4 results on '"Lythgoe, H."'
Search Results
2. NIHR Clinical Research Networks: what they do and how they help paediatric research.
- Author
-
Lythgoe H, Price V, Poustie V, Attar S, Hawcutt D, Preston J, and Beresford MW
- Subjects
- Abnormalities, Drug-Induced, Child, Commerce, England, Health Care Sector, Humans, International Cooperation, Interprofessional Relations, Patient Participation, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research, Research Support as Topic, Social Support, Biomedical Research organization & administration, Pediatrics organization & administration
- Abstract
This review provides paediatricians with an update on the new structure of the National Institute for Health Research's (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (CRN): Children and its role within the wider NIHR infrastructure. The network supports delivery of high-quality research within the NHS in England and supports researchers, through provision of staff and resources, with feasibility, site set-up, patient recruitment and study management. Since 2013, over 80% of commercial contract studies running within the UK sat within the UKCRN Portfolio. Of the diverse, increasing portfolio of studies supported by the network, many studies are interventional, with 33% being randomised controlled studies. Recruitment to studies supported by the network through the Children's Portfolio has consistently improved. Over 200 000 participants have been recruited to the Children's Portfolio studies to date, and there are currently approximately 500 studies open to recruitment. The CRN: Children has successfully involved patients and the public in all aspects of study design and delivery, including through the work of Generation R. Challenges remain in conducting paediatric research and the network is committed to supporting Children's research and further building on its achievements to date. Education and engagement of paediatricians within the network and research is important to further improving quality and delivery of paediatric research., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Evaluation of the ACR and SLICC classification criteria in juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: a longitudinal analysis
- Author
-
Lythgoe, H, Morgan, T, Heaf, E, Lloyd, O, Al-Abadi, E, Armon, K, Bailey, K, Davidson, J, Friswell, M, Gardner-Medwin, J, Haslam, K, Ioannou, Y, Leahy, A, Leone, V, Pilkington, C, Rangaraj, S, Riley, P, Tizard, EJ, Wilkinson, N, Beresford, MW, and Grp, UKJSLE Study
- Subjects
Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Pediatrics ,Adolescent ,National cohort ,Disease course ,Cohort Studies ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Rheumatology ,Internal medicine ,medicine ,Humans ,Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Longitudinal Studies ,Stage (cooking) ,Age of Onset ,Child ,030203 arthritis & rheumatology ,business.industry ,Clinical trial ,Juvenile onset ,Child, Preschool ,Physical therapy ,Observational study ,Female ,business ,Cohort study ,Follow-Up Studies - Abstract
Objectives The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group proposed revised classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLICC-2012 criteria). This study aimed to compare these criteria with the well-established American College of Rheumatology classification criteria (ACR-1997 criteria) in a national cohort of juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) patients and evaluate how patients’ classification criteria evolved over time. Methods Data from patients in the UK JSLE Cohort Study with a senior clinician diagnosis of probable evolving, or definite JSLE, were analyzed. Patients were assessed using both classification criteria within 1 year of diagnosis and at latest follow up (following a minimum 12-month follow-up period). Results A total of 226 patients were included. The SLICC-2012 was more sensitive than ACR-1997 at diagnosis (92.9% versus 84.1% p Conclusions The SLICC-2012 was better able to classify patients with JSLE than the ACR-1997 and did so at an earlier stage in their disease course. SLICC-2012 should be considered for classification of JSLE patients in observational studies and clinical trial eligibility.
- Published
- 2017
4. Defining consensus opinion to develop randomised controlled trials in rare diseases using Bayesian design: An example of a proposed trial of adalimumab versus pamidronate for children with CNO/CRMO.
- Author
-
Ramanan, A. V., Hampson, L. V., Lythgoe, H, Jones, A. P., Hardwick, B, Hind, H, Jacobs, B, Vasileiou, D, Wadsworth, I, Ambrose, N, Davidson, J, Ferguson, P. J., Herlin, T, Kavirayani, A, Killeen, O. G., Compeyrot-Lacassagne, S, Laxer, R. M., Roderick, M, Swart, J. F., and Hedrich, C. M.
- Subjects
ADALIMUMAB ,RARE diseases ,THERAPEUTICS ,ANTI-inflammatory agents ,ADOLESCENCE ,CHILDREN - Abstract
Introduction: Chronic nonbacterial osteomyelitis (CNO) is a rare autoinflammatory bone disorder primarily affecting children and adolescents. It can lead to chronic pain, bony deformities and fractures. The pathophysiology of CNO is incompletely understood. Scientific evidence suggests dysregulated expression of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines to be centrally involved. Currently, treatment is largely based on retrospective observational studies and expert opinion. Treatment usually includes nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or glucocorticoids, followed by a range of drugs in unresponsive cases. While randomised clinical trials are lacking, retrospective and prospective non-controlled studies suggest effectiveness of TNF inhibitors and bisphosphonates. The objective of the Bayesian consensus meeting was to quantify prior expert opinion. Methods: Twelve international CNO experts were randomly chosen to be invited to a Bayesian prior elicitation meeting. Results: Results showed that a typical new patient treated with pamidronate would have an 84% chance of improvement in their pain score relative to baseline at 26 weeks and an 83% chance on adalimumab. Experts thought there was a 50% chance that a new typical patient would record a pain score of 28mm (pamidronate) to 30mm (adalimumab) or better at 26 weeks. There was a modest trend in prior opinion to indicate an advantage of pamidronate vs adalimumab, with a 68% prior chance that pamidronate is superior to adalimumab by some margin. However, it is clear that there is considerable uncertainty about the precise relative merits of the two treatments. Conclusions: The rarity of CNO leads to challenges in conducting randomised controlled trials with sufficient power to provide a definitive outcome. We address this using a Bayesian design, and here describe the process and outcome of the elicitation exercise to establish expert prior opinion. This opinion will be tested in the planned prospective CNO study. The process for establishing expert consensus opinion in CNO will be helpful for developing studies in other rare paediatric diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.