Search

ObjectiveTo appraise the currency, completeness and quality of evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) of acute management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).MethodsWe conducted comprehensive searches to March 2016 for published, English-language SRs and RCTs of acute management of moderate to severe TBI. Systematic reviews and RCTs were grouped under 12 broad intervention categories. For each review, we mapped the included and non-included RCTs, noting the reasons why RCTs were omitted. An SR was judged as 'current' when it included the most recently published RCT we found on their topic, and 'complete' when it included every RCT we found that met its inclusion criteria, taking account of when the review was conducted. Quality was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist (trichotomised into low, moderate and high quality).FindingsWe included 85 SRs and 213 RCTs examining the effectiveness of treatments for acute management of moderate to severe TBI. The most frequently reviewed interventions were hypothermia (n = 17, 14.2%), hypertonic saline and/or mannitol (n = 9, 7.5%) and surgery (n = 8, 6.7%). Of the 80 single-intervention SRs, approximately half (n = 44, 55%) were judged as current and two-thirds (n = 52, 65.0%) as complete. When considering only the most recently published review on each intervention (n = 25), currency increased to 72.0% (n = 18). Less than half of the 85 SRs were judged as high quality (n = 38, 44.7%), and nearly 20% were low quality (n = 16, 18.8%). Only 16 (20.0%) of the single-intervention reviews (and none of the five multi-intervention reviews) were judged as current, complete and high-quality. These included reviews of red blood cell transfusion, hypothermia, management guided by intracranial pressure, pharmacological agents (various) and prehospital intubation. Over three-quarters (n = 167, 78.4%) of the 213 RCTs were included in one or more SR. Of the remainder, 17 (8.0%) RCTs post-dated or were out of scope of existing SRs, and 29 (13.6%) were on interventions that have not been assessed in SRs.ConclusionA substantial number of SRs in acute management of moderate to severe TBI lack currency, completeness and quality. We have identified both potential evidence gaps and also substantial research waste. Novel review methods, such as Living Systematic Reviews, may ameliorate these shortcomings and enhance utility and reliability of the evidence underpinning clinical care.

There is a need for clinical trial end-points to better assess how patients feel and function, so that interventions can be developed which alleviate symptoms and improve quality of life. Use of 6-min walk test (6MWT) outcomes as a primary end-point in interstitial lung disease (ILD) trials is growing, particularly for drugs targeting concurrent pulmonary hypertension. However, 6MWT outcomes may be influenced differentially by interstitial lung and pulmonary vascular components of ILD, making interpretation complicated. We propose that using 6MWT outcomes, including 6-min walk distance or oxygen desaturation, as primary end-points should depend upon the study population (how advanced the ILD is; whether vasculopathy is significant), the degree of disease progression, and, importantly, the effect of study treatment expected. We argue that the 6MWT as a single outcome measure is suitable as a primary end-point if the treatment goal is to improve functional performance or prevent disease progression within a study population of patients with advanced ILD or those with ILD and co-existent vasculopathy. In addition, we discuss the potential of composite primary end-points incorporating 6MWT outcomes, outlining important considerations to ensure that they are appropriate for the study population and treatment goals. ispartof: EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY REVIEW vol:31 issue:165 ispartof: location:England status: published

Coma and disorders of consciousness (DoC) are highly prevalent and constitute a burden for patients, families, and society worldwide. As part of the Curing Coma Campaign, the Neurocritical Care Society partnered with the National Institutes of Health to organize a symposium bringing together experts from all over the world to develop research targets for DoC. The conference was structured along six domains: (1) defining endotype/phenotypes, (2) biomarkers, (3) proof-of-concept clinical trials, (4) neuroprognostication, (5) long-term recovery, and (6) large datasets. This proceedings paper presents actionable research targets based on the presentations and discussions that occurred at the conference. We summarize the background, main research gaps, overall goals, the panel discussion of the approach, limitations and challenges, and deliverables that were identified. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12028-021-01260-x.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/., Background: Comedication with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) during treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) is extensively used in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), although the additive benefit remains unclear. We aimed to compare treatment outcomes in patients with PsA treated with TNFi and csDMARD comedication versus TNFi monotherapy. Methods: Patients with PsA from 13 European countries who initiated a first TNFi in 2006-2017 were included. Country-specific comparisons of 1 year TNFi retention were performed by csDMARD comedication status, together with HRs for TNFi discontinuation (comedication vs monotherapy), adjusted for age, sex, calendar year, disease duration and Disease Activity Score with 28 joints (DAS28). Adjusted ORs of clinical remission (based on DAS28) at 12 months were calculated. Between-country heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Secondary analyses stratified according to TNFi subtype (adalimumab/infliximab/etanercept) and restricted to methotrexate as comedication were performed. Results: In total, 15 332 patients were included (62% comedication, 38% monotherapy). TNFi retention varied across countries, with significant heterogeneity precluding a combined estimate. Comedication was associated with better remission rates, pooled OR 1.25 (1.12-1.41). Methotrexate comedication was associated with improved remission for adalimumab (OR 1.45 (1.23-1.72)) and infliximab (OR 1.55 (1.21-1.98)) and improved retention for infliximab. No effect of comedication was demonstrated for etanercept. Conclusion: This large observational study suggests that, as used in clinical practice, csDMARD and TNFi comedication are associated with improved remission rates, and specifically, comedication with methotrexate increases remission rates for both adalimumab and infliximab.

