from 1990 to 2015 to provide a framework for policy discussion., Evidence Review: Cause-specific mortality and nonfatal health outcomes were analyzed for 195 countries and territories by age group, sex, and year from 1990 to 2015 using standardized approaches for data processing and statistical modeling, with subsequent analysis of the findings to describe levels and trends across geography and time among children and adolescents 19 years or younger. A composite indicator of income, education, and fertility was developed (Socio-demographic Index [SDI]) for each geographic unit and year, which evaluates the historical association between SDI and health loss., Findings: Global child and adolescent mortality decreased from 14.18 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 14.09 million to 14.28 million) deaths in 1990 to 7.26 million (95% UI, 7.14 million to 7.39 million) deaths in 2015, but progress has been unevenly distributed. Countries with a lower SDI had a larger proportion of mortality burden (75%) in 2015 than was the case in 1990 (61%). Most deaths in 2015 occurred in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Global trends were driven by reductions in mortality owing to infectious, nutritional, and neonatal disorders, which in the aggregate led to a relative increase in the importance of noncommunicable diseases and injuries in explaining global disease burden. The absolute burden of disability in children and adolescents increased 4.3% (95% UI, 3.1%-5.6%) from 1990 to 2015, with much of the increase owing to population growth and improved survival for children and adolescents to older ages. Other than infectious conditions, many top causes of disability are associated with long-term sequelae of conditions present at birth (eg, neonatal disorders, congenital birth defects, and hemoglobinopathies) and complications of a variety of infections and nutritional deficiencies. Anemia, developmental intellectual disability, hearing loss, epilepsy, and vision loss are important contributors to childhood disability that can arise from multiple causes. Maternal and reproductive health remains a key cause of disease burden in adolescent females, especially in lower-SDI countries. In low-SDI countries, mortality is the primary driver of health loss for children and adolescents, whereas disability predominates in higher-SDI locations; the specific pattern of epidemiological transition varies across diseases and injuries., Conclusions and Relevance: Consistent international attention and investment have led to sustained improvements in causes of health loss among children and adolescents in many countries, although progress has been uneven. The persistence of infectious diseases in some countries, coupled with ongoing epidemiologic transition to injuries and noncommunicable diseases, require all countries to carefully evaluate and implement appropriate strategies to maximize the health of their children and adolescents and for the international community to carefully consider which elements of child and adolescent health should be monitored.

Importance: Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide. Current estimates of cancer burden in individual countries and regions are necessary to inform local cancer control strategies., Objective: To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 28 cancers in 188 countries by sex from 1990 to 2013., Evidence Review: The general methodology of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2013 study was used. Cancer registries were the source for cancer incidence data as well as mortality incidence (MI) ratios. Sources for cause of death data include vital registration system data, verbal autopsy studies, and other sources. The MI ratios were used to transform incidence data to mortality estimates and cause of death estimates to incidence estimates. Cancer prevalence was estimated using MI ratios as surrogates for survival data; YLDs were calculated by multiplying prevalence estimates with disability weights, which were derived from population-based surveys; YLLs were computed by multiplying the number of estimated cancer deaths at each age with a reference life expectancy; and DALYs were calculated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs., Findings: In 2013 there were 14.9 million incident cancer cases, 8.2 million deaths, and 196.3 million DALYs. Prostate cancer was the leading cause for cancer incidence (1.4 million) for men and breast cancer for women (1.8 million). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer was the leading cause for cancer death in men and women, with 1.6 million deaths. For men, TBL cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (24.9 million). For women, breast cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (13.1 million). Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) per 100 000 and age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) per 100 000 for both sexes in 2013 were higher in developing vs developed countries for stomach cancer (ASIR, 17 vs 14; ASDR, 15 vs 11), liver cancer (ASIR, 15 vs 7; ASDR, 16 vs 7), esophageal cancer (ASIR, 9 vs 4; ASDR, 9 vs 4), cervical cancer (ASIR, 8 vs 5; ASDR, 4 vs 2), lip and oral cavity cancer (ASIR, 7 vs 6; ASDR, 2 vs 2), and nasopharyngeal cancer (ASIR, 1.5 vs 0.4; ASDR, 1.2 vs 0.3). Between 1990 and 2013, ASIRs for all cancers combined (except nonmelanoma skin cancer and Kaposi sarcoma) increased by more than 10% in 113 countries and decreased by more than 10% in 12 of 188 countries., Conclusions and Relevance: Cancer poses a major threat to public health worldwide, and incidence rates have increased in most countries since 1990. The trend is a particular threat to developing nations with health systems that are ill-equipped to deal with complex and expensive cancer treatments. The annual update on the Global Burden of Cancer will provide all stakeholders with timely estimates to guide policy efforts in cancer prevention, screening, treatment, and palliation.