Search

Exome sequencing and genome sequencing have the potential to improve clinical utility for patients undergoing genetic investigations. However, evidence of clinical utility is limited to pediatric populations; we aimed to fill this gap by conducting a systematic review of the literature on the clinical utility of exome/genome sequencing across disease indications in pediatric and adult populations. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched between 2016 and 2020. Quantitative studies evaluating diagnostic yield were included; other measures of clinical utility such as changes to clinical management were documented if reported. Two reviewers screened, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Fifty studies met our inclusion criteria. All studies reported diagnostic yield, which ranged from 3 to 70%, with higher range of yields reported for neurological indications and acute illness ranging from 22 to 68% and 37–70%, respectively. Diagnoses triggered a range of clinical management changes including surveillance, reproductive-risk counseling, and identifying at-risk relatives in 4–100% of patients, with higher frequencies reported for acute illness ranging from 67 to 95%. The frequency of variants of uncertain significance ranged from 5 to 85% across studies with a potential trend of decreasing frequency over time and higher rates identified in patients of non-European ancestry. This review provides evidence for a higher range of diagnostic yield of exome/genome sequencing compared to standard genetic tests, particularly in neurological and acute indications. However, we identified significant heterogeneity in study procedures and outcomes, precluding a meaningful meta-analysis and certainty in the evidence available for decision-making. Future research that incorporates a comprehensive and consistent approach in capturing clinical utility of exome/genome sequencing across broader ancestral groups is necessary to improve diagnostic accuracy and yield and allow for analysis of trends over time. Prospero registration CRD42019094101.

To assess the association between time of birth and mortality among preterm infants. Population-based study of infants born 22–36 weeks gestation (GA) in Canada from 2010 to 2015 (n = 173 789). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations between timing of birth and mortality. Among infants 22–27 weeks GA, evening birth was associated with higher mortality than daytime birth (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.14, 95% CI 1.01–1.29). Among infants 28–32 weeks GA and 33–36 weeks GA, night birth was associated with lower mortality than daytime birth (AOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59–0.95; AOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62–0.99, respectively). Sensitivity analysis excluding infants with major congenital anomaly revealed that associations between hour of birth and mortality among infants born 28–32 and 33–36 weeks GA decreased or were not statistically significant. Higher mortality among extremely preterm infants during off-peak hours may suggest variations in available resources based on time of day.

Background Acute gastroenteritis is a leading cause of emergency department visits and hospitalizations among children in North America. Oral-rehydration therapy is recommended for children with mild-to-moderate dehydration, but children who present with vomiting are frequently offered intravenous rehydration in the emergency department (ED). Recent studies have demonstrated that the anti-emetic ondansetron can reduce vomiting, intravenous rehydration, and hospitalization when administered in the ED to children with dehydration. However, there is little evidence of additional benefit from prescribing ondansetron beyond the initial ED dose. Moreover, repeat dosing may increase the frequency of diarrhea. Despite the lack of evidence and potential adverse side effects, many physicians across North America provide multiple doses of ondansetron to be taken following ED disposition. Thus, the Multi-Dose Oral Ondansetron for Pediatric Gastroenteritis (DOSE-AGE) trial will evaluate the effectiveness of prescribing multiple doses of ondansetron to treat acute gastroenteritis-associated vomiting. This article specifies the statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the DOSE-AGE trial and was submitted before the outcomes of the study were available for analysis. Methods/design The DOSE-AGE study is a phase III, 6-center, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel design randomized controlled trial designed to determine whether participants who are prescribed multiple doses of oral ondansetron to administer, as needed, following their ED visit have a lower incidence of experiencing moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis, as measured by the Modified Vesikari Scale score, compared with a placebo. To assess safety, the DOSE-AGE trial will investigate the frequency and maximum number of diarrheal episodes following ED disposition, and the occurrence of palpitations, pre-syncope/syncope, chest pain, arrhythmias, and serious adverse events. For the secondary outcomes, the DOSE-AGE trial will investigate the individual elements of the Modified Vesikari Scale score and caregiver satisfaction with the therapy. Discussion The DOSE-AGE trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of multiple doses of oral ondansetron, taken as needed, following an initial ED dose in children with acute gastroenteritis-associated vomiting. The data from the DOSE-AGE trial will be analyzed using this SAP. This will reduce the risk of producing data-driven results and bias in our reported outcomes. The DOSE-AGE study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on February 22, 2019. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03851835. Registered on 22 February 2019.

In patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction (aSBO), the decision to operate as well as the timing and technique of surgery have significant impacts on clinical outcomes. Trends in the management of aSBO have not been described at the population level and guideline adherence is unknown. We sought to evaluate the secular trends in the management of aSBO in a large North American population. We used administrative data to identify patients admitted to hospital for their first episode of aSBO over 2005–2014. We evaluated temporal trends in admission for aSBO and in management practices using Cochran-Armitage tests. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess trends when controlling for potential confounders. Patients (40,800) were admitted with their first episode of aSBO. The mean age was 68.5 years and 55% of patients were female. The population-based rate of admission for aSBO decreased over the study period, from 39.1 to 38.1 per 100,000 persons per year. There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients who underwent surgery for aSBO (19 to 23%, p

The volume and technical complexity of both academic and commercial research using decision analytic modelling has increased rapidly over the last two decades. The range of software programs used for their implementation has also increased, but it remains true that a small number of programs account for the vast majority of cost-effectiveness modelling work. We report a comparison of four software programs: TreeAge Pro, Microsoft Excel, R and MATLAB. Our focus is on software commonly used for building Markov models and decision trees to conduct cohort simulations, given their predominance in the published literature around cost-effectiveness modelling. Our comparison uses three qualitative criteria as proposed by Eddy et al.: "transparency and validation", "learning curve" and "capability". In addition, we introduce the quantitative criterion of processing speed. We also consider the cost of each program to academic users and commercial users. We rank the programs based on each of these criteria. We find that, whilst Microsoft Excel and TreeAge Pro are good programs for educational purposes and for producing the types of analyses typically required by health technology assessment agencies, the efficiency and transparency advantages of programming languages such as MATLAB and R become increasingly valuable when more complex analyses are required.

Efficacy of osteoporosis medication is not well-established among patients taking oral glucocorticoids. We assessed the efficacy of approved osteoporosis pharmacotherapies in preventing fracture by combining data from randomized controlled trials. Teriparatide, risedronate, and etidronate were associated with decreased vertebral fracture risk. Several osteoporosis drugs are approved for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis. However, the efficacy of these treatments among oral GC users is still limited. We aimed to examine the comparative efficacy of osteoporosis treatments among oral GC users. We updated a systematic review through to March 2015 to identify all double-blinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined osteoporosis treatment among oral GC users. We used a network meta-analysis with informative priors to derive comparative risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % credible intervals (95 % CrI) for vertebral and non-vertebral fracture and mean differences in lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD). Treatment ranking was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) statistic. A meta-regression was completed to assess a subgroup effect between patients with prior GC exposures and GC initiators. We identified 27 eligible RCTs examining nine active comparators. Etidronate (RR, 0.41; 95%CrI = 0.17–0.90), risedronate (RR = 0.30, 95%CrI = 0.14–0.61), and teriparatide (RR = 0.07, 95%CrI = 0.001–0.48) showed greater efficacy than placebo in preventing vertebral fractures; yet, no treatment effects were statistically significant in reducing non-vertebral fractures. Alendronate, risedronate, and etidronate increased LS BMD while alendronate and raloxifene increased FN BMD. In preventing vertebral fractures, teriparatide was ranked as the best treatment (SUCRA: 77 %), followed by risedronate (77 %) and zoledronic acid (76 %). For non-vertebral fractures, teriparatide also had the highest SUCRA (69 %), followed by risedronate (64 %). No subgroup effect was identified with regards to prior GC exposure. Despite weak trial evidence available for fracture prevention among GC users, we identified several drugs that are likely to prevent osteoporotic fracture. Teriparatide, risedronate, and etidronate were associated with decreased vertebral fracture risk.

