Search

Background/Objectives The Adjunctive Steroid Combination in Ocular Trauma (ASCOT) trial is a unique pragmatic, multi-centre, patient and assessor masked, randomised controlled trial. We evaluate the clinical characteristics and pathology of this large trial cohort of patients with open globe injuries undergoing vitreoretinal surgery, including the associations between patient characteristics and their baseline vision. Subjects/Methods We (i) summarise demographics, injury history and ocular history of the 280 participants recruited into the ASCOT trial using descriptive statistics; (ii) analyse the national and seasonal variation across England and Scotland in these participant characteristics; and (iii) explore the associations between participant demographic, trauma history, ocular history and presenting baseline visual acuity (measured using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study, ETDRS) using multivariable regression analyses. Results The majority of participants with open globe penetrating injuries were of white ethnicity (233, 84%), male (246, 88%), with a median age of 43 years (IQR 30–55 years). There was considerable variability in presenting visual acuity with 75% unable to read any letters on the ETDRS chart, whilst the median ETDRS letter score was 58 (IQR 24–80) for those who could read ≥1 letter. The most common causes of injury were workplace related (31%) or interpersonal violence (24%). Previous eye surgery, visual axis corneal scar, lens status, hyphaemia and vitreous haemorrhaging were found to be associated with presenting vision as measured by the ETDRS chart. Conclusion The ASCOT trial provides valuable insights into the spectrum of pathology of patients with open globe eye injuries undergoing vitreoretinal surgery. The identified causes of injury and clinical presentation of the cases will help in training and resource planning to deal with these often challenging surgical cases. Trial registration EudraCT No. 014-002193-37. HTA Project 12/35/64.

Background We aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of intravitreal ranibizumab (Lucentis), aflibercept (Eylea) and bevacizumab (Avastin) for the treatment of macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion. Methods We calculated costs and quality-adjusted life-years from the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. We performed a within-trial analysis using the efficacy, safety, resource use and health utility data from a randomised controlled trial (LEAVO) over 100 weeks. We built a discrete event simulation to model long-term outcomes. We estimated utilities using the Visual-Functioning Questionnaire-Utility Index, EQ-5D and EQ-5D with an additional vision question. We used standard UK costs sources for 2018/19 and a cost of £28 per bevacizumab injection. We discounted costs and quality-adjusted life-years at 3.5% annually. Results Bevacizumab was the least costly intervention followed by ranibizumab and aflibercept in both the within-trial analysis (bevacizumab: £6292, ranibizumab: £13,014, aflibercept: £14,328) and long-term model (bevacizumab: £18,353, ranibizumab: £30,226, aflibercept: £35,026). Although LEAVO did not demonstrate bevacizumab to be non-inferior for the visual acuity primary outcome, the three interventions generated similar quality-adjusted life-years in both analyses. Bevacizumab was always the most cost-effective intervention at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, even using the list price of £243 per injection. Conclusions Wider adoption of bevacizumab for the treatment of macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion could result in substantial savings to healthcare systems and deliver similar health-related quality of life. However, patients, funders and ophthalmologists should be fully aware that LEAVO could not demonstrate that bevacizumab is non-inferior to the licensed agents.

BACKGROUND: Sublingual buprenorphine (BUP-SL) and liquid methadone (MET) and are the standard-of-care (SOC), daily maintenance medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). A sizable proportion of the OUD treatment population does not adhere to treatment and achieve desired clinical benefit. Two promising therapeutic technologies address this deficit: new medication formulations and psychosocial interventions (PSI). This study will determine: (A) the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness – monthly injectable, extended-release (BUP-XR) a novel formulation in a head-to-head comparison with BUP-SL or MET; and (B) the effectiveness of BUP-XR with PSI versus BUP-SL or MET with PSI. Safety, retention, craving, substance use, quality-adjusted life years, social functioning, and subjective recovery will be also evaluated. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, open-label, four-arm, parallel group, superiority RCT, with a qualitative (mixed-methods) evaluation. The study population is adults. The setting is five specialist National Health Service community treatment programmes in England and Scotland. In all sites, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to BUP-XR and BUP-SL or MET. At the London study co-ordinating centre, there will also be allocation of participants to BUP-XR with PSI and BUP-SL or MET with PSI. With 24 weeks of study treatment, the primary outcome is days of abstinence from all non-medical opioids during study weeks 2–24 combined with up to 12 urine drug screen tests for opioids. For 90% power (alpha, 5%; 15% inflation for attrition), 304 participants are needed for the BUP-XR and BUP-SL or MET comparison. Using the same planning parameters, 300 participants are needed for the comparison of BUP-XR and BUP-SL or MET with PSI. Statistical and health economic analysis plans will be published before data-lock on the Open Science Framework. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic randomised controlled trial is the first evaluation of injectable BUP-XR versus the SOC medications BUP-SL or MET, and with an adjunctive personalised PSI. If there is evidence for the superiority of BUP-XR over SOC, this will have substantial implications for clinical practice and OUD treatment policy in the UK and elsewhere. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials register (number: 2018-004460-63).

Introduction: Recruitment into trials in rare chronic pain conditions can be challenging, so such trials consequently are underpowered or fail. Methods: Drawing from our experience in conducting, to date, the largest academic trial in a rare chronic pain condition, complex regional pain syndrome, we have identified recruitment and retention strategies for successful trial conduct. Results: We present 13 strategies grouped across the categories of ‘setting the recruitment rate’, ‘networking’, ‘patient information’, ‘trial management’ and ‘patient retention’. Moreover, six recruitment risks are also discussed. A conservative recruitment estimate, based on audits of newly referred patients to the trial centres without taking into account availability of ‘old’ patients or recruitment from outside centres, and assuming a 55% patient refusal rate yielded accurate numbers. Conclusion: Appreciation of these identified recruitment challenges and opportunities may contribute to supporting prospective investigators when they design clinical trials for chronic pain patient population groups where it has been historically difficult to conduct high-quality and robust clinical trials.

