Search

Clinical trials in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH, formerly known as nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) require histologic scoring for assessment of inclusion criteria and endpoints. However, variability in interpretation has impacted clinical trial outcomes. We developed an artificial intelligence-based measurement (AIM) tool for scoring MASH histology (AIM-MASH). AIM-MASH predictions for MASH Clinical Research Network necroinflammation grades and fibrosis stages were reproducible (κ = 1) and aligned with expert pathologist consensus scores (κ = 0.62-0.74). The AIM-MASH versus consensus agreements were comparable to average pathologists for MASH Clinical Research Network scores (82% versus 81%) and fibrosis (97% versus 96%). Continuous scores produced by AIM-MASH for key histological features of MASH correlated with mean pathologist scores and noninvasive biomarkers and strongly predicted progression-free survival in patients with stage 3 (P

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a debilitating disorder, yet currently approved pharmacotherapies to treat AUD are under-utilized. The three medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the indication of AUD are disulfiram, acamprosate, and naltrexone. The current landscape of pharmacotherapies for AUD suggests opportunities for improvement. Clinical trials investigating novel pharmacotherapies for AUD traditionally use abstinence-based drinking outcomes or no heavy drinking days as trial endpoints to determine the efficacy of pharmacotherapies. These outcomes are typically measured through patient self-report endorsements of their drinking. Apart from these traditional outcomes, there have been recent developments in novel endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies. These novel endpoints include utilizing the World Health Organization (WHO) risk drinking level reductions to promote a harm-reduction endpoint rather than an abstinence-based endpoint. Additionally, in contrast to patient self-report measurements, biological markers of alcohol use may serve as objective endpoints in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. Lastly, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) definition of recovery from AUD and patient-oriented outcomes offer new frameworks to consider endpoints associated with more than alcohol consumption itself, such as the provider-patient experiences with novel pharmacotherapies. These recent developments in new endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies offer promising future opportunities for pharmacotherapy development, so long as validity and reliability measures are demonstrated for the endpoints. A greater breadth of endpoint utilization may better capture the complexity of AUD symptomatology.

BACKGROUND: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a progressive immune-mediated liver disease, for which no medical therapy has been shown to slow disease progression. However, the horizon for new therapies is encouraging, with several innovative clinical trials in progress. Despite these advancements, there is considerable heterogeneity in the outcomes studied, with lack of consensus as to what outcomes to measure, when to measure and how to measure. Furthermore, there has been a paradigm shift in PSC treatment targets over recent years, moving from biochemistry-based endpoints to histological assessment of liver fibrosis, imaging-based biomarkers and patient-reported outcome measures. The abundance of new interventional trials and evolving endpoints pose opportunities for all stakeholders involved in evaluating novel therapies. To this effect, there is a need to harmonise measures used in clinical trials through the development of a core outcome set (COS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Synthesis of a PSC-specific COS will be conducted in four stages. Initially, a systematic literature review will be performed to identify outcomes previously used in PSC trials, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews conducted with key stakeholders. The latter may include patients, clinicians, researchers, pharmaceutical industry representatives and healthcare payers and regulatory agencies, to identify additional outcomes of importance. Using the outcomes generated from the literature review and stakeholder interviews, an international two-round Delphi survey will be conducted to prioritise outcomes for inclusion in the COS. Finally, a consensus meeting will be convened to ratify the COS and disseminate findings for application in future PSC trials. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the East Midlands-Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 24/EM/0126) for this study. The COS from this study will be widely disseminated including publication in peer-reviewed journals, international conferences, promotion through patient-support groups and made available on the Core Outcomes Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 1239.

Objective: Until now, the clinically relevant improvement for the Xerostomia Inventory (XI) has not been defined. Therefore, our aim was to determine the Minimally Important Difference (MID) of the XI for improvement in dry‐mouth symptoms in SjD patients. Method: The study recruited 34 SjD patients who underwent sialendoscopy of major salivary glands and 15 SjD patients in a nonintervention control group. XI scores were assessed at several time points. The MID was determined from the mean difference in XI scores between the groups with and without improvement. Results: In the control group, no significant XI score changes were seen. In the sialendoscopy group, a clinically relevant XI score change of four scale points was identified after 1 week. For a prolonged duration (≥16 weeks), a minimum reduction of seven scale points in the XI score was required to indicate clinically relevant improvement. Conclusion: In SjD patients, a minimum change of four points in the XI score indicates a clinically relevant improvement for evaluating short‐term effects. For prolonged effects, a clinically relevant improvement requires a MID of seven points. The determination of the MID in XI could assist in future studies that evaluate changes in xerostomia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Smokeless tobacco (SLT) use in low- and middle-income countries has adverse health consequences. We hypothesize that it is feasible to test an intervention of mobile phone messages and face-to-face counseling sessions for SLT cessation in India. Aims and Methods We conducted an exploratory, individual parallel two group, randomized controlled trial (RCT), with baseline and end-point (3 months from randomization) assessments in urban primary health centers in Odisha, India. A total of 250 current (i.e. users in the last 3 months) SLT users or dual users (ie, smokers and SLT users) were recruited to the trial (125 in each group). Participants were randomized to either routine care, face-to-face counseling, and reminder mobile messages or routine care only. The primary outcomes were to assess the feasibility of running a full RCT including recruitment, compliance, and retention. Results A total of seven (77.8%) out of nine primary care centers took part in the trial. Out of the 315 SLT users invited to participate, 250 provided consent and were randomized [79.4% (95% CI: 74.5, 83.7)]. Out of the 250 randomized SLT users, 238 [95% (95% CI: 91.8, 97.5)] were followed up at 3 months (117 in the intervention group and 121 in the control group). Of the participants in the intervention group, 74 (63.8%) reported that they received the mobile messages. Conclusions This exploratory trial demonstrated the feasibility of delivering and evaluating an intervention of mobile phone messages and face-to-face counseling for SLT users in Indian primary care in a full randomized trial Implications This study found that combining mobile messages with face-to-face counseling for smokeless tobacco users visiting primary health care settings in India is feasible in terms of recruitment of users, compliance with the intervention, and retention of study participants within the trial. The biochemically verified smokeless tobacco abstinence rate was higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. There was poor agreement between self-reported tobacco cessation and the measured salivary cotinine in smokeless tobacco users. The findings support the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention signaling the need for a larger clinical trial to test the effectiveness of the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: There is a critical need to validate biofluid-based biomarkers as diagnostic and drug development tools for traumatic brain injury (TBI). As part of the TBI Endpoints Development Initiative, we identified four potentially predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers for TBI: astroglial markers GFAP and S100B and the neuronal markers UCH-L1 and Tau. Materials & methods: Several commonly used platforms for these four biomarkers were identified and compared on analytic performance and ability to detect gold standard recombinant protein antigens and to pool control versus TBI cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Results: For each marker, only some assay formats could differentiate TBI CSF from the control CSF. Also, different assays for the same biomarker reported divergent biomarker values for the same biosamples. Conclusion: Due to the variability of TBI marker assay in performance and reported values, standardization strategies are recommended when comparing reported biomarker levels across assay platforms.