Findings Between June 16, 2014, and July 28, 2017, 122 patients were eligible for screening and a total of 95 patients were randomly assigned to the infliximab-continued group (n=48) or the infliximab-discontinued group (n=47). 92 patients (n=46 for both groups) were included in the full analysis set. 37 (80.4% [95% CI 66.1-90.6]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-continued group and 25 (54.3% [39.0-69.1]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-discontinued group were in remission at week 48. The between-group difference was 26.1% (95% CI 7.7-44.5; p=0.0076) before adjustment and 27.3% (95% CI 8.0-44.1; p=0.0059) after adjustment for stratification factors. Eight (17%) of 48 patients in the infliximab-continued group and six (13%) of 47 in the infliximab-discontinued group developed adverse events (between-group difference 3.9% [95% CI -10.3 to 18.1]; p=0.59). In the infliximab-continued group, one patient had an infusion reaction and two patients had psoriatic skin lesions. Eight (66.7%, 95% CI 34.9-90.1) of the 12 patients in the infliximab-discontinuation group who were re-treated with infliximab after relapsing were in remission within 8 weeks of re-treatment; none had infusion reactions.Background Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents are the mainstay of long-term treatment for refractory ulcerative colitis. However, long-term use of anti-TNF therapy might lead to an increased risk of malignancy or infection. To date, no randomised controlled trial has evaluated whether anti-TNF agents can be safely discontinued in patients with ulcerative colitis in remission. We therefore aimed to compare outcomes in these patients who continued infliximab with those who discontinued infliximab.Methods We did a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial at 24 specialist centres in Japan. We enrolled patients with ulcerative colitis who were in remission, had been treated with intravenous infliximab (5 mg/kg) every 8 weeks, and had started infliximab at least 14 weeks before study enrolment. No restrictions regarding age and comorbidities were used to exclude participation. Patients who were confirmed to be in remission for more than 6 months, to be corticosteroid-free, and to have a Mayo Endoscopic Subscore (MES) of 0 or 1 were centrally randomised. An independent organisation randomly assigned patients (1:1) into either the infliximab-continued group or infliximab-discontinued group, using a computer-generated stratified randomisation procedure. The stratified factors were the use of immunomodulators (yes or no) and MES (0 or 1). Neither patients nor health-care providers were masked to the randomisation. The primary endpoint was the remission rate at week 48 in the full analysis set, which was based on the intention-to-treat principle and excluded participants with no efficacy data after randomisation. This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Center Trials registry, UMIN000012092. Findings Between June 16, 2014, and July 28, 2017, 122 patients were eligible for screening and a total of 95 patients were randomly assigned to the infliximab-continued group (n=48) or the infliximab-discontinued group (n=47). 92 patients (n=46 for both groups) were included in the full analysis set. 37 (80.4% [95% CI 66.1-90.6]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-continued group and 25 (54.3% [39.0-69.1]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-discontinued group were in remission at week 48. The between-group difference was 26.1% (95% CI 7.7-44.5; p=0.0076) before adjustment and 27.3% (95% CI 8.0-44.1; p=0.0059) after adjustment for stratification factors. Eight (17%) of 48 patients in the infliximab-continued group and six (13%) of 47 in the infliximab-discontinued group developed adverse events (between-group difference 3.9% [95% CI & minus;10.3 to 18.1]; p=0.59). In the infliximab-continued group, one patient had an infusion reaction and two patients had psoriatic skin lesions. Eight (66.7%, 95% CI 34.9-90.1) of the 12 patients in the infliximab-discontinuation group who were re-treated with infliximab after relapsing were in remission within 8 weeks of re-treatment; none had infusion reactions.Interpretation Maintenance of remission was significantly more common in patients who continued infliximab than in those who discontinued. Discontinuing infliximab should therefore be discussed with caution, taking both risk of relapse and efficacy of re-treatment into account.Funding Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation and the Intractable Disease Project of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Paediatric patients with cancer and those undergoing haematopoietic cell transplantation are at high risk of bacterial infections. The 8th European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL-8) convened a Paediatric Group to review the literature and to formulate recommendations for the use of antibiotics according to the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases grading system. The evaluation of antibacterial prophylaxis included mortality, bloodstream infection, febrile neutropenia, emergence of resistance, and adverse effects as endpoints. Initial antibacterial therapy and antibiotic de-escalation or discontinuation focused on patients with a clinically stable condition and without previous infection or colonisation by resistant bacteria, and on patients with a clinically unstable condition or with previous infection or colonisation by resistant bacteria. The final considerations and recommendations of the ECIL-8 Paediatric Group on antibacterial prophylaxis, initial therapy, and de-escalation strategies are summarised in this Policy Review.