Background Standalone thoracoscopic surgical ablation may be more effective than catheter ablation in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. Objectives To determine whether or not surgical ablation is clinically superior to catheter ablation as the first-line treatment strategy in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. Design This was a prospective, multicentre, randomised control trial. Setting Four NHS tertiary centres in England. Participants Adults with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation, who had European Heart Rhythm Association symptom scores > 2 and who were naive to previous catheter ablation or thoracic/cardiac surgery. Interventions Minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical ablation and conventional catheter ablation (control intervention). Main outcome measures The primary outcome was freedom from atrial fibrillation/tachycardia ≥ 30 seconds after a single procedure without antiarrhythmic drugs (class 1C/3) at 1 year, excluding a 3-month blanking period. The secondary outcomes include the intervention-related major complication rate; clinical success (≥ 75% reduction in arrhythmia burden); and changes in symptoms, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Methods Patients (n = 120) were randomised to surgical ablation (n = 60) or catheter ablation (n = 60). An implanted loop recorder provided continuous cardiac monitoring following ablation. Follow-up visits were at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Loop recorder data were reviewed monthly by a physiologist who was blinded to the randomisation outcome. Results The study treatment was received by 55 patients in the surgical ablation arm and 60 patients in the catheter ablation arm; five patients withdrew from surgical ablation before treatment. Data from randomised and treated patients were analysed as per intention to treat. Patients had a mean age of 62.3 (standard deviation 9.6) years, were predominantly male (74%), had a mean left atrial diameter of 44.6 mm (standard deviation 6 mm) and were in continuous atrial fibrillation for 22 months (range 16–31 months). At 12 months, 26% of patients in the surgical ablation arm (14/54) and 28% of patients in the catheter ablation arm (17/60) were free from atrial arrhythmias after a single procedure without antiarrhythmic drugs (odds ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 2.83; p = 0.84). An arrhythmia burden reduction of ≥ 75% was seen in 36 out of 54 (67%) patients in the surgical ablation arm, compared with 46 out of 60 (77%) patients in the catheter ablation arm (odds ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 4.08; p = 0.3). Procedure-related serious complications within 30 days of the intervention occurred in 15% (8/55) of patients in the surgical ablation arm (including one death) compared with 10% (6/60) of patients in the catheter ablation arm (p = 0.46). Surgical ablation was associated with significantly higher costs (£23,221 vs. £18,186; p = 0.02) and fewer quality-adjusted life-years than catheter ablation (0.76 vs. 0.83; p = 0.02). Limitations This study was conducted in four highly specialised cardiology centres that have substantial experience in both treatment modalities; therefore, the results may not be widely generalisable. The study was not powered to detect small differences in efficacy. Conclusions We found no evidence to suggest that standalone thoracoscopic surgical ablation outcomes were superior to catheter ablation outcomes in achieving freedom from atrial arrhythmia after a single procedure without antiarrhythmic drugs. Moreover, surgical ablation is associated with a longer hospital stay, smaller improvements in quality of life and higher health-care costs than catheter ablation (standard care therapy). Future work Evaluation of the impact of ablation treatments on sinus rhythm maintenance and quality of life with extended follow-up to 3 years. Model-based economic analysis to estimate long-term benefits, harms and costs of surgical and catheter ablation compared with antiarrhythmic drug therapy in long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation patients. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18250790 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02755688. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership. This study was supported by the UK Clinical Research Collaboration-registered King’s Clinical Trials Unit at King’s Health Partners, which is part funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London and the NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 8, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background Licensed ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 ml Lucentis®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland) and aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 ml Eylea®; Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany) and unlicensed bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 ml Avastin®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Basel, Switzerland) are used to treat macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion, but their relative clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and impact on the UK NHS and Personal Social Services have never been directly compared over the typical disease treatment period. Objective The objective was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor agents for the management of macula oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion. Design This was a three-arm, double-masked, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Setting The trial was set in 44 UK NHS ophthalmology departments, between 2014 and 2018. Participants A total of 463 patients with visual impairment due to macula oedema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion were included in the trial. Interventions The participants were treated with repeated intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (n = 155), aflibercept (n = 154) or bevacizumab (n = 154). Main outcome measures The primary outcome was an increase in the best corrected visual acuity letter score from baseline to 100 weeks in the trial eye. The null hypothesis that aflibercept and bevacizumab are each inferior to ranibizumab was tested with a non-inferiority margin of –5 visual acuity letters over 100 weeks. Secondary outcomes included additional visual acuity, and imaging outcomes, Visual Function Questionnaire-25, EuroQol-5 Dimensions with and without a vision bolt-on, and drug side effects. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using treatment costs and Visual Function Questionnaire-Utility Index to measure quality-adjusted life-years. Results The adjusted mean changes at 100 weeks in the best corrected visual acuity letter scores were as follows – ranibizumab, 12.5 letters (standard deviation 21.1 letters); aflibercept, 15.1 letters (standard deviation 18.7 letters); and bevacizumab, 9.8 letters (standard deviation 21.4 letters). Aflibercept was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference 2.23 letters, 95% confidence interval –2.17 to 6.63 letters; p = 0.0006), but not superior. The study was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to ranibizumab in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference –1.73 letters, 95% confidence interval –6.12 to 2.67 letters; p = 0.071). A post hoc analysis was unable to demonstrate that bevacizumab was non-inferior to aflibercept in the intention-to-treat population (adjusted mean best corrected visual acuity difference was –3.96 letters, 95% confidence interval –8.34 to 0.42 letters; p = 0.32). All per-protocol population results were the same. Fewer injections were required with aflibercept (10.0) than with ranibizumab (11.8) (difference in means –1.8, 95% confidence interval –2.9 to –0.8). A post hoc analysis showed that more bevacizumab than aflibercept injections were required (difference in means 1.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 2.7). There were no new safety concerns. The model- and trial-based cost-effectiveness analyses estimated that bevacizumab was the most cost-effective treatment at a threshold of £20,000–30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Limitations The comparison of aflibercept and bevacizumab was a post hoc analysis. Conclusion The study showed aflibercept to be non-inferior to ranibizumab. However, the possibility that bevacizumab is worse than ranibizumab and aflibercept by 5 visual acuity letters cannot be ruled out. Bevacizumab is an economically attractive treatment alternative and would lead to substantial cost savings to the NHS and other health-care systems. However, uncertainty about its relative effectiveness should be discussed comprehensively with patients, their representatives and funders before treatment is considered. Future work To obtain extensive patient feedback and discuss with all stakeholders future bevacizumab NHS use. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13623634. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Chronic rejection is the single biggest cause of premature kidney graft failure. HLA antibodies (Ab) are an established prognostic biomarker for premature graft failure so there is a need to test whether treatment decisions based on the presence of the biomarker can alter prognosis. The Optimised TacrolimuS and MMF for HLA Antibodies after Renal Transplantation (OuTSMART) trial combines two elements. Firstly, testing whether a routine screening programme for HLA Ab in all kidney transplant recipients is useful by comparing blinding versus unblinding of HLA Ab status. Secondly, for those found to be HLA Ab+, testing whether the introduction of a standard optimisation treatment protocol can reduce graft failure rates. OuTSMART is a prospective, open-labelled, randomised biomarker-based strategy (hybrid) trial, with two arms stratified by biomarker (HLA Ab) status. The primary outcome was amended from graft failure rates at 3 years to time to graft failure to increase power and require fewer participants to be recruited. Length of follow-up subsequently is variable, with all participants followed up for at least 43 months up to a maximum of 89 months. The primary outcome will be analysed using Cox regression adjusting for stratification factors. Analyses will be according to the intention-to-treat using all participants as randomised. Outcomes will be analysed comparing standard care versus biomarker-led care groups within the HLA Ab+ participants (including those who become HLA Ab+ through re-screening) as well as between HLA-Ab-unblinded and HLA-Ab-blinded groups using all participants. Changes to the primary outcome permit recruitment of fewer participants to achieve the same statistical power. Pre-stating the statistical analysis plan guards against changes to the analysis methods at the point of analysis that might otherwise introduce bias through knowledge of the data. Any deviations from the analysis plan will be justified in the final report. ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN46157828 . Registered on 26 March 2013; EudraCT 2012–004308-36 . Registered on 10 December 2012.