BackgroundDue to a large variety in treatment outcomes reported in therapeutic trials and lacking patient-relevant outcomes, it is hard to adequately compare and improve current therapies for patients with capillary malformations (CMs). The Core Outcome Set for Capillary Malformations (COSCAM) project aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in future CM trials, in which we will first develop a core outcome (sub)domain set (CDS). Here, we describe the methods for the development of a CDS and present the results of the first development stage.MethodsThe COSCAM project is carried out according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Skin Core OUtcomes Set INitiative (CS-COUSIN) and the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. During the first stage, we identified all potentially relevant outcome subdomains based on a systematic review, two focus group sessions and input from patient representatives of Dutch patient organizations and the COSCAM-founding group. In stage two, we will present the subdomains in a three-round e-Delphi study and online consensus meeting, in which CM patients, parents/caregivers and CM experts worldwide rate the importance of the proposed subdomains, hereby finalizing the core outcome (sub)domains of the CDS.ResultsA total of 67 potential outcome subdomains were included; sixteen were previously used in the literature, 20 were proposed by Dutch patients and their parents/caregivers (n = 13) in focus group sessions and 38 were suggested by the experts of the COSCAM-founding group. Seven were excluded because of overlap.ConclusionThe final CDS may serve as a minimum standard in future CM trials, thereby facilitating adequate comparison of treatment outcomes. After this CDS development, we will select appropriate outcome measurement instruments to measure the core outcome subdomains.

Drug discovery and approval in oncology is mediated by the use of imaging to evaluate drug efficacy in clinical trials. Imaging is performed while patients receive therapy to evaluate their response to treatment. Response criteria, specifically Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1), are standardized and can be used at different time points to classify response into the categories of complete response, partial response, stable disease, or disease progression. At the trial level, categorical responses for all patients are summated into image-based trial endpoints. These outcome measures, including objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS), are characteristics that can be derived from imaging and can be used as surrogates for overall survival (OS). Similar to OS, ORR and PFS describe the efficacy of a drug. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory approval requires therapies to demonstrate direct evidence of clinical benefit, such as improved OS. However, multiple programs have been created to expedite drug approval for life-threatening illnesses, including advanced cancer. ORR and PFS have been accepted by the FDA as adequate predictors of OS on which to base drug approval decisions, thus substantially shortening the time and cost of drug development (1). Use of imaging surrogate markers for drug approval has become increasingly common, accounting for more than 90% of approvals through the Accelerated Approval Program and allowing for use of many therapies which have altered the course of cancer. Keywords: Oncology, Tumor Response  RSNA, 2021.

Domain-specific endpoints are assessments that correspond to the output of individual neural systems and are useful for capturing treatment effects on specific behaviors. By contrast, global endpoints combine several attributes into a single score and are useful for capturing broad treatment effects in a summary way. While global endpoints have become the de facto mechanism required to define benefit in stroke trials, they also have important limitations, some of which might be addressed by simultaneously measuring domain-specific endpoints. Substantial opportunity remains to identify quantifiable patient benefit that would otherwise not be captured by global endpoints. Potential advantages of incorporating domain-specific endpoints in acute stroke trials are discussed, such as increased granularity of measurement, improved understanding of how therapies affect the brain between acute treatment and day 90, and optimized therapeutic translation. Potential disadvantages are also considered, including time and cost of administering domain-specific endpoints, as well as statistical implications. Domain-specific endpoints and global endpoints are not mutually exclusive, and both capture clinical benefits to patients. Incorporating a broader set of outcome assessments in stroke trials, including both global and domain-specific endpoints, is warranted.

Abstract Background Malnutrition (i.e., protein-energy malnutrition) in older adults has severe negative clinical consequences, emphasizing the need for effective treatments. Many, often small, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effectiveness of nutritional interventions for the treatment of malnutrition showed mixed results and a need for meta-analyses and data pooling has been expressed. However, evidence synthesis is hampered by the wide variety of outcomes and their method of assessment in previous RCTs. This paper describes the protocol for developing a Core Outcome Set (COS) for nutritional intervention studies in older adults with malnutrition and those at risk. Methods The project consists of five phases. The first phase consists of a scoping review to identify frequently used outcomes in published RCTs and select additional patient-reported outcomes. The second phase includes a modified Delphi Survey involving experienced researchers and health care professionals working in the field of malnutrition in older adults, followed by the third phase consisting of a consensus meeting to discuss and agree what critical outcomes need to be included in the COS. The fourth phase will determine how each COS outcome should be measured based on a systematic literature review and a second consensus meeting. This will be followed by a dissemination and implementation phase. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) representatives will contribute to study design, oversight, consensus, and dissemination. Conclusions The result of this project is a COS that should be included in any RCT evaluating the effect of nutritional interventions in older adults with malnutrition and those at risk. This COS will facilitate comparison of RCT results, will increase efficient use of research resources and will reduce bias due to measurement of the outcome and publication bias. Ultimately, the COS will support clinical decision making by identifying the most effective approaches for treating and preventing malnutrition in older adults.

BACKGROUND: A lack of consensus on the optimal outcome measures to assess the efficacy and effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) has hampered the pooling of research data for evidence synthesis and clinical guidelines. A core outcome set (COS) is a minimum set of outcome measures that are recommended for all studies of a particular condition. The National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) Core Outcome Set for OUD (COS-OUD) is a development study to identify core constructs, meaningful outcomes, and their optimal measurement for all efficacy and effectiveness studies of OUD treatment and service delivery. METHODS/DESIGN: Overseen by an expert workgroup, a modified, stepwise, e-Delphi methodology will be used to gain consensus among a panel of clinical practitioners and researchers involved in the treatment of OUD, who are members of the CTN. Sequential rounds of anonymous, online questionnaires will be used to identify, rate the importance of, and refine a core outcome set. A consensus threshold will be achieved if at least 70% of the panel rate the measure as critical for inclusion in the COS-OUD. Where consensus is not reached or there are suggestions for new measures, these will be brought forward to a further round of review prior to a consensus meeting. Products from this study will be communicated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and conferences. DISCUSSION: This initiative will develop a COS for OUD intervention trials, treatment studies, and service delivery and will support the pooling of research and clinical practice data and efforts to develop measurement-based care within the OUD treatment cascade. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1579.