Findings Between June 16, 2014, and July 28, 2017, 122 patients were eligible for screening and a total of 95 patients were randomly assigned to the infliximab-continued group (n=48) or the infliximab-discontinued group (n=47). 92 patients (n=46 for both groups) were included in the full analysis set. 37 (80.4% [95% CI 66.1-90.6]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-continued group and 25 (54.3% [39.0-69.1]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-discontinued group were in remission at week 48. The between-group difference was 26.1% (95% CI 7.7-44.5; p=0.0076) before adjustment and 27.3% (95% CI 8.0-44.1; p=0.0059) after adjustment for stratification factors. Eight (17%) of 48 patients in the infliximab-continued group and six (13%) of 47 in the infliximab-discontinued group developed adverse events (between-group difference 3.9% [95% CI -10.3 to 18.1]; p=0.59). In the infliximab-continued group, one patient had an infusion reaction and two patients had psoriatic skin lesions. Eight (66.7%, 95% CI 34.9-90.1) of the 12 patients in the infliximab-discontinuation group who were re-treated with infliximab after relapsing were in remission within 8 weeks of re-treatment; none had infusion reactions.Background Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents are the mainstay of long-term treatment for refractory ulcerative colitis. However, long-term use of anti-TNF therapy might lead to an increased risk of malignancy or infection. To date, no randomised controlled trial has evaluated whether anti-TNF agents can be safely discontinued in patients with ulcerative colitis in remission. We therefore aimed to compare outcomes in these patients who continued infliximab with those who discontinued infliximab.Methods We did a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial at 24 specialist centres in Japan. We enrolled patients with ulcerative colitis who were in remission, had been treated with intravenous infliximab (5 mg/kg) every 8 weeks, and had started infliximab at least 14 weeks before study enrolment. No restrictions regarding age and comorbidities were used to exclude participation. Patients who were confirmed to be in remission for more than 6 months, to be corticosteroid-free, and to have a Mayo Endoscopic Subscore (MES) of 0 or 1 were centrally randomised. An independent organisation randomly assigned patients (1:1) into either the infliximab-continued group or infliximab-discontinued group, using a computer-generated stratified randomisation procedure. The stratified factors were the use of immunomodulators (yes or no) and MES (0 or 1). Neither patients nor health-care providers were masked to the randomisation. The primary endpoint was the remission rate at week 48 in the full analysis set, which was based on the intention-to-treat principle and excluded participants with no efficacy data after randomisation. This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Center Trials registry, UMIN000012092. Findings Between June 16, 2014, and July 28, 2017, 122 patients were eligible for screening and a total of 95 patients were randomly assigned to the infliximab-continued group (n=48) or the infliximab-discontinued group (n=47). 92 patients (n=46 for both groups) were included in the full analysis set. 37 (80.4% [95% CI 66.1-90.6]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-continued group and 25 (54.3% [39.0-69.1]) of 46 patients in the infliximab-discontinued group were in remission at week 48. The between-group difference was 26.1% (95% CI 7.7-44.5; p=0.0076) before adjustment and 27.3% (95% CI 8.0-44.1; p=0.0059) after adjustment for stratification factors. Eight (17%) of 48 patients in the infliximab-continued group and six (13%) of 47 in the infliximab-discontinued group developed adverse events (between-group difference 3.9% [95% CI & minus;10.3 to 18.1]; p=0.59). In the infliximab-continued group, one patient had an infusion reaction and two patients had psoriatic skin lesions. Eight (66.7%, 95% CI 34.9-90.1) of the 12 patients in the infliximab-discontinuation group who were re-treated with infliximab after relapsing were in remission within 8 weeks of re-treatment; none had infusion reactions.Interpretation Maintenance of remission was significantly more common in patients who continued infliximab than in those who discontinued. Discontinuing infliximab should therefore be discussed with caution, taking both risk of relapse and efficacy of re-treatment into account.Funding Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation and the Intractable Disease Project of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

DisclaimerThis article is based on recommendations from the 12(th) WALT Congress, Nice, October 3-6, 2018, and a follow-up review of the existing data and the clinical observations of an international multidisciplinary panel of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the area of supportive care in cancer and/or PBM clinical application and dosimetry. This article is informational in nature. As with all clinical materials, this paper should be used with a clear understanding that continued research and practice could result in new insights and recommendations. The review reflects the collective opinion and, as such, does not necessarily represent the opinion of any individual author. In no event shall the authors be liable for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the proposed protocols. Objective: This position paper reviews the potential prophylactic and therapeutic effects of photobiomodulation (PBM) on side effects of cancer therapy, including chemotherapy (CT), radiation therapy (RT), and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Background: There is a considerable body of evidence supporting the efficacy of PBM for preventing oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing RT for head and neck cancer (HNC), CT, or HSCT. This could enhance patients' quality of life, adherence to the prescribed cancer therapy, and treatment outcomes while reducing the cost of cancer care. Methods: A literature review on PBM effectiveness and dosimetry considerations for managing certain complications of cancer therapy were conducted. A systematic review was conducted when numerous randomized controlled trials were available. Results were presented and discussed at an international consensus meeting at the World Association of photobiomoduLation Therapy (WALT) meeting in 2018 that included world expert oncologists, radiation oncologists, oral oncologists, and oral medicine professionals, physicists, engineers, and oncology researchers. The potential mechanism of action of PBM and evidence of PBM efficacy through reported outcomes for individual indications were assessed. Results: There is a large body of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of PBM for preventing OM in certain cancer patient populations, as recently outlined by the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Building on these, the WALT group outlines evidence and prescribed PBM treatment parameters for prophylactic and therapeutic use in supportive care for radiodermatitis, dysphagia, xerostomia, dysgeusia, trismus, mucosal and bone necrosis, lymphedema, hand-foot syndrome, alopecia, oral and dermatologic chronic graft-versus-host disease, voice/speech alterations, peripheral neuropathy, and late fibrosis amongst cancer survivors. Conclusions: There is robust evidence for using PBM to prevent and treat a broad range of complications in cancer care. Specific clinical practice guidelines or evidence-based expert consensus recommendations are provided. These recommendations are aimed at improving the clinical utilization of PBM therapy in supportive cancer care and promoting research in this field. It is anticipated these guidelines will be revised periodically.