Background: Opioid use disorder is a chronic, debilitating, and costly disorder that has increased in prevalence in many countries, with an associated sharp rise in mortality. Maintenance opioid agonist therapy is the first-line treatment, but many patients do not stop using illicit or non-prescribed drugs concomitantly. We aimed to test the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a personalised psychosocial intervention implemented with a toolkit of behaviour-change techniques as an adjunct to opioid agonist therapy. Methods: We did a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial at a specialist UK National Health Service community addictions clinic in London, UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, met criteria for opioid or cocaine dependence, or both, in the past 12 months, and voluntarily sought continued oral maintenance opioid agonist therapy, which they had been prescribed for at least 6 weeks. All participants were treatment resistant (ie, had used illicit or non-prescribed opioids or cocaine on one or more days in the past 28 days at study screening, which was verified by positive urine drug screen). Participants were allocated (1:1) by a web-accessed randomisation sequence (stratified by opioid agonist medication, current cocaine use, and current rug use) to receive a personalised psychosocial intervention (comprising a flexible toolkit of psychological-change methods, including contingency management to reinforce abstinence, recovery activities, and clinic attendance) in addition to treatment as usual, or treatment as usual only (control group). The primary outcome was treatment response at 18 weeks, which was defined as abstinence from illicit and non-prescribed opioids and cocaine in the past 28 days, as measured with treatment outcomes profiles and urine drug screening. Taking a societal cost perspective, we did an evaluation of cost-effectiveness with a wide range of willingness-to-pay values for a unit improvement in the probability of treatment response. We also calculated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Efficacy was analysed in a modified-intention-to-treat population, including all participants who were randomly allocated but excluding those who had previously completed the intervention. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN69313751. The trial is completed. Findings: Between June 7, 2013, and Dec 21, 2015, we randomly allocated 136 participants to the psychosocial intervention group and 137 to the control group. The trial database was locked on April 19, 2017. Three patients (one in the psychosocial intervention group and two in the control group) who were re-randomised in error were excluded from the analysis. 22 (16%) of 135 patients in the psychosocial intervention group had a treatment response, compared with nine (7%) of 135 in the control group (adjusted log odds 1·20 [95% CI 0·01–2·37]; p=0·048). The psychosocial intervention had a higher probability of being cost-effective than treatment as usual. There was a probability range of 47–87% for willingness-to-pay thresholds of £0–1000 for a unit improvement in the probability of treatment response. QALYs were higher in the psychosocial intervention group than in the control group (mean difference 0·048 [95% CI 0·016–0·080]; p=0·004) in adjusted analyses, with 60% and 67% probabilities of cost-effectiveness at the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY, respectively. The number of adverse events was similar between groups, and no severe adverse events in either group were judged to be treatment related. One participant in the control group was hospitalised with drug-injection-related sepsis and died. Interpretation: In maintenance opioid agonist therapy, an adjunctive personalised psychosocial intervention in addition to standard therapy was efficacious and cost-effective compared with standard therapy alone at helping treatment-resistant patients abstain from using illicit and non-prescribed opioids and cocaine. Funding: Indivior.

Background Hypoxia may contribute to the development and progression of diabetic macular oedema (DMO) and diabetic retinopathy. The photoreceptors are the most metabolically active cells in the retina and the rod photoreceptors consume the maximal amount of oxygen for dark adaptation. Therefore, a lightmask emitting 500- to 505-nm light and worn at night during sleep may prevent rod-related dark adaptation and, thereby, reduce the retinal oxygen consumption and improve or prevent progression of DMO and diabetic retinopathy as evidenced in small short-term studies. Objectives The clinical effectiveness and safety of using a lightmask to prevent dark adaptation as a treatment and preventative option was evaluated for DMO over 24 months. Design A Phase III, multicentre, prospective, single-masked, randomised controlled clinical trial that evaluated the clinical effectiveness and safety of a lightmask that prevents dark adaptation to treat and prevent non-central DMO versus standard care (i.e. non-lightmask arm) at 24 months. A subset of participants also enrolled for a mechanistic substudy that evaluated the role of hypoxia in DMO. Setting Fifteen NHS clinical sites in the UK. Participants Adults with non-centre-involving DMO. Intervention The participants were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to being offered a lightmask (Noctura 400 Sleep Masks, Polyphotonix Medical Ltd, Durham, UK) to wear at night during sleep to prevent dark adaptation or to the non-lightmask arm (standard care) for 24 months. The participants were evaluated every 4 months. Main outcome measure The primary outcome was defined as a change in retinal thickness at the zone of maximum thickness measured by spectral domain optical coherence tomography at 24 months in the study eye, analysed using a linear mixed-effects model that estimated adjusted treatment effects at both 12 and 24 months. Results A total of 308 participants were recruited between April 2014 and May 2015. A total of 155 participants in the lightmask arm and 153 in the control arm contributed to the intention-to-treat strategy. The lightmask arm did not show any difference in effect compared with the non-lightmask arm [adjusted mean difference between arms –0.65 µm, 95% confidence interval –6.90 to 5.59 µm; p = 0.84). The compliance of wearing the lightmask was suboptimal, as recorded electronically, from the returned lightmasks. There were no lightmask-related severe adverse events. The mechanistic study aimed at studying the effect of improving hypoxia by inhaling 100% oxygen or by offering lightmasks to wear during sleep at night over 12 months did not demonstrate any clinically beneficial effect on DMO. Conclusion The lightmask, as offered in this trial to prevent dark adaptation, did not show any treatment or preventative effect in participants with non-central oedema or diabetic retinopathy at 24 months. No effect was seen as early as 4 months when compliance was higher. Future work Future research is needed to evaluate the role of rod-induced hypoxia in the pathogenesis of DMO and diabetic retinopathy. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN85596558. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership. The report will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 6, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The lightmasks were purchased at a discounted rate from Polyphotonix Medical Ltd.

Experimental in vitro models that accurately capture pathophysiological characteristics of human tumours are essential for basic and translational cancer biology. Here, we describe a fully synthetic hydrogel extracellular matrix, specifically designed to elicit key phenotypic traits of the pancreatic environment in culture. To enable the growth of normal and cancerous pancreatic organoids from murine genetically engineered models and human patients, essential adhesive cues were empirically defined and incorporated into the hydrogel scaffold, revealing a functional role of laminin – integrin a3/a6 signalling in adhesion and survival of pancreatic organoids. Altered tissue stiffness — a hallmark of pancreatic cancer — was recapitulated in culture by adjusting the hydrogel properties to engage mechano-signalling and alter organoid growth. Pancreatic stromal cells were readily incorporated and replicated phenotypic traits characteristic of the tumour environment in vivo. This model therefore recapitulates a pathologically remodelled tumour microenvironment for studies of normal and pancreatic cancer cells in vitro., This upload is compiled of 21 individual data packages which contain the raw data and R-scripts necessary to generate the outputs displayed in the paper. Each folder contains a README document which assists the reader through the files.