BACKGROUND:Acute severe childhood asthma is an infrequent, but potentially life-threatening emergency condition. There is a wide range of different approaches to this condition, with very little supporting evidence, leading to significant variation in practice. To improve knowledge in this area, there must first be consensus on how to conduct clinical trials, so that valid comparisons can be made between future studies. We have formed an international working group comprising paediatricians and emergency physicians from North America, Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa, South America, Central America, Australasia and the United Kingdom. METHODS/DESIGN:A 5-stage approach will be used: (1) a comprehensive list of outcomes relevant to stakeholders will be compiled through systematic reviews and qualitative interviews with patients, families, and clinicians; (2) Delphi methodology will be applied to reduce the comprehensive list to a core outcome set; (3) we will review current clinical practice guidelines, existing clinical trials, and literature on bedside assessment of asthma severity. We will then identify practice differences in tne clinical assessment of asthma severity, and determine whether further prospective work is needed to achieve agreement on inclusion criteria for clinical trials in acute paediatric asthma in the emergency department (ED) setting; (4) a retrospective chart review in Australia and New Zealand will identify the incidence of serious clinical complications such as intubation, ICU admission, and death in children hospitalized with acute severe asthma. Understanding the incidence of such outcomes will allow us to understand how common (and therefore how feasible) particular outcomes are in asthma in the ED setting; and finally (5) a meeting of the Pediatric Emergency Research Networks (PERN) asthma working group will be held, with invitation of other clinicians interested in acute asthma research, and patients/families. The group will be asked to achieve consensus on a core set of outcomes and to make recommendations for the conduct of clinical trials in acute severe asthma. If this is not possible, the group will agree on a series of prioritized steps to achieve this aim. DISCUSSION:The development of an international consensus on core outcomes is an important first step towards the development of consensus guidelines and standardised protocols for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this population. This will enable us to better interpret and compare future studies, reduce risks of study heterogeneity and outcome reporting bias, and improve the evidence base for the management of this important condition.

Multiple drugs currently used in clinical practice have been approved by regulatory agencies based on studies that utilize composite endpoints. Composite endpoints are appealing because they reduce sample size requirements, follow-up periods, and costs. However, interpreting composite endpoints can be challenging, and their misuse is not uncommon. Incorrect interpretation of composite outcomes can lead to misleading conclusions that impact patient care. To correctly interpret composite outcomes, several important questions should be considered. Are the individual components of the composite outcome equally important to patients? Did the more and less important endpoints occur with similar frequency? Do the component endpoints exhibit similar relative risk reductions? If these questions receive affirmative answers, the use and interpretation of the composite endpoint would be appropriate. However, if any component of the composite endpoint fails to satisfy the aforementioned criteria, interpretation can become difficult, necessitating additional steps. Regulatory agencies acknowledge these challenges and have specific considerations when approving drugs based on studies employing composite endpoints. In conclusion, composite endpoints are valuable tools for evaluating the efficacy and net clinical benefit of interventions; however, cautious interpretation is advised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundPediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) teams provide care for critically ill children with diverse and often complex medical and surgical conditions. Researchers often lack guidance on an approach to select the best outcomes when evaluating this critically ill population. Studies would be enhanced by incorporating multi-stakeholder preferences to better evaluate clinical care. This manuscript outlines the methodology currently being used to develop a PICU Core Outcome Set (COS). This PICU COS utilizes mixed methods, an inclusive stakeholder approach, and a modified Delphi consensus process that will serve as a resource for PICU research programs.MethodsA Scoping Review of the PICU literature evaluating outcomes after pediatric critical illness, a qualitative study interviewing PICU survivors and their parents, and other relevant literature will serve to inform a modified, international Delphi consensus process. The Delphi process will derive a set of minimum domains for evaluation of outcomes of critically ill children and their families. Delphi respondents include researchers, multidisciplinary clinicians, families and former patients, research funding agencies, payors, and advocates. Consensus meetings will refine and finalize the domains of the COS, outline a battery instruments for use in future studies, and prepare for extensive dissemination for broad implementation.DiscussionThe PICU COS will be a guideline resource for investigators to assure that outcomes most important to all stakeholders are considered in PICU clinical research in addition to those deemed most important to individual scientists.Trial registrationCOMET database (http://www.comet-initiative.org/, Record ID 1131, 01/01/18).

PurposeThe following is a summary of discussion at a United States FDA (Food and Drug Administration) public workshop reviewing potential trial designs and end points to develop therapies to treat localized prostate cancer.Materials and methodsThe workshop focused on the challenge that drug and device development to treat localized prostate cancer has been limited by the large trial sizes and lengthy timelines required to demonstrate an improvement in overall or metastasis-free survival and by the lack of agreed on alternative end points. Additionally, evolving treatment paradigms in the management of localized prostate cancer include the widespread use of active surveillance of patients with low and some intermediate risk prostate cancer, and the availability of advances in imaging and genomics.ResultsThe workshop addressed issues related to trial design in this setting. Attendees discussed several potential novel end points such as a delay of morbidity due to radiation or prostatectomy and pathological end points such as Gleason Grade Group upgrade.ConclusionsThe workshop provided an open forum for multiple stakeholder engagement to advance the development of effective treatment options for men with localized prostate cancer.

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.