ObjectiveTo assess the benefits and harms of different types and doses of anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who are acutely ill and admitted to hospital.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesCochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and national health authority databases. The search was last updated on 16 November 2021.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesPublished and unpublished randomised controlled trials that evaluated low or intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin, low or intermediate dose unfractionated heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, pentasaccharides, placebo, or no intervention for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill adult patients in hospital.Main outcome measuresRandom effects, bayesian network meta-analyses used four co-primary outcomes: all cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and serious adverse events at or closest timing to 90 days. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. The quality of evidence was graded using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework.Results44 randomised controlled trials that randomly assigned 90 095 participants were included in the main analysis. Evidence of low to moderate quality suggested none of the interventions reduced all cause mortality compared with placebo. Pentasaccharides (odds ratio 0.32, 95% credible interval 0.08 to 1.07), intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin (0.66, 0.46 to 0.93), direct oral anticoagulants (0.68, 0.33 to 1.34), and intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (0.71, 0.43 to 1.19) were most likely to reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (very low to low quality evidence). Intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (2.63, 1.00 to 6.21) and direct oral anticoagulants (2.31, 0.82 to 6.47) were most likely to increase major bleeding (low to moderate quality evidence). No conclusive differences were noted between interventions regarding serious adverse events (very low to low quality evidence). When compared with no intervention instead of placebo, all active interventions did more favourably with regard to risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality, and less favourably with regard to risk of major bleeding. The results were robust in prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses.ConclusionsLow-molecular-weight heparin in an intermediate dose appears to confer the best balance of benefits and harms for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Unfractionated heparin, in particular the intermediate dose, and direct oral anticoagulants had the least favourable profile. A systematic discrepancy was noted in intervention effects that depended on whether placebo or no intervention was the reference treatment. Main limitations of this study include the quality of the evidence, which was generally low to moderate due to imprecision and within-study bias, and statistical inconsistency, which was addressed post hoc.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020173088.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms of different types and doses of anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who are acutely ill and admitted to hospital.DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.DATA SOURCES: Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and national health authority databases. The search was last updated on 16 November 2021.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that evaluated low or intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin, low or intermediate dose unfractionated heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, pentasaccharides, placebo, or no intervention for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill adult patients in hospital.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Random effects, bayesian network meta-analyses used four co-primary outcomes: all cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and serious adverse events at or closest timing to 90 days. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. The quality of evidence was graded using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework.RESULTS: 44 randomised controlled trials that randomly assigned 90 095 participants were included in the main analysis. Evidence of low to moderate quality suggested none of the interventions reduced all cause mortality compared with placebo. Pentasaccharides (odds ratio 0.32, 95% credible interval 0.08 to 1.07), intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin (0.66, 0.46 to 0.93), direct oral anticoagulants (0.68, 0.33 to 1.34), and intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (0.71, 0.43 to 1.19) were most likely to reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (very low to low quality evidence). Intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (2.63, 1.00 to 6.21) and direct oral anticoagulants (2.31, 0.82 to 6.47) were most likely to increase major bleeding (low to moderate quality evidence). No conclusive differences were noted between interventions regarding serious adverse events (very low to low quality evidence). When compared with no intervention instead of placebo, all active interventions did more favourably with regard to risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality, and less favourably with regard to risk of major bleeding. The results were robust in prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses.CONCLUSIONS: Low-molecular-weight heparin in an intermediate dose appears to confer the best balance of benefits and harms for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Unfractionated heparin, in particular the intermediate dose, and direct oral anticoagulants had the least favourable profile. A systematic discrepancy was noted in intervention effects that depended on whether placebo or no intervention was the reference treatment. Main limitations of this study include the quality of the evidence, which was generally low to moderate due to imprecision and within-study bias, and statistical inconsistency, which was addressed post hoc.SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020173088.

BACKGROUND: A EULAR taskforce was convened to develop recommendations for lifestyle behaviours in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). In this paper, the literature on the effect of diet on the progression of RMDs is reviewed.METHODS: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed of studies related to diet and disease outcomes in seven RMDs: osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, systemic sclerosis and gout. In the first phase, existing relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, published from 2013 to 2018, were identified. In the second phase, the review was expanded to include published original studies on diet in RMDs, with no restriction on publication date. Systematic reviews or original studies were included if they assessed a dietary exposure in one of the above RMDs, and reported results regarding progression of disease (eg, pain, function, joint damage).RESULTS: In total, 24 systematic reviews and 150 original articles were included. Many dietary exposures have been studied (n=83), although the majority of studies addressed people with OA and RA. Most dietary exposures were assessed by relatively few studies. Exposures that have been assessed by multiple, well conducted studies (eg, OA: vitamin D, chondroitin, glucosamine; RA: omega-3) were classified as moderate evidence of small effects on disease progression.CONCLUSION: The current literature suggests that there is moderate evidence for a small benefit for certain dietary components. High-level evidence of clinically meaningful effect sizes from individual dietary exposures on outcomes in RMDs is missing.

