Search

Abstract Background Although a number of studies have assessed the management of mania in routine clinical practice, no studies have so far evaluated the short- and long-term management and outcome of patients affected by bipolar mania in different European countries. The objective of the study is to present, in the context of a large multicenter survey (EMBLEM study), an overview of the baseline data on the acute management of a representative sample of manic bipolar patients treated in the Italian psychiatric hospital and community settings. EMBLEM is a 2-year observational longitudinal study that evaluates across 14 European countries the patterns of the drug prescribed in patients with bipolar mania, their socio-demographic and clinical features and the outcomes of the treatment. Methods The study consists of a 12-week acute phase and a ≤ 24-month maintenance phase. Bipolar patients were included into the study as in- or out-patients, if they initiated or changed, according to the decision of their psychiatrist, oral antipsychotics, anticonvulsants and/or lithium for the treatment of an episode of mania. Data concerning socio-demographic characteristics, psychiatric and medical history, severity of mania, prescribed medications, functional status and quality of life were collected at baseline and during the follow-up period. Results In Italy, 563 patients were recruited in 56 sites: 376 were outpatients and 187 inpatients. The mean age was 45.8 years. The mean CGI-BP was 4.4 (± 0.9) for overall score and mania, 1.9 (± 1.2) for depression and 2.6 (± 1.6) for hallucinations/delusions. The YMRS showed that 14.4% had a total score < 12, 25.1% ≥ 12 and < 20, and 60.5% ≥ 20. At entry, 75 patients (13.7%) were treatment-naïve, 186 (34.1%) were receiving a monotherapy (of which haloperidol [24.2%], valproate [16.7%] and lithium [14.5%] were the most frequently prescribed) while 285 (52.2%) a combined therapy (of which 8.0% were represented by haloperidol/lithium combinations). After a switch to an oral medication, 137 patients (24.8%) were prescribed a monotherapy while the rest (415, 75.2%) received a combination of drugs. Conclusion Data collected at baseline in the Italian cohort of the EMBLEM study represent a relevant source of information to start addressing the short and long-term therapeutic strategies for improving the clinical as well as the socio-economic outcomes of patients affected by bipolar mania. Although it's not an epidemiological investigation and has some limitations, the results show several interesting findings as a relatively late age of onset of bipolar disorder, a low rate of past suicide attempts, a low lifetime rate of alcohol abuse and drug addiction.

Purpose: Acute ischemic stroke is a leading cause of death and morbidity worldwide. Despite advances in medical technology, nearly 30% of strokes result in incomplete vessel recanalization. Recent studies have demonstrated that clot composition correlates with success rates of mechanical thrombectomy procedures. To understand clot behavior during thrombectomy, which exerts considerable strains on thrombi, in vitro studies must characterize the rate-dependent high-strain behavior of embolus analogs (EAs) with different formation conditions, which can be used to fit models of hyper-viscoelasticity., Methods: In this study, the effect of collagen infiltration as a carotid-induced collagen-rich thrombosis surrogate is considered as a contributor to embolus analog high-strain stiffness, when compared to 40% hematocrit EAs., Results: EA high-strain stiffnesses, characterized on a uniaxial load frame, increase by an order of magnitude for collagenous clot analogs. Chandler loop analogs show high-strain stiffnesses and clot compositions commensurate with previous reports of stroke patient clots, and collagenous clots show significant increase in stiffness when compared to stroke patient clots. Finally, hyper-viscoelastic curve fitting demonstrates the asymmetry between tension and compression. Nonlinear, rate-dependent models that consider clot-stiffening behavior match the high strain stiffness of clots fairly well. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the stability of the elastic energy needs to be considered to obtain optimal curve fits for high-strain, rate dependent data., Conclusion: This study provides a framework for the development of dynamically formed EAs that mimic the mechanical and structural properties of in vivo clots and provides parameters for numerical simulation of clot behavior with hyper-viscoelastic models., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest K.B.M. has a financial interest in Cranial Devices, Inc., a company which could potentially benefit from the results of the presented research. The interest has been reviewed and is being managed by The Pennsylvania State University in accordance with its individual conflict of interest policy, for the purpose of maintaining the objectivity of research at The Pennsylvania State University. All other authors indicate no conflict associated with this research., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The GetReal Trial Tool is a decision support tool to assess the impact of design choices on generalizability of clinical trials