Background: Malnutrition (i.e., protein-energy malnutrition) in older adults has severe negative clinical consequences, emphasizing the need for effective treatments. Many, often small, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effectiveness of nutritional interventions for the treatment of malnutrition showed mixed results and a need for meta-analyses and data pooling has been expressed. However, evidence synthesis is hampered by the wide variety of outcomes and their method of assessment in previous RCTs. This paper describes the protocol for developing a Core Outcome Set (COS) for nutritional intervention studies in older adults with malnutrition and those at risk. Methods: The project consists of five phases. The first phase consists of a scoping review to identify frequently used outcomes in published RCTs and select additional patient-reported outcomes. The second phase includes a modified Delphi Survey involving experienced researchers and health care professionals working in the field of malnutrition in older adults, followed by the third phase consisting of a consensus meeting to discuss and agree what critical outcomes need to be included in the COS. The fourth phase will determine how each COS outcome should be measured based on a systematic literature review and a second consensus meeting. This will be followed by a dissemination and implementation phase. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) representatives will contribute to study design, oversight, consensus, and dissemination. Conclusions: The result of this project is a COS that should be included in any RCT evaluating the effect of nutritional interventions in older adults with malnutrition and those at risk. This COS will facilitate comparison of RCT results, will increase efficient use of research resources and will reduce bias due to measurement of the outcome and publication bias. Ultimately, the COS will support clinical decision making by identifying the most effective approaches for treating and preventing malnutrition in older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When a clinical trial has a composite endpoint and a comparison of treatment strategies with multiple intervention components, interim data reviews by a data safety and monitoring board (DSMB) can be challenging as the data evolve on multiple fronts. We illustrate with a study in the treatment of Kaposi sarcoma (KS), an HIV-associated cancer with a multi-faceted disease presentation. The study, ACTG-A5264/AMC-067, was a 1:1 randomized trial to compare two strategies: immediate initiation of etoposide with antiretroviral therapy (ART), or ART with delayed etoposide upon disease progression. The outcome was a composite endpoint that included the following events, ordered from worst to best in the following three categories: (1) KS progression at 48 weeks, death, initiation of alternate KS treatment, loss to study follow-up; (2) stable KS; and (3) partial or complete KS response at 48 weeks. We present the interim results on the composite endpoint and the individual components, where components favored different study arms at an interim review. To facilitate interim data monitoring for complex trials, we recommend clear communications between the study team and the DSMB prior to the initiation of the trial on the need for a composite endpoint, the intentions behind the defined strategies, and relative importance of individual components of the composite endpoint. We also recommend flexibility in the timing of data reviews by the DSMB to interpret emerging data in multiple dimensions. Clinicaltrials.govNCT01352117.

Christian Lienhardt and colleagues discuss the importance of communication and coordination between regulators, researchers, and policy makers to ensure tuberculosis trials provide high-quality evidence for policy decisions.

Exome-sequencing studies have generally been underpowered to identify deleterious alleles with a large effect on complex traits as such alleles are mostly rare. Because the population of northern and eastern Finland has expanded considerably and in isolation following a series of bottlenecks, individuals of these populations have numerous deleterious alleles at a relatively high frequency. Here, using exome sequencing of nearly 20,000 individuals from these regions, we investigate the role of rare coding variants in clinically relevant quantitative cardiometabolic traits. Exome-wide association studies for 64 quantitative traits identified 26 newly associated deleterious alleles. Of these 26 alleles, 19 are either unique to or more than 20 times more frequent in Finnish individuals than in other Europeans and show geographical clustering comparable to Mendelian disease mutations that are characteristic of the Finnish population. We estimate that sequencing studies of populations without this unique history would require hundreds of thousands to millions of participants to achieve comparable association power.

Advanced heart failure (HF) is a progressive disease characterized by recurrent hospitalizations and high risk of mortality. Indeed, outcomes in late stages of HF approximate those seen in patients with various aggressive malignancies. Clinical trials assessing beneficial outcomes of new treatments in patients with cancer have used innovative approaches to measure impact on total disease burden or surrogates to assess treatment efficacy. Although most cardiovascular outcomes trials continue to use time-to-first event analyses to assess the primary efficacy end point, such analyses do not adequately reflect the impact of new treatments on the totality of the chronic disease burden. Consequently, patient enrichment and other strategies for ongoing clinical trial design, as well as new statistical methodologies, are important considerations, particularly when studying a population with advanced chronic HF. The DREAM-HF trial (Double-Blind Randomized Assessment of Clinical Events With Allogeneic Mesenchymal Precursor Cells in Advanced Heart Failure) is an ongoing, randomized, sham-controlled phase 3 study of the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal precursor cells as immunotherapy in patients with advanced chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction. Mesenchymal precursor cells have a unique multimodal mechanism of action that is believed to result in polarization of proinflammatory type 1 macrophages in the heart to an anti-inflammatory type 2 macrophage state, inhibition of maladaptive adverse left ventricular remodeling, reversal of cardiac and peripheral endothelial dysfunction, and recovery of deranged vasculature. The objective of DREAM-HF is to confirm earlier phase 2 results and evaluate whether mesenchymal precursor cells will reduce the rate of nonfatal recurrent HF-related major adverse cardiac events while delaying or preventing progression of HF to terminal cardiac events. DREAM-HF is an example of an ongoing contemporary events-driven cardiovascular cell-based immunotherapy study that has utilized the concepts of baseline disease enrichment, prognostic enrichment, and predictive enrichment to improve its efficiency by using accumulating data from within as well as external to the trial. Adaptive enrichment designs and strategies are important components of a rational approach to achieve clinical research objectives in shorter clinical trial timelines and with increased cost-effectiveness without compromising ethical standards or the overall statistical integrity of the study. The DREAM-HF trial also presents an alternative approach to traditional composite time-to-first event primary efficacy end points. Statistical methodologies such as the joint frailty model provide opportunities to expand the scope of events-driven HF with reduced ejection fraction clinical trials to utilize time to recurrent nonfatal HF-related major adverse cardiac events as the primary efficacy end point without compromising the integrity of the statistical analyses for terminal cardiac events. In advanced chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction studies, the joint frailty model is utilized to reflect characteristics of the high-risk patient population with important unmet therapeutic needs. In some cases, use of the joint frailty model may substantially reduce sample size requirements. In addition, using an end point that is acceptable to the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, such as recurrent nonfatal HF-related major adverse cardiac events, enables generation of clinically relevant pharmacoeconomic data while providing comprehensive views of the patient's overall cardiovascular disease burden. The major goal of this review is to provide lessons learned from the ongoing DREAM-HF trial that relate to biologic plausibility and flexible clinical trial design and are potentially applicable to other development programs of innovative therapies for patients with advanced cardiovascular disease. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02032004.