BackgroundA EULAR taskforce was convened to develop recommendations for lifestyle behaviours in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). In this paper, the literature on the effect of diet on the progression of RMDs is reviewed.MethodsSystematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed of studies related to diet and disease outcomes in seven RMDs: osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, systemic sclerosis and gout. In the first phase, existing relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, published from 2013 to 2018, were identified. In the second phase, the review was expanded to include published original studies on diet in RMDs, with no restriction on publication date. Systematic reviews or original studies were included if they assessed a dietary exposure in one of the above RMDs, and reported results regarding progression of disease (eg, pain, function, joint damage).ResultsIn total, 24 systematic reviews and 150 original articles were included. Many dietary exposures have been studied (n=83), although the majority of studies addressed people with OA and RA. Most dietary exposures were assessed by relatively few studies. Exposures that have been assessed by multiple, well conducted studies (eg, OA: vitamin D, chondroitin, glucosamine; RA: omega-3) were classified as moderate evidence of small effects on disease progression.ConclusionThe current literature suggests that there is moderate evidence for a small benefit for certain dietary components. High-level evidence of clinically meaningful effect sizes from individual dietary exposures on outcomes in RMDs is missing.

Introduction Microscopic colitis is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease characterised by normal or almost normal endoscopic appearance of the colon, chronic watery, non-bloody diarrhoea and distinct histological abnormalities, which identify three histological subtypes, the collagenous colitis, the lymphocytic colitis and the incomplete microscopic colitis. With ongoing uncertainties and new developments in the clinical management of microscopic colitis, there is a need for evidence-based guidelines to improve the medical care of patients suffering from this disorder. Methods Guidelines were developed by members from the European Microscopic Colitis Group and United European Gastroenterology in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. Following a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Statements and recommendations were developed by working groups consisting of gastroenterologists, pathologists and basic scientists, and voted upon using the Delphi method. Results These guidelines provide information on epidemiology and risk factors of microscopic colitis, as well as evidence-based statements and recommendations on diagnostic criteria and treatment options, including oral budesonide, bile acid binders, immunomodulators and biologics. Recommendations on the clinical management of microscopic colitis are provided based on evidence, expert opinion and best clinical practice. Conclusion These guidelines may support clinicians worldwide to improve the clinical management of patients with microscopic colitis.

Background The lack of a consensus definition of neonatal sepsis and a core outcome set (COS) proves a substantial impediment to research that influences policy and practice relevant to key stakeholders, patients and parents. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. In the included studies, the described outcomes were extracted in accordance with the provisions of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) handbook and registered. Results Among 884 abstracts identified, 90 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. Only 30 manuscripts explicitly stated the primary and/or secondary outcomes. A total of 88 distinct outcomes were recorded across all 90 studies included. These were then assigned to seven different domains in line with the taxonomy for classification proposed by the COMET initiative. The most frequently reported outcome was survival with 74% (n = 67) of the studies reporting an outcome within this domain. Conclusions This systematic review constitutes one of the initial phases in the protocol for developing a COS in neonatal sepsis. The paucity of standardised outcome reporting in neonatal sepsis hinders comparison and synthesis of data. The final phase will involve a Delphi Survey to generate a COS in neonatal sepsis by consensus recommendation. Impact This systematic review identified a wide variation of outcomes reported among published RCTs on the management of neonatal sepsis. The paucity of standardised outcome reporting hinders comparison and synthesis of data and future meta-analyses with conclusive recommendations on the management of neonatal sepsis are unlikely. The final phase will involve a Delphi Survey to determine a COS by consensus recommendation with input from all relevant stakeholders.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), may lead to severe systemic inflammatory response, pulmonary damage, and even acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This in turn may result in respiratory failure and in death. Experimentally, acetylcholine (ACh) modulates the acute inflammatory response, a neuro-immune mechanism known as the inflammatory reflex. Recent clinical evidence suggest that electrical and chemical stimulation of the inflammatory reflex may reduce the burden of inflammation in chronic inflammatory diseases. Pyridostigmine (PDG), an ACh-esterase inhibitor (i-ACh-e), increases the half-life of endogenous ACh, therefore mimicking the inflammatory reflex. This clinical trial is aimed at evaluating if add-on of PDG leads to a decrease of invasive mechanical ventilation and death among patients with severe COVID-19. Methods A parallel-group, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2/3 clinical trial to test the efficacy of pyridostigmine bromide 60 mg/day P.O. to reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Discussion This study will provide preliminary evidence of whether or not -by decreasing systemic inflammation- add-on PDG can improve clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04343963 (registered on April 14, 2020).

