Search

Purpose: The Respiratory Health in Northern Europe, Spain and Australia (RHINESSA) cohort was established to (1) investigate how exposures before conception and in previous generations influence health and disease, particularly allergies and respiratory health, (2) identify susceptible time windows and (3) explore underlying mechanisms. The ultimate aim is to facilitate efficient intervention strategies targeting multiple generations., Participants: RHINESSA includes study participants of multiple generations from ten study centres in Norway (1), Denmark (1), Sweden (3), Iceland (1), Estonia (1), Spain (2) and Australia (1). The RHINESSA core cohort, adult offspring generation 3 (G3), was first investigated in 2014-17 in a questionnaire study (N=8818, age 18-53 years) and a clinical study (subsample, n=1405). Their G2 parents participated in the population-based cohorts, European Community Respiratory Heath Survey and Respiratory Health In Northern Europe, followed since the early 1990s when they were 20-44 years old, at 8-10 years intervals. Study protocols are harmonised across generations., Findings to Date: Collected data include spirometry, skin prick tests, exhaled nitric oxide, anthropometrics, bioimpedance, blood pressure; questionnaire/interview data on respiratory/general/reproductive health, indoor/outdoor environment, smoking, occupation, general characteristics and lifestyle; biobanked blood, urine, gingival fluid, skin swabs; measured specific and total IgE, DNA methylation, sex hormones and oral microbiome. Research results suggest that parental environment years before conception, in particular, father's exposures such as smoking and overweight, may be of key importance for asthma and lung function, and that there is an important susceptibility window in male prepuberty. Statistical analyses developed to approach causal inference suggest that these associations may be causal. DNA methylation studies suggest a mechanism for transfer of father's exposures to offspring health and disease through impact on offspring DNA methylation., Future Plans: Follow-up is planned at 5-8 years intervals, first in 2021-2023. Linkage with health registries contributes to follow-up of the cohort., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Breathlessness is a major cause of suffering and disability globally. The symptom relates to multiple factors including asthma and lung function, which are influenced by hereditary factors. No study has evaluated potential inheritance of breathlessness itself across generations., Methods: We analysed the association between breathlessness in parents and their offspring in the Respiratory Health in Northern Europe, Spain and Australia generation study. Data on parents and offspring aged ≥18 years across 10 study centres in seven countries included demographics, self-reported breathlessness, asthma, depression, smoking, physical activity level, measured Body Mass Index and spirometry. Data were analysed using multivariable logistic regression accounting for clustering within centres and between siblings., Results: A total of 1720 parents (mean age at assessment 36 years, 55% mothers) and 2476 offspring (mean 30 years, 55% daughters) were included. Breathlessness was reported by 809 (32.7%) parents and 363 (14.7%) offspring. Factors independently associated with breathlessness in parents and offspring included obesity, current smoking, asthma, depression, lower lung function and female sex. After adjusting for potential confounders, parents with breathlessness were more likely to have offspring with breathlessness, adjusted OR 1.8 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.9). The association was not modified by sex of the parent or offspring., Conclusion: Parents with breathlessness were more likely to have children who developed breathlessness, after adjusting for asthma, lung function, obesity, smoking, depression and female sex in both generations. The hereditary components of breathlessness need to be further explored., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MJA reports grants from Pfizer, grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Sanofi, other from Sanofi and personal fees from GSK, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Vancomycin is the most widely used antibiotic for neonatal Gram-positive sepsis, but clinical outcome data of dosing strategies are scarce. The NeoVanc programme comprised extensive preclinical studies to inform a randomised controlled trial to assess optimised vancomycin dosing. We compared the efficacy of an optimised regimen to a standard regimen in infants with late onset sepsis that was known or suspected to be caused by Gram-positive microorganisms., Methods: NeoVanc was an open-label, multicentre, phase 2b, parallel-group, randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing the efficacy and toxicity of an optimised regimen of vancomycin to a standard regimen in infants aged 90 days or younger. Infants with at least three clinical or laboratory sepsis criteria or confirmed Gram-positive sepsis with at least one clinical or laboratory criterion were enrolled from 22 neonatal intensive care units in Greece, Italy, Estonia, Spain, and the UK. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the optimised regimen (25 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 15 mg/kg every 12 h or 8 h dependent on postmenstrual age, for 5 ± 1 days) or the standard regimen (no loading dose; 15 mg/kg every 24 h, 12 h, or 8 h dependent on postmenstrual age for 10 ± 2 days). Vancomycin was administered intravenously via 60 min infusion. Group allocation was not masked to local investigators or parents. The primary endpoint was success at the test of cure visit (10 ± 1 days after the end of actual vancomycin therapy) in the per-protocol population, where success was defined as the participant being alive at the test of cure visit, having a successful outcome at the end of actual vancomycin therapy, and not having a clinically or microbiologically significant relapse or new infection requiring antistaphylococcal antibiotics for more than 24 h within 10 days of the end of actual vancomycin therapy. The non-inferiority margin was -10%. Safety was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02790996)., Findings: Between March 3, 2017, and July 29, 2019, 242 infants were randomly assigned to the standard regimen group (n=122) or the optimised regimen group (n=120). Primary outcome data in the per-protocol population were available for 90 infants in the optimised group and 92 in the standard group. 64 (71%) of 90 infants in the optimised group and 73 (79%) of 92 in the standard group had success at test of cure visit; non-inferiority was not confirmed (adjusted risk difference -7% [95% CI -15 to 2]). Incomplete resolution of clinical or laboratory signs after 5 ± 1 days of vancomycin therapy was the main factor contributing to clinical failure in the optimised group. Abnormal hearing test results were recorded in 25 (30%) of 84 infants in the optimised group and 12 (15%) of 79 in the standard group (adjusted risk ratio 1·96 [95% CI 1·07 to 3·59], p=0·030). There were six vancomycin-related adverse events in the optimised group (one serious adverse event) and four in the standard group (two serious adverse events). 11 infants in the intention-to-treat population died (six [6%] of 102 infants in the optimised group and five [5%] of 98 in the standard group)., Interpretation: In the largest neonatal vancomycin efficacy trial yet conducted, no clear clinical impact of a shorter duration of treatment with a loading dose was demonstrated. The use of the optimised regimen cannot be recommended because a potential hearing safety signal was identified; long-term follow-up is being done. These results emphasise the importance of robust clinical safety assessments of novel antibiotic dosing regimens in infants., Funding: EU Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PTH is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence neonatal infection guideline development group. LR is an employee of Therakind. DD obtained a PhD that was funded by Fondazione Penta; the capacity and remit of this PhD was independent and unrelated to involvement with NeoVanc. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The aims of this study were to determine the frequency of dialysis and kidney transplantation and to estimate the regularity of comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with kidney failure in Europe. This study uses data from the ERA-EDTA Registry. Additionally, our study included supplemental data from Armenia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Kosovo, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Slovenia and additional data from Israel, Italy, Slovakia using other information sources. Through an online survey, responding nephrologists estimated the frequency of CCM (i.e. planned holistic care instead of kidney replacement therapy) in 33 countries. In 2016, the overall incidence of replacement therapy for kidney failure was 132 per million population (pmp), varying from 29 (Ukraine) to 251 pmp (Greece). On 31 December 2016, the overall prevalence of kidney replacement therapy was 985 pmp, ranging from 188 (Ukraine) to 1906 pmp (Portugal). The prevalence of peritoneal dialysis (114 pmp) and home hemodialysis (28 pmp) was highest in Cyprus and Denmark respectively. The kidney transplantation rate was nearly zero in some countries and highest in Spain (64 pmp). In 28 countries with five or more responding nephrologists, the median percentage of candidates for kidney replacement therapy who were offered CCM in 2018 varied between none (Slovakia and Slovenia) and 20% (Finland) whereas the median prevalence of CCM varied between none (Slovenia) and 15% (Hungary). Thus, the substantial differences across Europe in the frequency of kidney replacement therapy and CCM indicate the need for improvement in access to various treatment options for patients with kidney failure., (Copyright © 2021 International Society of Nephrology. All rights reserved.)