Rationale & objectiveThe process of angiogenesis after kidney injury may determine recovery and long-term outcomes. We evaluated the association of angiogenesis markers with acute kidney injury (AKI) and mortality after cardiac surgery.Study designProspective cohort.Setting & participants1,444 adults undergoing cardiac surgery in the TRIBE-AKI (Translational Research Investigating Biomarker Endpoints for Acute Kidney Injury) cohort.ExposuresPlasma concentrations of 2 proangiogenic markers (vascular endothelial growth factor A [VEGF] and placental growth factor [PGF]) and 1 antiangiogenic marker (soluble VEGF receptor 1 [VEGFR1]), measured pre- and postoperatively within 6 hours after surgery.OutcomesAKI, long AKI duration (≥7 days), and 1-year all-cause mortality.Analytical approachMultivariable logistic regression.ResultsFollowing cardiac surgery, plasma VEGF concentrations decreased 2-fold, and PGF and VEGFR1 concentrations increased 1.5- and 8-fold, respectively. There were no meaningful associations of preoperative concentrations of angiogenic markers with outcomes of AKI and mortality. Higher postoperative VEGF and PGF concentrations were independently associated with lower odds of AKI (adjusted ORs of 0.89 [95% CI, 0.82-0.98] and 0.69 [95% CI, 0.55-0.87], respectively), long AKI duration (0.65 [95% CI, 0.49-0.87] and 0.48 [95% CI, 0.28-0.82], respectively), and mortality (0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.89] and 0.46 [95% CI, 0.31-0.68], respectively). In contrast, higher postoperative VEGFR1 concentrations were independently associated with higher odds of AKI (1.56; 95% CI, 1.31-1.87), long AKI duration (1.75; 95% CI, 1.09-2.82), and mortality (2.28; 95% CI, 1.61-3.22).LimitationsAngiogenesis markers were not measured after hospital discharge, so we were unable to determine long-term trajectories of angiogenesis marker levels during recovery and follow-up.ConclusionsHigher levels of postoperative proangiogenic markers, VEGF and PGF, were associated with lower AKI and mortality risk, whereas higher postoperative antiangiogenic VEGFR1 levels were associated with higher risk for AKI and mortality.

Background Survival and health status (eg, symptoms and quality of life) are key outcomes in clinical trials of heart failure treatment. However, health status can only be recorded on survivors, potentially biasing treatment effect estimates when there is differential survival across treatment groups. Joint modeling of survival and health status can address this bias. Methods and Results We analyzed patient-level data from the PARTNER 1B trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus standard care. Health status was quantified with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at randomization, 1, 6, and 12 months. We compared hazard ratios for survival and mean differences in KCCQ scores at 12 months using several models: the original growth curve model for KCCQ scores (ignoring death), separate Bayesian models for survival and KCCQ scores, and a Bayesian joint longitudinal-survival model fit to either 12 or 30 months of survival follow-up. The benefit of transcatheter aortic valve replacement on 12-month KCCQ scores was greatest in the joint-model fit to all survival data (mean difference, 33.7 points; 95% credible intervals [CrI], 24.2-42.4), followed by the joint-model fit to 12 months of survival follow-up (32.3 points; 95% CrI, 22.5-41.5), a Bayesian model without integrating death (30.4 points; 95% CrI, 21.4-39.3), and the original growth curve model (26.0 points; 95% CI, 18.7-33.3). At 12 months, the survival benefit of transcatheter aortic valve replacement was also greater in the joint model (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CrI, 0.32-0.73) than in the nonjoint Bayesian model (0.54; 95% CrI, 0.37-0.75) or the original Kaplan-Meier estimate (0.55; 95% CI, 0.40-0.74). Conclusions In patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and prohibitive surgical risk, the estimated benefits of transcatheter aortic valve replacement on survival and health status compared with standard care were greater in joint Bayesian models than other approaches.

Frontotemporal dementia refers to a group of progressive neurodegenerative syndromes usually caused by the accumulation of pathological tau or TDP-43 proteins. The effects of these proteins in the brain are complex, and each can present with several different clinical syndromes. Clinical efficacy trials of drugs targeting these proteins must use endpoints that are meaningful to all participants despite the variability in symptoms across patients. There are many candidate clinical measures, including neuropsychological scores and functional measures. Brain imaging is another potentially attractive outcome that can be precisely quantified and provides evidence of disease modification. Most imaging studies in frontotemporal dementia have been cross-sectional, and few have compared longitudinal changes in cortical volume with changes in other measures such as perfusion and white matter integrity. The current study characterized longitudinal changes in 161 patients with three frontotemporal dementia syndromes: behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 77) and the semantic (n = 45) and non-fluent (n = 39) variants of primary progressive aphasia. Visits included comprehensive neuropsychological and functional assessment, structural MRI (3 T), diffusion tensor imaging, and arterial spin labelled perfusion imaging. The goal was to identify measures that are appropriate as clinical trial outcomes for each group, as well as those that might be appropriate for trials that would include more than one of these groups. Linear mixed effects models were used to estimate changes in each measure, and to examine the correlation between imaging and clinical changes. Sample sizes were estimated based on the observed effects for theoretical clinical trials using bootstrapping techniques to provide 95% confidence intervals for these estimates. Declines in functional and neuropsychological measures, as well as frontal and temporal cortical volumes and white matter microstructure were detected in all groups. Imaging changes were statistically significantly correlated with, and explained a substantial portion of variance in, the change in most clinical measures. Perfusion and diffusion tensor imaging accounted for variation in clinical decline beyond volume alone. Sample size estimates for atrophy and diffusion imaging were comparable to clinical measures. Corpus callosal fractional anisotropy led to the lowest sample size estimates for all three syndromes. These findings provide further guidance on selection of trial endpoints for studies in frontotemporal dementia and support the use of neuroimaging, particularly structural and diffusion weighted imaging, as biomarkers. Diffusion and perfusion imaging appear to offer additional utility for explaining clinical change beyond the variance explained by volume alone, arguing for considering multimodal imaging in treatment trials.

BackgroundSurrogates are frequently used in cancer medicine as the end-point of clinical trials and as the basis of United States Food and Drug Administration approvals, but they do not always represent outcomes that are important for patients. We aim to build upon previous umbrella reviews of surrogate validation studies by identifying and examining all meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials that evaluate the strength of correlation between overall survival (OS) and surrogate markers.MethodsGoogle Scholar and PubMed were searched by two independent reviewers for all eligible meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials examining the correlation between a surrogate end-point and OS in medical oncology. Included studies were trial-level (level-1) meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials in cancer. Data abstracted include date of publication, tumour type, setting, trial set, number of studies included in the analysis, dates of included publications, correlation coefficients and method to determine the correlation coefficient.ResultsSeventy-eight articles met the inclusion criteria and reported correlations in 89 settings. Eleven (12%) of these validation studies found only high correlation(s), while nine (10%) settings showed a moderate-only correlation. Thirty-four (38%) reported only low correlation(s). Thirty-five (39%) reported correlations of different strengths, depending on surrogate marker used and test of correlation.ConclusionsIn this large, umbrella analysis of surrogate validation studies, we found most surrogates in oncology had low or modest correlation with OS, which suggests that caution should be used when making conclusions based on surrogate markers.