Background Risankizumab is a humanized IgG monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin-23 through binding the p19 subunit. In Phase 3 trials, risankizumab demonstrated superior efficacy compared with adalimumab and ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Here, we evaluated the impact of baseline characteristics on efficacy of risankizumab compared with ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods This analysis included all patients initially randomized to risankizumab or ustekinumab from the replicate, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, UltIMMa-1 (NCT02684370) and UltIMMa-2 (NCT02684357). Patients received either risankizumab (150 mg) or ustekinumab (weight-based; 45 or 90 mg per label) at weeks 0, 4, 16, 28 and 40. Efficacy was assessed as the proportion of patients achieving >= 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90) at weeks 16 and 52 by baseline patient demographics, disease characteristics and prior biologic exposure. Mean per cent improvement in PASI was calculated by body weight and body mass index at week 52. Missing efficacy data were imputed as non-responders for categorical variables and last observation carried forward for continuous variables. Logistic regression analyses assessed for interactions between treatment and five independent variables (age, sex, weight, baseline PASI score and presence of psoriatic arthritis) at both weeks 16 and 52. Results Baseline patient demographics, disease characteristics and prior biologic exposure were similar between patients randomized to risankizumab (n = 598) and ustekinumab (n = 199). At weeks 16 and 52, risankizumab demonstrated superior efficacy compared with ustekinumab across these patient characteristics (P < 0.01). Logistic regression analyses demonstrated that risankizumab was superior to ustekinumab at weeks 16 and 52 in all models tested (P < 0.0001 for all). Conclusions Risankizumab demonstrated consistent and superior efficacy compared with ustekinumab regardless of patient demographics, disease characteristics or prior biologic exposure.

As the most common non-traumatic disabling disease among adolescents, multiple sclerosis (MS) is a devastating neurological inflammatory disease of the central nervous system. Research has not yet fully elucidated its pathogenesis, but it has shown MS to be a complex, multifactorial disease with many interplaying factors. One of these factors, natural killer (NK) cells, lymphocytes of the innate immune system, have recently gained attention due to the effects of daclizumab therapy, causing an expansion of the immunoregulatory subset of NK cells. Since then, NK cells and their relation to MS have been the focus of research, with many new findings being published in the last decade. In this review, NK cells are pictured as potent cytotoxic killers, as well as unique immune-regulators. Additionally, an overview of our current knowledge regarding NK cells in MS is given. The role of NK cells in MS is reviewed in the context of well-established environmental factors and current disease modifying therapies to gain further understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment options in MS.

As the most common non-traumatic disabling disease among adolescents, multiple sclerosis (MS) is a devastating neurological inflammatory disease of the central nervous system. Research has not yet fully elucidated its pathogenesis, but it has shown MS to be a complex, multifactorial disease with many interplaying factors. One of these factors, natural killer (NK) cells, lymphocytes of the innate immune system, have recently gained attention due to the effects of daclizumab therapy, causing an expansion of the immunoregulatory subset of NK cells. Since then, NK cells and their relation to MS have been the focus of research, with many new findings being published in the last decade. In this review, NK cells are pictured as potent cytotoxic killers, as well as unique immune-regulators. Additionally, an overview of our current knowledge regarding NK cells in MS is given. The role of NK cells in MS is reviewed in the context of well-established environmental factors and current disease modifying therapies to gain further understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment options in MS.

Objective: Neuropathic pain prevalence is estimated between 7% and 10% of the population. International guidelines recommend a variety of drugs at different therapy lines for pain relief. However, side effect profiles, for example, prompted the UK government recently to classify pregabalin and gabapentin as class C drugs. Lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (LMP) might be a safer alternative. A systematic review assessed how LMP and pregabalin compared in terms of efficacy and safety. The review focused on pain reduction, quality of life and adverse events in peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) i.e. post-herpetic neuralgia, diabetic peripheral neuropathy, post-surgical/trauma, or other PNP conditions. Methods: Electronic databases were searched as well as a number of other sources up to November 2018. Sensitive strategies were used, with no restriction by language or publication status. Two independent reviewers screened records and extracted data with consensus determining final decisions. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration 2011 checklist for RCTs. Full network meta-analysis was conducted to compare LMP to pregabalin 300/600 mg in terms of pain reduction, quality of life, as well as serious adverse events and selected adverse events. Trials with enriched enrolment design were excluded. Results: Searches retrieved 7,104 records. In total 111 references pertaining to 43 RCTs were included for data extraction. Bayesian network meta-analysis of several pain outcomes showed no clear difference in efficacy between treatments However, LMP was clearly advantageous in terms of dizziness and any adverse event vs. pregabalin 600 mg/day and discontinuations vs. pregabalin 300 mg/day or 600 mg/day, as well as being associated with improved quality of life (albeit in this case based on weak evidence). Conclusions: LMP was found to be similar to pregabalin in reducing pain in all populations but had a better adverse events profile.

Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CCRT) followed by durvalumab immune therapy in appropriate patients is considered to be the standard of care in most fit stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, CCRT is a toxic treatment that affects all organ systems and may cause acute and permanent side effects, some of which may be lethal. Supportive care is therefore of utmost importance in this clinical setting. A group of experts from the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) identified the following items of importance for further improvement of supportive care: smoking cessation; nutrition before and during CCRT (including treatment and prevention of anorexia); physical exercise before and during CCRT; prevention and treatment of acute esophagitis and dysphagia; treatment of cough and dyspnea; treatment of skin reactions; treatment of fatigue; prophylaxis of nausea and emesis; prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cardiac disease and damage; and optimization of radiotherapy techniques and chemotherapy adjustments to reduce toxicity in the era of immune therapy. The resulting recommendations are summarized in this manuscript and knowledge gaps identified, in which future investments are needed to improve supportive care and hence quality of life and survival for our stage III NSCLC patients.