Aims Long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (LSPAF) is challenging to treat with suboptimal catheter ablation (CA) outcomes. Thoracoscopic surgical ablation (SA) has shown promising efficacy in atrial fibrillation (AF). This multicentre randomized controlled trial tested whether SA was superior to CA as the first interventional strategy in de novo LSPAF. Methods and results We randomized 120 LSPAF patients to SA or CA. All patients underwent predetermined lesion sets and implantable loop recorder insertion. Primary outcome was single procedure freedom from AF/atrial tachycardia (AT) ≥30 s without anti-arrhythmic drugs at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included clinical success (≥75% reduction in AF/AT burden); procedure-related serious adverse events; changes in patients’ symptoms and quality-of-life scores; and cost-effectiveness. At 12 months, freedom from AF/AT was recorded in 26% (14/54) of patients in SA vs. 28% (17/60) in the CA group [OR 1.128, 95% CI (0.46–2.83), P = 0.83]. Reduction in AF/AT burden ≥75% was recorded in 67% (36/54) vs. 77% (46/60) [OR 1.13, 95% CI (0.67–4.08), P = 0.3] in SA and CA groups, respectively. Procedure-related serious adverse events within 30 days of intervention were reported in 15% (8/55) of patients in SA vs. 10% (6/60) in CA, P = 0.46. One death was reported after SA. Improvements in AF symptoms were greater following CA. Over 12 months, SA was more expensive and provided fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with CA (0.78 vs. 0.85, P = 0.02). Conclusion Single procedure thoracoscopic SA is not superior to CA in treating LSPAF. Catheter ablation provided greater improvements in symptoms and accrued significantly more QALYs during follow-up than SA. Clinical Trial Registration ISRCTN18250790 and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02755688, Graphical Abstract

Summary Fibroblasts display extensive transcriptional heterogeneity, yet functional annotation and characterization of their heterocellular relationships remains incomplete. Using mass cytometry, we chart the stromal composition of 18 murine tissues and 5 spontaneous tumor models, with an emphasis on mesenchymal phenotypes. This analysis reveals extensive stromal heterogeneity across tissues and tumors, and identifies coordinated relationships between mesenchymal and immune cell subsets in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Expression of CD105 demarks two stable and functionally distinct pancreatic fibroblast lineages, which are also identified in murine and human healthy tissues and tumors. Whereas CD105-positive pancreatic fibroblasts are permissive for tumor growth in vivo, CD105-negative fibroblasts are highly tumor suppressive. This restrictive effect is entirely dependent on functional adaptive immunity. Collectively, these results reveal two functionally distinct pancreatic fibroblast lineages and highlight the importance of mesenchymal and immune cell interactions in restricting tumor growth., Graphical abstract, Highlights • Mass cytometry analysis of mesenchymal stroma in murine normal and tumor tissue • Mesenchymal heterogeneity is a feature of human and murine tissues and tumors • CD105 expression distinguishes two pancreatic fibroblast lineages • CD105neg pancreatic fibroblasts support anti-tumor immunity to control tumor growth, Hutton et al. use mass cytometry to chart stromal cells and describe mesenchymal states and lineages in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. CD105 (Eng) expression distinguishes two pancreatic fibroblast lineages with distinct functions. CD105pos fibroblasts are tumor permissive, whereas CD105neg fibroblasts suppress tumor growth in a manner dependent on adaptive immunity.

IntroductionHealth Technology Assessment (HTA) is an important but time-consuming process to inform decision-making. Following requests from stakeholders in Scotland to provide advice on technologies that had recently undergone HTA in other jurisdictions, SHTG recognized a gap in their ‘product menu’. Colleagues within the SHTG team devised a mechanism through which an original HTA could be adapted for Scotland, taking into account local contextual factors.MethodsSHTG Adaptations comprise the following: i) assessment of the original HTA using the EUnetHTA HTA Adaptation Toolkit and checklist; ii) draft Adaptation using the outcome of the assessment and contextual information for Scotland; iii) consultation group of relevant Scottish clinicians is provided with the original HTA and draft SHTG Adaptation; iv) modified Delphi approach (max. three rounds of questioning) is used to ascertain the relevance of the original HTA to Scotland; v) the Adaptation is submitted to SHTG Council for endorsement.ResultsSHTG Adaptations have a timeline of 2–3 months, three have been published since this product was launched. The process has run smoothly with excellent clinical engagement from across NHS Scotland. Key learning focusses on the role of the SHTG Council (i.e. appraisal committee) in this process and in handling of expert opinion of evidence which has already been appraised by another agency.ConclusionsThe SHTG Adaptation is a new product which offers a timely assessment and utilization of an HTA from another agency.

Background Chronic wounds are a major health burden and have a severe impact on well-being. This synthesis of qualitative studies was undertaken to inform a health technology assessment of antimicrobial wound dressings. It aimed to explore patients' experiences of chronic wounds and determine improvements for clinical practice. Method Inclusion criteria included use of qualitative methods, and English language publication. Databases searched included MEDLINE (Ovid), MEDLINE in Process (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), and PsychInfo (EBSCOHost). Searches were limited to 1990–2014. The method of analysis was Framework synthesis. Results A total of 20 studies were included. The synthesis confirmed the severe physical, social and psychological impact of the chronic wound. Inadequately controlled pain and sleeplessness, restrictions to lifestyle, and the loss of previous life roles can lead to feelings of hopelessness and helplessness and therefore depression and anxiety. Dressings and dressing changes are a key aspect of treatment and provide opportunities for positive interaction and person centred-care. Conclusion People with chronic wounds can be supported to live well within the severe physical, psychological and social restrictions of a chronic wound. Effective clinical pain management and the recognition of the experience of acute and chronic pain are of the utmost importance to people with a chronic wound. Treatment should not be purely focused on healing but incorporate symptom management, coping and wellbeing via person-centred and holistic care.

Background: Proliferative diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of severe sight impairment in people with diabetes. Proliferative diabetic retinopathy has been managed by panretinal laser photocoagulation (PRP) for the past 40 years. We report the 1 year safety and efficacy of intravitreal aflibercept. Methods: In this phase 2b, single-blind, non-inferiority trial (CLARITY), adults (aged ≥18 years) with type 1 or 2 diabetes and previously untreated or post-laser treated active proliferative diabetic retinopathy were recruited from 22 UK ophthalmic centres. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to repeated intravitreal aflibercept (2 mg/0·05 mL at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks, and from week 12 patients were reviewed every 4 weeks and aflibercept injections were given as needed) or PRP standard care (single spot or mutlispot laser at baseline, fractionated fortnightly thereafter, and from week 12 patients were assessed every 8 weeks and treated with PRP as needed) for 52 weeks. Randomisation was by minimisation with a web-based computer generated system. Primary outcome assessors were masked optometrists. The treating ophthalmologists and participants were not masked. The primary outcome was defined as a change in best-corrected visual acuity at 52 weeks with a linear mixed-effect model that estimated adjusted treatment effects at both 12 weeks and 52 weeks, having excluded fluctuations in best corrected visual acuity owing to vitreous haemorrhage. This modified intention-to-treat analysis was reapplied to the per protocol participants. The non-inferiority margin was prespecified as −5 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters. Safety was assessed in all participants. This trial is registered with ISRCTN registry, number 32207582. Findings: We recruited 232 participants (116 per group) between Aug 22, 2014 and Nov 30, 2015. 221 participants (112 in aflibercept group, 109 in PRP group) contributed to the modified intention-to-treat model, and 210 participants (104 in aflibercept group and 106 in PRP group) within per protocol. Aflibercept was non-inferior and superior to PRP in both the modified intention-to-treat population (mean best corrected visual acuity difference 3·9 letters [95% CI 2·3–5·6], p