Little data exist on the frequency of fracture among oral glucocorticoid users. We examined the effect of oral glucocorticoids on fracture incidence using data from randomized controlled trials. Patients starting glucocorticoids had a higher probability of fracture and decline in bone mineral density compared to chronic glucocorticoid users. Oral glucocorticoids (GCs) are the leading cause of secondary osteoporosis. However, there have been few studies that quantify the rate of fracture among GC users. We sought to provide a pooled estimate of fracture risk from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of GC-treated patients. We updated a MEDLINE search published by the American College of Rheumatology through to March 2015 and identified RCTs of osteoporosis therapies that reported fracture and bone mineral density (BMD) among oral GC users. We restricted the analysis to placebo or control arms. RCT arms were stratified by GC exposure at enrolment to GC initiators (≤6 months) and chronic GC users (>6 months). Bayesian meta-regression was used to estimate the annual probability of vertebral fracture (primary), non-vertebral fracture and percentage change in lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD. The annual incidence of vertebral and non-vertebral fracture was 5.1 % (95 % CrI = 2.8–8.2) and 2.5 % (95 % CrI = 1.2–-4.2) among GC initiators, and 3.2 % (95 % CrI = 1.8–5.0) and 3.0 % (95 % CrI = 0.8–5.9) among chronic GC users. Our meta-regression identified a non-significant effect of group-level variables (mean age, mean BMD, mean GC daily dose, patients with previous vertebral fractures, proportion of women and adjuvant used) on vertebral fracture rate. Our study found higher vertebral fracture incidence among GC initiators, yet a relative decline in fracture incidence with longer exposure. Our findings suggest that fracture incidence among oral GC users may be more common than previously estimated. Optimizing GC-induced osteoporosis management during early exposure to GC is essential to prevent fractures.

There has been a large increase in the incidence of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) over the past decades, largely because of the increasing size of the population at risk. One of the major risk groups for IFIs are patients with haematological malignancies treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy or undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. These IFIs are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Consequently, as the diagnosis of IFIs is difficult, antifungal prophylaxis is desirable in high-risk patients. Furthermore, as the economic impact of IFIs is also significant, it is important to assess the cost benefit and cost effectiveness of each prophylactic agent in order to aid decisions concerning which prophylactic agent provides the best value for limited healthcare resources. This article systematically reviews the available pharmacoeconomic evidence regarding antifungal prophylaxis in immunocompromised patients treated for haematological malignancies. Furthermore, specific points of interest concerning economic analyses of antifungal prophylaxis are briefly discussed. Considering the available evidence, antifungal prophylaxis in immunocompromised patients treated for haematological malignancies seems to be an intervention with favourable cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and cost-saving potential. Furthermore, recently introduced antifungal agents seem to be attractive alternatives to fluconazole from a pharmacoeconomic point of view. However, due to wide heterogeneity in patient characteristics, underlying diseases, hospital settings and study methods in the included economic studies, as well as the lack of 'head-to-head' trials, it is difficult to find clear evidence of the economic advantages of a single prophylactic agent. Furthermore, we show that the results of cost-effectiveness analyses are highly dependent on several crucial factors that influence the baseline IFI incidence rates and, therefore, differ per patient population or region.

Objective The aim of this study was to estimate and compare the costs of vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive hospital infections in Turkey using a cost minimisation analysis. Setting Hacettepe University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. Method The health-care provider's perspective was considered within formal pharmacoeconomic assessment methodology. The records of 76 patients who had been hospitalised and treated for Gram-positive infections at Hacettepe University Hospital between 16 July 2003 and 22 November 2003 were retrospectively evaluated to obtain individual data on resources and associated costs. Main outcome measure From a cost minimisation perspective, hospital directors may consider teicoplanin to be a relevant option in addition to vancomycin. Result The estimated mean treatment cost per patient was 1,780 TRY (1,101 EUR) for teicoplanin and 1,429 TRY (884 EUR) for vancomycin, with statistical analysis failing to reveal any significant difference between the two drugs in terms of these total costs (p = 0.33). This cost minimisation analysis shows that the average costs of vancomycin and teicoplanin per patient observed did not differ significantly. Conclusion Other potential advantages of one drug over the other, as reported by other authors, such as differing safety profiles or advantages in administration, may ultimately decide which is preferred.

Dyskinesias are involuntary muscle movements that occur spontaneously in Huntington's disease (HD) and after long-term treatments for Parkinson's disease (levodopa-induced dyskinesia; LID) or for schizophrenia (tardive dyskinesia, TD). Previous studies suggested that dyskinesias in these three conditions originate from different neuronal pathways that converge on overstimulation of the motor cortex. We hypothesized that the same variants of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor gene that were previously associated with the age of dyskinesia onset in HD were also associated with the vulnerability for TD and not LID. Genotyping patients with LID and TD revealed, however, that these two variants were dose-dependently associated with susceptibility to LID, but not TD. This suggested that LID, TD and HD might arise from the same neuronal pathways, but TD results from a different mechanism.