Background Since the publication of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of large vessel vasculitis (LVV) in 2009, several relevant randomised clinical trials and cohort analyses have been published, which have the potential to change clinical care and therefore supporting the need to update the original recommendations.Methods Using EULAR standardised operating procedures for EULAR-endorsed recommendations, the EULAR task force undertook a systematic literature review and sought opinion from 20 experts from 13 countries. We modified existing recommendations and created new recommendations.Results Three overarching principles and 10 recommendations were formulated. We recommend that a suspected diagnosis of LVV should be confirmed by imaging or histology. High dose glucocorticoid therapy (40-60 mg/day prednisone-equivalent) should be initiated immediately for induction of remission in active giant cell arteritis (GCA) or Takayasu arteritis (TAK). We recommend adjunctive therapy in selected patients with GCA (refractory or relapsing disease, presence of an increased risk for glucocorticoid-related adverse events or complications) using tocilizumab. Methotrexate may be used as an alternative. Non-biological glucocorticoid-sparing agents should be given in combination with glucocorticoids in all patients with TAK and biological agents may be used in refractory or relapsing patients. We no longer recommend the routine use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy for treatment of LVV unless it is indicated for other reasons.Conclusions We have updated the recommendations for the management of LVV to facilitate the translation of current scientific evidence and expert opinion into better management and improved outcome of patients in clinical practice.

Background Previous studies have shown conflicting results on the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on quality of life (QoL) in obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) patients. Objectives To evaluate the effect of CPAP on QoL in OSA patients compared to sham CPAP, placebo pills, and conservative treatment. Methods Studies were identified via Web of Knowledge, PubMed, PsychInfo, CINAHL, EMBASE, OpenGrey, and the Cochrane Library. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. Results Meta-analysis of 13 randomised controlled trials showed no significant differences in overall and psychological QoL comparing values of CPAP treated patients with controls; however, physical QoL improved. CPAP significantly affected the overall QoL in studies with controls receiving sham CPAP, parallel design, low risk of bias, and mild OSA patients. Conclusion CPAP treatment may help to improve physical symptoms of OSA, whereas impaired psychological QoL still cannot be alleviated.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional gastrointestinal disorder that is characterized by abdominal pain and an altered defecation pattern. It affects between 5 and 20% of the general population and can seriously impact quality of life. The pathophysiology of IBS is rather complex and multifactorial including, for example, altered signalling by the gut-brain axis, dysbiosis, abnormal visceral pain signalling and intestinal immune activation. The latter has gained particular interest in recent years, with growing insight into the bidirectional communication between the nervous system and the immune system. In this Review, we detail the current evidence suggesting that immune activation contributes to the pathology seen in patients with IBS and discuss the potential mechanisms involved. Moreover, we describe how immune mediators, particularly those released by mast cells, can directly activate or sensitize pain-transmitting nerves, leading to increased pain signalling and abdominal pain. Finally, we discuss the potential of interventions targeting immune activation as a new therapeutic strategy for patients suffering from IBS. ispartof: NATURE REVIEWS IMMUNOLOGY vol:22 issue:11 pages:674-686 ispartof: location:England status: published

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is characterised by recurrent abdominal pain related to defaecation or associated with altered stool frequency or consistency. Despite its prevalence, major uncertainties in the diagnostic and therapeutic management persist in clinical practice. METHODS: A Delphi consensus was conducted by 20 experts from Belgium, and consisted of literature review and voting process on 78 statements. Grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation criteria were applied to evaluate the quality of evidence. Consensus was defined as > 80 % agreement. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 50 statements. The Belgian consensus agreed as to the multifactorial aetiology of IBS. According to the consensus abdominal discomfort also represents a cardinal symptom, while bloating and abdominal distension often coexist. IBS needs subtyping based on stool pattern. The importance of a positive diagnosis, relying on history and clinical examination is underlined, while additional testing should remain limited, except when alarm features are present. Explanation of IBS represents a crucial part of patient management. Lifestyle modification, spasmolytics and water-solube fibres are considered first-line agents. The low FODMAP diet, selected probiotics, cognitive behavioural therapy and specific treatments targeting diarrhoea and constipation are considered appropriate. There is a consensus to restrict faecal microbiota transplantation and gluten-free diet, while other treatments are strongly discouraged. CONCLUSIONS: A panel of Belgian gastroenterologists summarised the current evidence on the aetiology, symptoms, diagnosis and treatment of IBS with attention for the specificities of the Belgian healthcare system. ispartof: ACTA GASTRO-ENTEROLOGICA BELGICA vol:85 issue:2 pages:360-382 ispartof: location:Belgium status: accepted