Background Transverse myelitis (TM) is an immune-mediated disorder of the spinal cord that affects adults and children and that causes motor, sensory and autonomic dysfunction. There is a prolonged recovery phase, which may continue for many years. Neuromyelitis optica (NMO) is an uncommon relapsing inflammatory central nervous system condition in which TM can be the first presenting symptom. As TM and NMO affect many patients in the prime of their working life, the disorder can impose a significant demand on health resources. There are currently no robust controlled trials in children or adults to inform the optimal treatment of TM. However, treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is being effectively used in the management of a range of neurological conditions. Although other interventions such as plasma exchange (PLEX) in addition to intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone therapy can be beneficial in TM, PLEX is costly and technically challenging to deliver in the acute setting. IVIG is more readily accessible and less costly. Objective To evaluate whether additional and early treatment with IVIG is of extra benefit in TM compared with standard therapy with IV steroids. Design A multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group randomised controlled trial of IVIG compared with standard therapy for the treatment of TM in adults and children. Participants Patients aged ≥ 1 year diagnosed with either acute first-onset TM or first presentation of NMO. Target recruitment was 170 participants (85 participants per arm). Interventions Participants were randomised 1 : 1 to treatment with IV methylprednisolone only or treatment with IV methylprednisolone plus 2 g/kg of IVIG in divided doses within 5 days of the first commencement of steroid therapy. Main outcome measures Primary outcome measure – American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale at 6 months post randomisation, with a good outcome defined by a two-grade change. Secondary and tertiary outcome measures – ASIA motor and sensory scales, Expanded Disability Status Scale, health outcome, quality of life, Client Service Receipt Inventory and International Spinal Cord Injury Pain, Bladder and Bowel Basic Data Sets. Results In total, 26 participants were screened and two were randomised into the study. With the limited sample size, treatment effect could not be determined. However, we identified barriers to accrual that included strict inclusion criteria, the short enrolment window, challenges associated with the use of the ASIA Impairment Scale as an outcome measure and estimation of the incidence of TM. Conclusions The study did not reach the end point and the effect of IVIG in TM/NMO could not be determined. Investigators should be aware of the potential challenges associated with carrying out a rare disease trial with a short enrolment window. The study question is one that still necessitates investigation. Preliminary work to ameliorate the effect of the barriers encountered in this study is vital. Trial registration EudraCT 2014-002335-34, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02398994 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12127581. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 31. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also received from Biotest AG, Germany (supply of IVIG) and the Transverse Myelitis Society (excess research cost to facilitate study initiation).

BackgroundWe previously reported that repeated low-dose grass pollen intradermal allergen injection suppresses allergen-induced cutaneous late-phase responses, comparable with conventional high-dose subcutaneous and sublingual immunotherapy.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and mechanism of grass pollen intradermal immunotherapy for treatment of allergic rhinitis.DesignA Phase II, double-blind, randomised controlled parallel-group trial.SettingSingle-centre UK study.ParticipantsAdults aged 18–65 years, with grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.InterventionsSeven 2-weekly intradermal injections were given into the forearm, containing eitherPhleum pratensesoluble grass pollen extract (7 ng of the major allergen Phl p 5) or histamine control.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a combined symptom and medication score (CSMS) during the 2013 grass pollen season. Secondary clinical outcomes were overall symptom scores; individual symptoms scores for nose, mouth, eyes and lungs; overall medication scores; CSMSs during the peak season; visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for nose and eye symptoms; Mini Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire scores; health-related quality-of-life scores (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, 5-levels); a global evaluation of symptoms, number of symptom-free and medication-free days; number of days when prednisolone was used; and adverse events. Mechanistic studies included measurement of late-phase skin response sizes, allergen-specific antibody titres, analysis of skin biopsies and basophil activation tests.ResultsThere was no significant difference in CSMSs between treatment arms [difference in median area under curve (AUC) 14, 95% confidence interval (CI) –172.5 to 215.1;p = 0.80]. Paradoxically, among the secondary outcomes, nasal symptoms measured with daily scores were higher in the active arm (difference in median AUC 35, 95% CI 4.0 to 67.5;p = 0.03), with a trend for higher nasal symptoms measured by VASs (difference in median AUC 53, 95% CI –11.6 to 125.2;p = 0.05). No differences were seen in other clinical outcomes in the main intention-to-treat analysis. In mechanistic studies, active treatment increasedP. pratense-, Phl p 1- and Phl p 5-specific immunoglobulin E (allp = 0.001) compared with the control. T cells cultured from skin biopsies of active intradermal immunotherapy subjects showed higher T helper type 2 cell (Th2) marker CRTH2 (chemoattractant receptor-homologous molecule expressed on Th2 cells) expression (p p p p = 0.03), but not at 10–13 months’ time points.LimitationsGrass pollen doses were not increased during the course, as our proof-of-concept trial showed that repeating the same doses was sufficient to achieve almost complete late-response suppression. Injections were not continued throughout the season, as previous subcutaneous grass pollen immunotherapy trials have demonstrated preseasonal regimen efficacy.ConclusionsIntradermal immunotherapy suppressed late-phase skin responses to allergen, but was not clinically effective. The intervention appeared to have an immunological priming effect and exacerbated certain seasonal symptoms, notably in the nose.Future workFurther studies on low-dose intradermal grass pollen immunotherapy are not recommended because of our demonstrated worsening of allergic rhinitis symptoms and immunological priming. The findings are of great significance for other novel immunotherapies targeting the skin, such as epicutaneous techniques.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN78413121.FundingThis project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.

Background: The development of a nurse-led approach to managing epilepsy in adults with an intellectual disability offers the potential of improved outcomes and lower costs of care. We undertook a cluster randomised trial to assess the impact on costs and outcomes of the provision of intellectual disability nurses working to a designated epilepsy nurse competency framework. Here, we report the impact of the intervention on costs. Method: Across the UK, 8 sites randomly allocated to the intervention recruited 184 participants, 9 sites allocated to treatment as usual recruited 128 participants. Cost and outcome data were collected mainly by telephone interview at baseline and after six months. Total costs at six months were compared from the perspective of health & social services, and society, with adjustments for pre-specified participant and cluster characteristics at baseline including costs. Missing data was imputed using Multiple Imputation. Uncertainty was quantified by bootstrapping. Results: The intervention was associated with lower per participant costs from a health & social services perspective of -£357 (2014/15 GBP) (95% CI -£986, £294) and from a societal perspective of -£631 (95% CI -£1,473, £181). Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of accommodation costs. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the competency framework is unlikely to increase the cost of caring for people with epilepsy and intellectual disability and may reduce costs., This paper presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Health Technology Assessment Programme (Grant 10/104/16 PI Dr H Ring). During the time that this research was carried out, H Ring also received support from the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) East of England at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust.