to routine clinical practice, while taking into account the risk of bias, precision, acceptability and operational feasibility. This study describes the validation of the GetReal Trial Tool., Methods: Twelve experts took part in the GetReal Trial tool validation using the protocols of 6 trials conducted with pragmatic elements. The tool entails 7 domains with a total of 43 questions. A pooled Kappa statistic (95% CI) using random effects model was estimated using Open Meta (analyst) software. The possible operational challenges were collated and discussed with the trialists that conducted the trials., Results: Agreement in the design choices made for the trial protocols was >50% for all the trials and all teams reached consensus during discussion. The pooled Kappa statistic (95% CI) was 0.236 (0.154-0.318). The GetReal Trial tool highlighted several operational challenges, of which almost half had been experienced previously by the trialists. Out of 25 additional operational challenges mentioned by the trialists, 76% were already highlighted by the tool. The tool was considered helpful to optimize trials right from the design stage., Conclusion: The GetReal Trial Tool helps to scrutinize the choice of study design in the light of Real World Evidence generation. The tool identifies most of the operational challenges experienced by trialists to date. The tool serves the intended purpose of facilitating discussion and understanding more pragmatic design choices and their implications., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To develop a claims-based algorithm identifying systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares using a linked claims-electronic medical record (EMR) dataset., Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of linked administrative claims and EMR data spanning 1 January 2003 to 31 March 2019. Included were adult SLE patients with at least 12 months of continuous enrollment in claims data, 12 months of clinical activity in EMR, and an absence of malignancies excluding basal and squamous cell carcinoma. Patient follow-up was divided into 30-day windows, and a proxy SLEDAI-2K score based on the EMR data was calculated for each 30-day period. A flare was defined as an increase of at least 4 from the baseline score. A series of potential flare predictor variables identified in claims were based on a combination of established variables from a previous algorithm, with the addition of other SLE-related indicators based on clinical input. Logistic regression models were built to predict monthly SLE flares., Results: Inclusion criteria identified 2427 patients. Results from a logistic model with forward selection capping the number of variables at 10 performed well with a c -statistic of 0.76 and a Brier score of 0.07. The top five predictors were any inpatient admission (OR = 4.76), outpatient office visit (OR = 3.04), MRI (OR = 2.26), ER visit (OR = 2.25), and number of rheumatology visits (OR = 1.75); p < .01 for all., Conclusions: The final algorithm shows promise in providing an alternative and more streamlined way for identifying likely flares in administrative claims data that will advance the study of SLE within the context of flares.

Methodologies incorporating Real World Elements into clinical trial design (also called pragmatic trials) offer an attractive opportunity to assess the effect of a treatment strategy in routine care and as such guide decision making in practice. Uptake of these methods is slow for several reasons, including uncertainty about acceptability of trial results, lack of experience with the methodology and operational challenges. We developed the "GetReal Trial Tool," an easy-to-use online interface, which allows users to assess the impact of design choices on generalizability to routine clinical practice, while taking into account risk of bias, precision, acceptability and operational feasibility. The tool is grounded in the scientific literature combined with knowledge of experts from academia, pharmaceutical companies, HTA bodies, patient organizations, and regulators. The aim is to help researchers optimize trial design and facilitate translation of evidence from pragmatic trials to clinical practice. In this paper we describe the development, structure and application of the GetReal Trial Tool., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background & Aims: There are currently no validated claims-based indicators for identifying a worsening of disease in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate indicators that identify flare-ups of IBD using data from Danish nationwide registries., Methods: Using Danish nationwide administrative data, we identified all patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) who had at least one measurement of faecal calprotectin between 1 January 2015 and 31 June 2017. We tested several different claims-based indicators of disease flare-ups against levels of faecal (F-)calprotectin (no flare-up: <250 mg/kg; mild flare-up: 250-1000 mg/kg; severe flare-up: ⩾1000 mg/kg). A generalised estimating equation was used to evaluate whether the proposed indicators could predict disease activity., Results: A total of 890 children and 4719 adults with CD, and 592 children and 