To screen the tens of thousands of chemicals for which no toxicity data currently exists, it is necessary to move from in vivo rodent models to alternative models, such as zebrafish. Here, we used dechorionated Tropical 5D wild-type zebrafish embryos to screen a 91-compound library provided by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) for developmental toxicity. This library contained 86 unique chemicals that included negative controls, flame retardants, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), drugs, industrial chemicals, and pesticides. Fish were exposed to 5 concentrations of each chemical or an equal amount of vehicle (0.5% DMSO) in embryo medium from 6 h post-fertilization (hpf) to 5 days post-fertilization (dpf). Fish were examined daily for mortality and teratogenic effects and photomotor behavior was assessed at 4 and 5 dpf. Of the 5 negative control compounds in the library, none caused mortality/teratogenesis, but two altered behavior. Chemicals provided in duplicate produced similar outcomes. Overall, 13 compounds caused mortality/teratology but not behavioral abnormalities, 24 only affected behavior, and 18 altered both endpoints, with behavior affected at concentrations that did not cause mortality/teratology (55/86 hits). Of the compounds that affected behavior, 52% caused behavioral abnormalities at either 4 or 5 dpf. Compounds within the same functional group caused different behavioral abnormalities, while similar behavioral patterns were caused by compounds from different groups. Our data suggest that behavior is a sensitive endpoint for developmental toxicity screening that integrates multiple modes of toxic action and is influenced by the age of the larval fish at the time of testing.

There are an estimated 14,000 randomized trials published in chronic kidney disease. The most frequently reported outcomes are biochemical endpoints, rather than clinical and patient-reported outcomes including cardiovascular disease, mortality, and quality of life. While many trials have focused on optimizing kidney health, the heterogeneity and uncertain relevance of outcomes reported across trials may limit their policy and practice impact. The international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) Initiative was formed to identify core outcomes that are critically important to patients and health professionals, to be reported consistently across trials. We convened a SONG Implementation Workshop to discuss the implementation of core outcomes. Eighty-two patients/caregivers and health professionals participated in plenary and breakout discussions. In this report, we summarize the findings of the workshop in two main themes: socializing the concept of core outcomes, and demonstrating feasibility and usability. We outline implementation strategies and pathways to be established through partnership with stakeholders, which may bolster acceptance and reporting of core outcomes in trials, and encourage their use by end-users such as guideline producers and policymakers to help improve patient-important outcomes.

BackgroundStandard therapy for glioblastoma includes surgery, radiotherapy, and temozolomide. This Phase 3 trial evaluates the addition of an autologous tumor lysate-pulsed dendritic cell vaccine (DCVax®-L) to standard therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma.MethodsAfter surgery and chemoradiotherapy, patients were randomized (2:1) to receive temozolomide plus DCVax-L (n = 232) or temozolomide and placebo (n = 99). Following recurrence, all patients were allowed to receive DCVax-L, without unblinding. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS).ResultsFor the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 331), median OS (mOS) was 23.1 months from surgery. Because of the cross-over trial design, nearly 90% of the ITT population received DCVax-L. For patients with methylated MGMT (n = 131), mOS was 34.7 months from surgery, with a 3-year survival of 46.4%. As of this analysis, 223 patients are ≥ 30 months past their surgery date; 67 of these (30.0%) have lived ≥ 30 months and have a Kaplan-Meier (KM)-derived mOS of 46.5 months. 182 patients are ≥ 36 months past surgery; 44 of these (24.2%) have lived ≥ 36 months and have a KM-derived mOS of 88.2 months. A population of extended survivors (n = 100) with mOS of 40.5 months, not explained by known prognostic factors, will be analyzed further. Only 2.1% of ITT patients (n = 7) had a grade 3 or 4 adverse event that was deemed at least possibly related to the vaccine. Overall adverse events with DCVax were comparable to standard therapy alone.ConclusionsAddition of DCVax-L to standard therapy is feasible and safe in glioblastoma patients, and may extend survival. Trial registration Funded by Northwest Biotherapeutics; Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00045968; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00045968?term=NCT00045968&rank=1 ; initially registered 19 September 2002.