To accelerate the process of licensing antiseizure medication (ASM) in children, extrapolation of efficacy data for focal-onset seizures from adults to children ≥2 or ≥4 years of age is now accepted. We summarized the efficacy evidence from randomized, controlled trials that was used to grant approval for the pediatric indication of focal-onset seizures for the different ASMs available in Europe. Data from high-quality randomized, controlled trials in young children are limited, especially on the use of ASMs in monotherapy. Licensure trials are typically focused on seizure type irrespective of etiology or epilepsy syndrome. We elaborate on the importance of etiology- or syndrome-driven research and treatment, illustrating this with examples of childhood epilepsy syndromes characterized by predominantly focal-onset seizures. Some of these syndromes respond well to standard ASMs used for focal-onset seizures, but others would benefit from a more etiology- or syndrome-driven approach. Advances in molecular genetics and neuroimaging have made it possible to reveal the underlying cause of a child's epilepsy and tailor research and treatment. More high-quality randomized, controlled trials based on etiology or syndrome type are needed, including those assessing effects on cognition and behavior. In addition, study designs such as "N-of-1 trials" could elucidate possible new treatment options in rare epilepsies. Broadening incentives currently in place to stimulate the development and marketing of drugs for rare diseases (applicable to some epilepsy syndromes) to more common pediatric epilepsy types and syndromes might be a means to enable high-quality trials, and ultimately allow more evidence-based treatment in children. ispartof: FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY vol:13 ispartof: location:Switzerland status: published

Background The major reasons to treat sarcoidosis are to lower the morbidity and mortality risk or to improve quality of life (QoL). The indication for treatment varies depending on which manifestation is the cause of symptoms: lungs, heart, brain, skin, or other manifestations. While glucocorticoids (GC) remain the first choice for initial treatment of symptomatic disease, prolonged use is associated with significant toxicity. GC-sparing alternatives are available. The presented treatment guideline aims to provide guidance to physicians treating the very heterogenous sarcoidosis manifestations. Materials and Methods A European Respiratory Society Task Force (TF) committee composed of clinicians, methodologists, and patients with experience in sarcoidosis developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) methodology. The committee developed eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions and these were used to make specific evidence-based recommendations. Results The TF committee delivered twelve recommendations for seven PICOs. These included treatment of pulmonary, cutaneous, cardiac, and neurologic disease as well as fatigue. One PICO question regarding small fiber neuropathy had insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. In addition to the recommendations, the committee provided information on how they use alternative treatments, when there was insufficient evidence to support a recommendation. Conclusions There are many treatments available to treat sarcoidosis. Given the diverse nature of the disease, treatment decisions require an assessment of organ involvement, risk for significant morbidity, and impact on QoL of the disease and treatment. Message An evidence based guideline for treatment of sarcoidosis is presented. The panel used the GRADE approach and specific recommendations are made. A major factor in treating patients is the risk of loss of organ function or impairment of quality of life.

In 2011, the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome (ESSTS) published the first European guidelines for Tourette Syndrome (TS). We now present an update of the part on pharmacological treatment, based on a review of new literature with special attention to other evidence-based guidelines, meta-analyses, and randomized double-blinded studies. Moreover, our revision took into consideration results of a recent survey on treatment preferences conducted among ESSTS experts. The first preference should be given to psychoeducation and to behavioral approaches, as it strengthens the patients’ self-regulatory control and thus his/her autonomy. Because behavioral approaches are not effective, available, or feasible in all patients, in a substantial number of patients pharmacological treatment is indicated, alone or in combination with behavioral therapy. The largest amount of evidence supports the use of dopamine blocking agents, preferably aripiprazole because of a more favorable profile of adverse events than first- and second-generation antipsychotics. Other agents that can be considered include tiapride, risperidone, and especially in case of co-existing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), clonidine and guanfacine. This view is supported by the results of our survey on medication preference among members of ESSTS, in which aripiprazole was indicated as the drug of first choice both in children and adults. In treatment resistant cases, treatment with agents with either a limited evidence base or risk of extrapyramidal adverse effects might be considered, including pimozide, haloperidol, topiramate, cannabis-based agents, and botulinum toxin injections. Overall, treatment of TS should be individualized, and decisions based on the patient’s needs and preferences, presence of co-existing conditions, latest scientific findings as well as on the physician’s preferences, experience, and local regulatory requirements.

Structural changes involving tissue remodelling and fibrosis are major features of many pulmonary diseases, including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Abnormal deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins is a key factor in the development of tissue remodelling that results in symptoms and impaired lung function in these diseases. Tissue remodelling in the lungs is complex and differs between compartments. Some pathways are common but tissue remodelling around the airways and in the parenchyma have different morphologies. Hence it is critical to evaluate both common fibrotic pathways and those that are specific to different compartments; thereby expanding the understanding of the pathogenesis of fibrosis and remodelling in the airways and parenchyma in asthma, COPD and IPF with a view to developing therapeutic strategies for each. Here we review the current understanding of remodelling features and underlying mechanisms in these major respiratory diseases. The differences and similarities of remodelling are used to highlight potential common therapeutic targets and strategies. One central pathway in remodelling processes involves transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta induced fibroblast activation and myofibroblast differentiation that increases ECM production. The current treatments and clinical trials targeting remodelling are described, as well as potential future directions. These endeavours are indicative of the renewed effort and optimism for drug discovery targeting tissue remodelling and fibrosis. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.