‘Assumptions are made and most assumptions are wrong’ (Albert Einstein) Clinical trial conduct must be consistent with trial design, yet conducting the trial according to plan remains a major challenge. We discuss the importance of optimal co-applicant team formation in trial leadership, appropriate delegation of tasks and staff supervision arrangements. Finally, we discuss five standard documents which we believe require particular attention. With appropriate engagement by or with co-applicants during the preparation of these five standard documents, we believe many of the pitfalls trials commonly experience can be avoided. The risks inherent in failing to identify and address mistaken assumptions during the preparation of these documents are discussed and recommendations for best practice suggested.

A 67-year-old woman with post-menopausal bleeding and a suspicious endocervical mass was referred to gynaecology outpatients’ for diagnosis and management. Cervical punch biopsies taken showed a benign cervical perivascular epithelioid cell tumour (PEComa), with MRI imaging and PET-CT scan indicating a 3–4 cm endocervical tumour with malignant features. The patient underwent radical hysterectomy with lymph node dissection and the surgical specimen histopathology demonstrated a residual benign PEComa and a stage IIB mesonephric adenocarcinoma (MNA) of the cervix. There is no disease recurrence 12 months after surgery. Cervical PEComas are extremely rare tumours of mesenchymal origin deriving from the perivascular epithelioid cells with only 14 cases described so far. Cervical MNAs are rare tumours originating from the remnants of the mesonephric duct of Wolff with only 40 cases reported. Our case adds to the existing literature and highlights the challenges with regard to preoperative diagnosis, treatment and prognosis.

Tumours are complex ecosystems where phenotypically diverse tumour cells are embedded in a heterocellular environment. Using an in vitro model of intra-tumoural heterogeneity, we find that clonal tumour cell populations establish disparate interactions with stromal fibroblasts to regulate phenotypic diversity across tumour and stromal cell populations. Unexpectedly, tumour sub-clones instruct stromal fibroblasts to acquire distinct phenotypes, thereby increasing fibroblast diversity, whereas tumour cell diversity is reduced by fibroblast interactions. Heterocellular interactions differentially engage tumour cell reciprocal signalling pathways, resulting in normalisation of cell-autonomous differences in MAPK signalling but diversification of AKT signalling. These results demonstrate that tumour-stroma interactions differentially alter tumour and stromal cell diversity and that our existing cell-autonomous perspective on tumour cell heterogeneity underestimates phenotypic diversity.

Trial design We present a study protocol for a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial that seeks to test the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a 52-week period of treatment with the first-in-class co-stimulatory blocker abatacept for preventing or delaying the onset of inflammatory arthritis. Methods The study aimed to recruit 206 male or female subjects from the secondary care hospital setting across the UK and the Netherlands. Participants who were at least 18 years old, who reported inflammatory sounding joint pain (clinically suspicious arthralgia) and who were found to be positive for serum autoantibodies associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were eligible for enrolment. All study subjects were randomly assigned to receive weekly injections of investigational medicinal product, either abatacept or placebo treatment over the course of a 52-week period. Participants were followed up for a further 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was defined as the time to development of at least three swollen joints or to the fulfilment of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) classification criteria for RA using swollen but not tender joints, whichever endpoint was met first. In either case, swollen joints were confirmed by ultrasonography. Participants, care givers, and those assessing the outcomes were all blinded to group assignment. Clinical assessors and ultrasonographers were also blinded to each other’s assessments for the duration of the study. Conclusions There is limited experience of the design and implementation of trials for the prevention of inflammatory joint diseases. We discuss the rationale behind choice and duration of treatment and the challenges associated with defining the “at risk” state and offer pragmatic solutions in the protocol to enrolling subjects at risk of RA. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN46017566. Registered on 4 July 2014. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3403-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Individuals with joint pain and carrying serum autoantibodies associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at high risk of developing RA. While there are currently no evidence-based guidelines to inform therapy decisions for such subjects, there are therapies licensed for the treatment of established RA that target pathways implicated in the earliest phase of the disease. Accordingly, we set out to test the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a 52-week period of treatment with the first in class costimulatory blocker abatacept for preventing or delaying the onset of inflammatory arthritis. Methods and Design The APIPPRA study was designed as a randomised, double blind, parallel group placebo-controlled clinical trial, aiming to recruit 206 male or female subjects from the secondary care hospital setting across the UK and the Netherlands. Participants aged 18 or over who report inflammatory sounding joint pain (clinically suspicious arthralgia) and who are found to be positive for serum autoantibodies associated with RA, will be randomised to receive weekly injections of investigational medicinal product (IMP), either abatacept or placebo treatment over a 52-week period. All study subjects consent to a further 52 weeks of follow up to monitor for the primary endpoint, the time to development of ≥ 3 swollen joints, or to the fulfillment of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for RA using swollen but not tender joints, whichever endpoint is met first. In either case, swollen joints are confirmed by ultrasonography. Discussion There is limited experience of the design and implementation of trials for the prevention of inflammatory joint diseases. Here, we propose to explore the effects of immunomodulatory therapy at the very earliest detectable phase of disease using an intervention that is already licensed for use in established RA. We discuss the rationale behind choice and duration of treatment, the challenges associated with defining the “at risk” state, and offer pragmatic solutions in the protocol to enrolling subjects at risk of RA. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN46017566. Registered on 04 July 2014

This randomized clinical trial compares the clinical effectiveness of intravitreal therapy with ranibizumab vs aflibercept vs bevacizumab for the management of macular edema secondary to central retinal vein occlusion., Key Points Question Does intravitreal aflibercept or bevacizumab result in a noninferior mean change in vision at 100 weeks compared with ranibizumab for eyes with central retinal vein occlusion–related macular edema? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 463 individuals with central retinal vein occlusion–related macular edema from 44 UK National Health Service ophthalmology departments, aflibercept treatment was noninferior (no worse than) ranibizumab treatment at 100 weeks and the results for bevacizumab vs ranibizumab were not noninferior (ie, inconclusive compared with the ranibizumab group). Meaning This is important information for ophthalmologists to consider before treating such cases., Importance The comparative clinical effectiveness of ranibizumab, aflibercept, and bevacizumab for the management of macular edema due to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) is unclear. Objective To determine whether intravitreal aflibercept or bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab results in a noninferior mean change in vision at 100 weeks for eyes with CRVO-related macular edema. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective, 3-arm, double-masked, randomized noninferiority trial (Lucentis, Eylea, Avastin in Vein Occlusion [LEAVO] Study) took place from December 12, 2014, through December 16, 2016, at 44 UK National Health Service ophthalmology departments. Inclusion criteria included age 18 years or older, visual impairment due to CRVO-related macular edema of less than 12 months with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letter score (approximate Snellen equivalent) in the study eye between 19 (20/400) and 78 (20/32), and spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging central subfield thickness of 320 μm or greater. Data were analyzed from March 4, 2019, to April 26, 2019. Interventions Participants were randomized (1:1:1) to receive repeated intravitreal injections of ranibizumab (0.5 mg/0.05 mL) (n = 155), aflibercept (2.0 mg/0.05 mL) (n = 154), or bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) (n = 154) for 100 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Adjusted mean change in BCVA in the study eye at 100 weeks wherein noninferiority was concluded if the lower bounds of the 95% CI of both the intention-to-treat and the per protocol analyses were above –5 letters. Results Of 463 participants, 265 (57.2%) were male, with a mean (SD) age of 69.1 (13.0) years. The mean (SD) gain in BCVA letter score was 12.5 (21.1) for ranibizumab, 15.1 (18.7) for aflibercept, and 9.8 (21.4) for bevacizumab at 100 weeks. Aflibercept was noninferior to ranibizumab (intention-to-treat–adjusted mean BCVA difference, 2.23 letters; 95% CI, –2.17 to 6.63 letters; P