Simple Summary: How tumor response and progression-free survival (PFS) reflect the overall survival (OS) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) clinical trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have not been clarified. This study validated the uses of objective response rate and PFS for NSCLC trials with ICI through an individual-patient level and a trial level. Background: To assess the usefulness of tumor response and progression-free survival (PFS) as surrogates for overall survival (OS) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), which have not been confirmed. Methods: Patient- and trial-level analyses were performed. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors was preferred for image assessment. For trial-level analysis, surrogacy was assessed using the weighted rank correlation coefficient (r) following "reciprocal duplication." This method duplicates all plots as if the experimental and the reference arms were switched. Monte Carlo simulations were performed for evaluating this method. Results: A total of 3312 cases were included in the patient-level analysis. Patients without response (first line (1L): hazard ratio (HR) 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.71–2.23; second or later line (2L-): HR 4.22, 95% CI 3.22–5.53), without disease control (1L: HR 4.34, 95% CI 3.82–4.94; 2L-: HR 3.36, 95% CI 2.96–3.81), or with progression during the first year (1L: HR 3.42, 95% CI 2.60–4.50; 2L-: HR 3.33, 95% CI 2.64–4.20), had a higher risk of death. Systematic searches identified 38 RCTs including 17,515 patients for the study-level analysis. Odds ratio in the objective response rate (N = 38 × 2, r = −0.87) and HR in PFS (N = 38 × 2, r = 0.85) showed an excellent association with HR in overall survival, while this effect was not observed in the disease control rate (N = 26 × 2, r = −0.03). Conclusions: Objective response rate and PFS are reasonable surrogates for OS in NSCLC trials with ICI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of supragingival plaque control on the recurrence of periodontitis (RP) and the achievement of a stable periodontal clinical endpoint after 10 years of periodontal maintenance therapy (PMT).Methods: The present retrospective cohort study included 225 individuals in continuous PMT. The plaque index (PI) determining the oral hygiene (OH) status, periodontal clinical parameters, and other variables of interest were collected at three time points: T1 (prior to active periodontal therapy [APT]), T2 (after APT), and T3 (10 years after T2). According to PI records at T3, participants were categorized into: (1) good OH (GOH; PI ≤ 30%, n = 63); (2) fair OH (FOH; PI > 30% and ≤40%, n = 73); and (3) poor OH (POH; PI > 40%, n = 88). Data were analyzed using the chi-square and Student t tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and mediation and regression analyses.Results: Significant differences in all periodontal clinical parameters between the GOH, FOH, and POH groups were observed at T3. The POH group exhibited higher mean bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL), as well as higher tooth loss (POH > FOH > GOH; P < .001). There was an increased risk for RP in the FOH (odds ratio [OR] 2.02; CI, 1.10-4.38) and POH (OR 4.33; CI, 2.17-8.65) groups. Moreover, the FOH and POH groups had an approximately 2.5 and 6.0 times greater chance of not achieving a stable periodontal clinical endpoint, respectively.Conclusions: After 10 years of monitoring in PMT, individuals with higher PI scores (>30%) presented an unhealthier periodontal status, a higher risk for RP, and a lower chance of achieving ≤4 sites with PD ≥ 5 mm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With few notable exceptions, drug development for heart failure (HF) has become progressively more challenging, and there remain no definitively proven therapies for patients with acute HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction. Inspection of temporal trends suggests an increasing rate of disagreement between early-phase and phase III trial end points. Preliminary results from phase II HF trials are frequently promising, but increasingly followed by disappointing phase III results. Given this potential disconnect, it is reasonable to carefully re-evaluate the purpose, design, and execution of phase II HF trials, with particular attention directed toward the surrogate end points commonly used by these studies. In this review, we offer a critical reappraisal of the role of phase II HF trials and surrogate end points, highlighting challenges in their use and interpretation, lessons learned from past experiences, and specific strengths and weaknesses of various surrogate outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of approaches that should be considered for the goal of optimizing the efficiency of HF drug development. This review is based on discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, industry and government sponsors, and regulators that took place at the Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, DC, on December 2, 2016.

An online near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy platform system for real-time powder blending monitoring and blend endpoint determination was tested for a phenytoin sodium formulation. The study utilized robust experimental design and multiple sensors to investigate multivariate data acquisition, model development, and model scale-up from lab to manufacturing. The impact of the selection of various blend endpoint algorithms on predicted blend endpoint (i.e., mixing time) was explored. Spectral data collected at two process scales using two NIR spectrometers was incorporated in a single (global) calibration model. Unique endpoints were obtained with different algorithms based on standard deviation, average, and distributions of concentration prediction for major components of the formulation. Control over phenytoin sodium's distribution was considered critical due to its narrow therapeutic index nature. It was found that algorithms sensitive to deviation from target concentration offered the simplest interpretation and consistent trends. In contrast, algorithms sensitive to global homogeneity of active and excipients yielded the longest mixing time to achieve blending endpoint. However, they were potentially more sensitive to subtle uniformity variations. Qualitative algorithms using principal component analysis (PCA) of spectral data yielded the prediction of shortest mixing time for blending endpoint. The hybrid approach of combining NIR data from different scales presents several advantages. It enables simplifying the chemometrics model building process and reduces the cost of model building compared to the approach of using data solely from commercial scale. Success of such a hybrid approach depends on the spectroscopic variability captured at different scales and their relative contributions in the final NIR model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the search for effective treatments for COVID-19, the initial emphasis has been on re-purposed treatments. To maximize the chances of finding successful treatments, novel treatments that have been developed for this disease in particular, are needed. In this article, we describe and evaluate the statistical design of the AGILE platform, an adaptive randomized seamless Phase I/II trial platform that seeks to quickly establish a safe range of doses and investigates treatments for potential efficacy. The bespoke Bayesian design (i) utilizes randomization during dose-finding, (ii) shares control arm information across the platform, and (iii) uses a time-to-event endpoint with a formal testing structure and error control for evaluation of potential efficacy. Both single-agent and combination treatments are considered. We find that the design can identify potential treatments that are safe and efficacious reliably with small to moderate sample sizes., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Clinical trials in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) have led to the approval of several effective treatments that improve symptoms, exercise capacity and clinical outcomes. In phase 3 clinical trials, primary end-points must reflect how a patient "feels, functions or survives". In a rare disease like PAH, with an ever-growing number of treatment options and numerous candidate therapies being studied, future clinical trials are now faced with challenges related to sample size requirements, efficiency and demonstration of incremental benefit on traditional end-points in patients receiving background therapy with multiple drugs. Novel clinical trial end-points, innovative trial designs and statistical approaches and new technologies may be potential solutions to tackle the challenges facing future PAH trials, but these must be acceptable to patients and regulatory bodies while preserving methodological rigour. In this World Symposium on Pulmonary Hypertension task force article, we address emerging trial end-points and designs, biomarkers and surrogate end-point validation, the concept of disease modification, challenges and opportunities to address diversity and representativeness, and the use of new technologies such as artificial intelligence in PAH clinical trials., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J. Weatherald declares grants or contracts to their institution from Janssen, Bayer, Merck, AstraZeneca and Sanofi; consulting fees, payment or honoraria to themselves, travel support and paid membership of an Advisory Board from Janssen and Merck; payment for expert testimony from Sprigings Intellectual Property Law; unpaid membership of a Data Safety Monitoring Board drom Université Laval; and unpaid membership of the medical advisory committee of the Pulmonary Hypertension Association of Canada and the scientific medical advisory committee of the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute. T.R. Fleming declares no competing interests. M.R. Wilkins declares grants or contracts from the British Heart Foundation (RE/18/4/34215 centre support); consulting fees from MorphogenIX (advisory committee), VIVUS (study protocol advisory meeting), Janssen and Kinaset (study advisory boards) and Chiesi, Aerami and Benevolent AI (consultancy); payment for expert testimony from Pennington Marches and Sprigings; support for travel to scientific meetings from Apollo Therapeutics; patents planned, issued or pending (Imperial Innovations: patent submitted for prognostic protein model presented in this manuscript; patent for ZIP12 as a drug target; patent for TSPO as a drug target); membership of an adjudication committee for three clinical trials for Acceleron; membership of study safety committees for GSK and Novartis; a role as a trustee of the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute; and stock options in W12 Therapeutics. T.M. Cascino delares grants from NHLBI (K12 HL138039) and Johnson & Johnson Innovative Medicine; consulting fees from and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Merck; and payment or honoraria from Total CME. M.A. Psotka declares no competing interests. R. Zamanian declares grants to their institution from Gossamer Bio, Merck, United Therapeutics and Janssen; consulting fees from Gossamer Bio, Morphogen IX, Merck and Aerovate; patents planned, issued or pending for FK506 for treatment of pulmonary hypertension; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Aerovate; and stock options in REVIVA. W. Seeger declares consulting fees from United Therapeutics, Abivax, Tiakis Biotech AG, Pfizer, Liquidia, Medspray BV and Pieris Pharmaceuticals. N. Galiè declares grants or contracts from Janssen, Actelion and Merck; consulting fees from Janssen, Actelion, Chiesi and Ferrer; payment or honoraria from Janssen, Actelion and Chiesi; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Dompe; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Janssen, Actelion and Ferrer. M. Gomberg-Maitland declares consulting fees from Acceleron/Merck (steering committee), Aerami (until 2023), Janssen (consultancy), JucaBio (steering committee), Keros (steering committee) and United Therapeutics (Jenesis Young Investigator Grant Chairman); support for attending the ERS Congress from Merck; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring board for Acceleron/Merck (until 2023) and Janssen (until 2023); and unpaid roles as Treasurer of ISHLT and a member of the United Therapeutics Scientific Advisory Board., (Copyright ©The authors 2024.)