5467 adults with UC were included in the study. During the observation period, 48-61% and 48-55% of the CD and UC patients, respectively, had no flare-up, 26-29% (CD) and 24-26% (UC) experienced a mild flare-up, and 12-23% (CD) and 21-27% (UC) experienced a severe flare-up. Combinations of indicators that could predict a flare-up in CD and UC adults included hospitalisation, surgery, initiation or switch of biological therapy, treatment with systemic steroids, locally acting steroids or topical 5-aminosalicylates, colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy, and magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography. In children, only the number of gastroenterology visits was significant as an indicator among UC patients, and none were seen in children with CD. Overall, the indicator combinations resulted in a predictive ability of 0.62-0.67., Conclusion: Administrative claims data can be useful for identifying patients exhibiting (F-calprotectin defined) flare-ups of their IBD. Clinically relevant events captured in the Danish national patient registry are associated with increased levels of calprotectin and hence increased disease activity, and can be used as valid outcomes in future studies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: JB has received research funding from Takeda, Tillots Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb and the Novo Nordisk Foundation, and honoraria as consultant and/or speaker from Samsung Bioepis, Pfizer, Tillots, AbbVie, Takeda, Pharmacosmos, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. HZ has no conflicts to declare. K-CC, DN, AN, TG and IG are currently employed by Eli Lilly and Company. AE has received research funding from Pfizer, Eli Lilly, the Danish National Psoriasis Foundation and the Kgl Hofbundtmager Aage Bang Foundation, and honoraria as consultant and/or speaker from Almirall, Leo Pharma, Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd., Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Galderma, Dermavant, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Janssen Pharmaceuticals., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Results from pragmatic trials should reflect the comparative treatment effects encountered in patients in real-life clinical practice to guide treatment decisions. Therefore, pragmatic trials should focus on outcomes that are relevant to patients, clinical practice, and treatment choices. This sixth article in the series (see Box) discusses different types of outcomes and their suitability for pragmatic trials, design choices for measuring these outcomes, and their implications and challenges. Measuring outcomes in pragmatic trials should not interfere with real-world clinical practice to ensure generalizability of trial results, and routinely collected outcomes should be prioritized. Typical outcomes include mortality, morbidity, functional status, well-being, and resource use. Surrogate endpoints are typically avoided as primary outcome. It is important to measure outcomes over a relevant time horizon and obtain valid and precise results. As pragmatic trials are often open label, a less subjective outcome can reduce bias. Methods that decrease bias or enhance precision of the results, such as standardization and blinding of outcome assessment, should be considered when a high risk of bias or high variability is expected. The selection of outcomes in pragmatic trials should be relevant for decision making and feasible in terms of executing the trial in the context of interest. Therefore, this should be discussed with all stakeholders as early as feasible to ensure the relevance of study results for decision making in clinical practice and the ability to perform the study., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The GetReal consortium of the Innovative Medicines Initiative aims to develop strategies to incorporate real-world evidence earlier into the drug life cycle to better inform health care decision makers on the comparative risks and benefits of new drugs. Pragmatic trials are currently explored as a means to generate such evidence in routine care settings. The traditional informed consent model for randomized clinical trials has been argued to pose substantial hurdles to the practicability of pragmatic trials: it would lead to recruitment difficulties, reduced generalizability of the results, and selection bias. The present article analyzes these challenges and discusses four proposed alternative informed consent models: integrated consent, targeted consent, broadcast consent, and a waiver of consent. These alternative consent models each aim at overcoming operational and methodological challenges, while still providing patients all the relevant information they need to make informed decisions. Each consent model, however, relies on different attitudes toward the principle of respect for persons and the related duty to inform patients as well as represents different views on whether the common good demands moral duties from patients. Such normative consequences of modifying consent requirements should be at least acknowledged and ought to be assessed in light of the validity of empirical claims., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)