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess 24-month outcomes of wearing an organic light-emitting sleep mask as an intervention to treat and prevent progression of non-central diabetic macular oedema.METHODS: CLEOPATRA was a phase 3, single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial undertaken at 15 ophthalmic centres in the UK. Adults with non-centre-involving diabetic macular oedema were randomly assigned (1:1) to wearing either a light mask during sleep (Noctura 400 Sleep Mask, PolyPhotonix Medical, Sedgefield, UK) or a sham (non-light) mask, for 24 months. Randomisation was by minimisation generated by a central web-based computer system. Outcome assessors were masked technicians and optometrists. The primary outcome was the change in maximum retinal thickness on optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 24 months, analysed using a linear mixed-effects model incorporating 4-monthly measurements and baseline adjustment. Analysis was done using the intention-to-treat principle in all randomised patients with OCT data. Safety was assessed in all patients. This trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN85596558.FINDINGS: Between April 10, 2014, and June 15, 2015, 308 patients were randomly assigned to wearing the light mask (n=155) or a sham mask (n=153). 277 patients (144 assigned the light mask and 133 the sham mask) contributed to the mixed-effects model over time, including 246 patients with OCT data at 24 months. The change in maximum retinal thickness at 24 months did not differ between treatment groups (mean change -9·2 μm [SE 2·5] for the light mask vs -12·9 μm [SE 2·9] for the sham mask; adjusted mean difference -0·65 μm, 95% CI -6·90 to 5·59; p=0·84). Median compliance with wearing the light mask at 24 months was 19·5% (IQR 1·9-51·6). No serious adverse events were related to either mask. The most frequent adverse events related to the assigned treatment were discomfort on the eyes (14 with the light mask vs seven with the sham mask), painful, sticky, or watery eyes (14 vs six), and sleep disturbance (seven vs one).INTERPRETATION: The light mask as used in this study did not confer long-term therapeutic benefit on non-centre-involving diabetic macular oedema and the study does not support its use for this indication.FUNDING: The Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.

Background Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) has been the standard of care for patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) for the last 40 years. It prevents severe visual loss in PDR but is also associated with adverse effects on visual functions. Objectives The clinical efficacy and mechanistic evaluation of aflibercept for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (CLARITY) trial evaluated the clinical efficacy, mechanisms and cost-effectiveness of intravitreal aflibercept (Eylea®, Regeneron, Tarrytown, NY, USA/Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany therapy for PDR. Design A multicentre, prospective, individually randomised, single-masked, active-controlled trial with concurrent economic evaluation that tested the non-inferiority of intravitreal aflibercept versus standard care PRP at 52 weeks. A subset of the participants enrolled in a mechanistic evaluation substudy. Setting 22 UK NHS clinical sites. Participants Patients aged at least 18 years having either treatment-naive PDR or active retinal neovascularisation (NV) despite prior PRP requiring treatment and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 54 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters or better in the study eye were included. Eyes with evidence of macular oedema at baseline confirmed by central subfield thickness > 320 µm on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography were excluded. Intervention In the intervention arm, intravitreal aflibercept injections were given at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks and patients were subsequently reviewed every month and injected pro re nata based on the treatment response defined by degree of regression of retinal NV. In the comparator arm, PRP was completed in 2-weekly sessions and then supplemented if necessary at 8-weekly intervals. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the mean change in BCVA at 52 weeks utilising a linear mixed-effects model incorporating data from both week 12 and week 52. Results A total of 232 participants (116 per arm) were recruited between August 2014 and November 2015. A total of 221 and 210 participants contributed to the intention-to-treat (ITT) model and per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. Economic evaluation was undertaken on 202 participants (101 per arm) with complete cost and outcome data. Aflibercept was non-inferior and superior to PRP in both the ITT population [mean BCVA difference 3.9 letters, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3 to 5.6 letters; p p Limitations This study is limited to 1 year of follow-up. Conclusions At an additional cost, the study shows that intravitreal aflibercept is an effective alternative treatment option for PDR in the first year. Future work Future research is needed to evaluate the long-term benefits of aflibercept in comparison with PRP and other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents for this condition. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN32207582. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanistic Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and NIHR partnership. Aflibercept was supplied by Bayer Plc (Reading, UK). The study was sponsored by NIHR Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre and supported by the UK Clinical Research Network. The research was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and University College London Institute of Ophthalmology, the NIHR Moorfields Clinical Research Facility and the UK Clinical Reasearch Collaboration-registered King’s Clinical Trials Unit at King’s Health Partners, which is partly funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a debilitating, chronic and costly disorder, and is increasingly prevalent in many countries. Maintenance opioid agonist therapy (OAT) with oral methadone or oral buprenorphine is the first-line, empirically-supported treatment. However, many patients do not stop taking illicit drugs during OAT. We developed a personalised psychosocial intervention (PSI) to select behaviour change methods tailored to patient need and preference. The aim was to determine if this PSI adjunctive to on-going OAT can help treatment-resistant patients achieve abstinence. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, open-label, randomised controlled trial at a specialist NHS community addictions clinic. We recruited adults meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV criteria for opioid and/or cocaine dependence, enrolled in OAT for a median of 26 weeks (IQR 10-88), voluntarily seeking continued OAT, who were treatmentresistant. Treatment resistance was defined as using illicit or nonmedical opioids and/or cocaine on one or more days in the past 28 days at screening, verified by urine drug screen. Participants were allocated (1:1) by a Clinical Trials Unit managed, webaccessed, password-protected, randomisation sequence (stratified by OAT medication, cocaine use, and drug injecting) to receive continued OAT and standard case management (treatment-as-usual, TAU) or OAT TAU and a psychology assistant-delivered personalised PSI. Treatment was provided open-label. Outcome data were collected by independent research assistants. The primary outcome was treatment response at 18 weeks, defined as abstinence from illicit and non-prescribed opioids and cocaine in the past 28 days recorded by Treatment Outcomes Profile and negative urine drug screen. Taking a societal cost perspective, the evaluation of cost-effectiveness was done by taking a wide range of values of willingness-to-pay (WTP) for a unit improvement in the probability of treatment response, and EQ-5D-3L derived quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The planned analysis was intention-to-treat (ITT), including all those who were randomly allocated. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN69313751. FINDINGS: Between June 7, 2013 and December 21, 2015, we randomly allocated 136 patients (50%) to the PSI group and 137 patients (51%) to the TAU group. The trial database was locked for analysis on April 19, 2017. In error, we re-randomised three participants. These cases were excluded from all analysis. Due to this error, the analysis is classified as a modified ITT (mITT). All other randomised participants were included. PSI was superior to TAU. In the mITT analysis, there were 22 responders (16·3%) among the 135 participants in the PSI group, and 9 responders (6·7%) among the 135 participants in the TAU group (adjusted log odds 1·20; 95% CI 0·01 to 2·37; p-value=0·005). PSI had a higher probability of being cost-effective than TAU. There was a probability range of 47% to 87% for WTP thresholds of £0 to £1,000. QALYs were higher in the PSI group than the TAU (mean difference 0·048 [95% CI 0·016 to 0·080]; p-value=0·004), with a 60% and 67% probability of cost-effectiveness at the NICE willingness to pay thresholds of £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY, respectively. In the TAU group, one participant (1%) died (hospitalised with acute sepsis) and another (1%) had a serious adverse event (hospitalised with head injury). In the PSI group, one participant (1%) had a serious adverse event (hospitalised with panic attack). None of these events was judged to be trial-related. INTERPRETATION: We found a personalised PSI for OAT-resistant patients, delivered by psychology assistants, was effective and had a higher probability of being cost-effective compared to TAU. Treatment-resistant patients should be offered personalised PSI. Trial Registration Number: This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN69313751. Funding: Unrestricted research grant to Action on Addiction from Indivior. Declaration of Interest: JM is supported by research grants from the Department of Health, Institute for Health Research (NIHR), and the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health at South London and Maudsley NHS Mental Health Foundation Trust (SLaM). He has part-time employment as Senior Academic Advisor for the Alcohol, Drugs, Tobacco and Justice Division, Health and Wellbeing Directorate, Public Health England. He declares an unrestricted research grant funding at IoPPN and SLaM to Action on Addiction from Indivior for the present study, and grant support from NIHR for a trial of oral and extended-release naltrexone. JM has received honoraria from PCM Scientific in relation to the Improving Outcomes in Treatment of Opioid Dependence conference (2015-2018). He holds no stocks in any company. JH was supported by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) doctoral fellowship. MK, GS and LM declare unrestricted research grant funding at IoPPN and SLaM to Action on Addiction from Indivior for the present study. Ethical Approval: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the UK National Health Service (London-Bromley Research Ethics Committee: 13/LO/0640). Details of the study protocol and PSI have been published.

Background Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a rare, severe post-traumatic pain condition affecting distal limbs. Patients who do not spontaneously improve in 12 months are classed as having ‘long-standing CRPS’ and often cannot be effectively treated, leading to a poor prognosis. CRPS is associated with functional autoantibodies. Two small trials, including a randomised controlled trial, have suggested that low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) may be an effective treatment for some patients. Objective We hypothesised that low-dose IVIg is effective for reducing pain in long-standing CRPS. Methods A randomised, double blinded placebo-controlled multicentre trial in seven UK pain management centres. Patients were eligible if they had moderate or severe long-standing CRPS that they had experienced for up to 5 years. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 0.5 g/kg IVIg, the active intervention, or visually indistinguishable 0.1% albumin in saline placebo. Randomisation was initiated by study sites via an independent online randomisation system and was 1 : 1 with varying block sizes, stratified by study centre. Participants, investigators and assessors were blinded to group assignment. The study drug/placebo was infused intravenously at the study centres on day 1 and day 23 after randomisation. The primary outcome was the 24-hour average pain intensity between day 6 and day 42, on an 11-point (0–10) numeric rating scale, compared between the groups. Outcomes were analysed using a mixed-effects regression model that used 37 measurements of pain intensity (the primary outcome) per participant. All patients who received an infusion and provided any outcome were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Results A total of 111 patients were recruited and assigned between 27 August 2013 and 28 October 2015. Three patients were excluded because they had been inappropriately randomised, five patients were withdrawn from the primary analysis because they provided no outcomes and 103 patients were analysed for the primary outcome. The average pain score in the IVIg group was 0.27 units (95% confidence interval –0.24 to 0.80 units) higher than in the placebo group. Therefore, there is no significant evidence of a treatment effect at the 5% level and there was no significant difference between groups. Six serious adverse events but no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions were reported during the blinded and open-label phase. Conclusion and future work Low-dose immunoglobulin was not effective in relieving pain in patients with moderate to severe CRPS of 1–5 years’ duration. Better drug treatments for long-standing CRPS are urgently required. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42179756. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership. Additional funding was obtained by the Pain Relief Foundation. Biotest UK Ltd provided the active study medication at no cost.

© 2017 American College of Physicians. Background: Two small trials suggest that low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) may improve the symptoms of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), a rare posttraumatic pain condition.Objective: To confirm the efficacy of low-dose IVIg compared with placebo in reducing pain during a 6-week period in adult patients who had CRPS from 1 to 5 years. Design: 1:1 parallel, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial for 6 weeks, with an optional 6-week open extension. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 study groups between 27 August 2013 and 28 October 2015; the last patient completed follow-up on 21 March 2016. Patients, providers, researchers, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. (ISRCTN42179756) Setting: 7 secondary and tertiary care pain management centers in the United Kingdom. Participants: 111 patients with moderate or severe CRPS of 1 to 5 years' duration. Intervention: IVIg, 0.5 g/kg of body weight, or visually indistinguishable placebo of 0.1% albumin in saline on days 1 and 22 after randomization. Measurements: The primary outcome was 24-hour average pain intensity, measured daily between days 6 and 42, on an 11-point (0- to 10-point) rating scale. Secondary outcomes were pain interference and quality of life. Results: The primary analysis sample consisted of 108 eligible patients, 103 of whom had outcome data. Mean (average) pain scores were 6.9 points (SD, 1.5) for placebo and 7.2 points (SD, 1.3) for IVIg. The adjusted difference in means was 0.27 (95% CI, -0.25 to 0.80; P = 0.30), which excluded the prespecified, clinically important difference of -1.2. No statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes were found between the groups. In the open extension, 12 of the 67 patients (18%) who received 2 IVIg infusions had pain reduction of at least 2 points compared with their baseline score. Two patients in the blinded phase (1 in the placebo and 1 in the IVIg group) and 4 in the open IVIg phase had serious events. Limitations: Results do not apply to patients who have had CRPS for less than 1 year or more than 5 years and do not extend to full-dose treatment (for example, 2 g/kg). The study was inadequately powered to detect subgroup effects. Conclusion: Low-dose immunoglobulin treatment for 6 weeks was not effective in relieving pain in patients with moderate to severe CRPS of 1 to 5 years' duration.Primary Funding Source: Medical Research Council/National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Program, Pain Relief Foundation, and Biotest United Kingdom.