Background: Neonatal septic shock represents a critical and life-threatening condition that necessitates immediate and personalized interventions. Prior research endeavors have been undertaken to inform the optimization of neonatal septic shock management, yet substantial heterogeneity prevails in the selection, measurement, and reporting of outcomes across relevant studies. The heterogeneity in outcome selections and measures impedes the comparability of results and the synthesis of evidence, thus contributing to suboptimal utilization of research findings. This protocol presents the methodology for identifying and developing a Core Outcome Set for Neonatal Septic Shock Management (COS-NSS), intended for use in both research and routine clinical practice. A rigorous four-stage approach will be employed to develop the COS-NSS. In Stage 1, a scoping review will be conducted to compile a list of currently reported outcomes for neonatal septic shock management. Stage 2 will involve an expert stakeholder meeting using a semi-structured discussion approach to elucidate all identified outcomes and outcome domains, as well as to gather any additional outcomes. Moving to Stage 3, a two-round e-Delphi survey involving a wide variety of stakeholders will be undertaken to elicit diverse perspectives on the level of importance assigned to each proposed outcome. Finally, in Stage 4, the results of the Delphi study will be discussed in a consensus meeting to determine and agree on the final list of outcomes that will constitute the COS-NSS., Discussion: The stagewise approach integrates research evidence with multi-stakeholder perspectives to establish standardized outcomes that would improve consistency across neonatal septic shock trials. The development and uptake of the COS-NSS will facilitate effective comparison of studies, allowing for study synthesis and generation of high-quality evidence, thus ultimately fostering enhanced medical care for neonates suffering from septic shock., Trial Registration: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative database registration: 2766 . Registered on July 19th, 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Why does a beneficial treatment effect on a longitudinal biomarker not translate into overall treatment benefit on survival, when the biomarker is in fact a prognostic factor of survival? In a recent exploratory data analysis in oncology, we were faced with this seemingly paradoxical result. To address this problem, we applied a theoretically principled methodology called dynamic path analysis, which allows us to perform mediation analysis with a longitudinal mediator and survival outcome. The aim of the analysis is to decompose the total treatment effect into a direct treatment effect and an indirect treatment effect mediated through a carefully constructed mediation path. The dynamic nature of the underlying methodology enables us to describe how these effects evolve over time, which can add to the mechanistic understanding of the underlying processes. In this paper, we present a detailed description of the dynamic path analysis framework and illustrate its application to survival mediation analysis using simulated and real data. The use case analysis provides clarity on the specific exploratory question of interest while the methodology generalizes to a wide range of applications in drug development where time-to-event is the primary clinical outcome of interest., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The analysis of multiple time-to-event outcomes in a randomized controlled clinical trial can be accomplished with existing methods. However, depending on the characteristics of the disease under investigation and the circumstances in which the study is planned, it may be of interest to conduct interim analyses and adapt the study design if necessary. Due to the expected dependency of the endpoints, the full available information on the involved endpoints may not be used for this purpose. We suggest a solution to this problem by embedding the endpoints in a multistate model. If this model is Markovian, it is possible to take the disease history of the patients into account and allow for data-dependent design adaptations. To this end, we introduce a flexible test procedure for a variety of applications, but are particularly concerned with the simultaneous consideration of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). This setting is of key interest in oncological trials. We conduct simulation studies to determine the properties for small sample sizes and demonstrate an application based on data from the NB2004-HR study., (© 2024 The Author(s). Biometrical Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH.)

Background: Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in older adults resident in long-term care settings (LTC) report heterogenous outcomes, hampering the identification of effective management strategies for this important condition. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in this population., Methods: We used a rigorous COS development process including qualitative interviews with family members and staff with experience of delirium in LTC; a modified two-round Delphi survey; and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique. The study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (https://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796)., Results: Item generation identified 22 delirium-specific outcomes and 32 other outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews. When combined with outcomes identified in our earlier systematic review, and following an item reduction step, this gave 43 outcomes that advanced to the formal consensus processes. These involved 169 participants from 12 countries, and included healthcare professionals (121, 72%), researchers (24, 14%), and family members/people with experience of delirium (24, 14%). Six outcomes were identified as essential to include in all trials of interventions for delirium in LTC, and were therefore included in the COS. These are: 'delirium occurrence'; 'delirium related distress'; 'delirium severity'; 'cognition including memory', 'admission to hospital' and 'mortality'., Conclusions: This COS, endorsed by the American Delirium Society and the European and Australasian Delirium Associations, is recommended for use in future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions for older adults residing in LTC., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Objective: Disease severity scores, or endpoints, are routinely measured during Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) to closely monitor the effect of treatment. In real-world clinical practice, although a larger set of patients is observed, the specific RCT endpoints are often not captured, which makes it hard to utilize real-world data (RWD) to evaluate drug efficacy in larger populations., Methods: To overcome this challenge, we developed an ensemble technique which learns proxy models of disease endpoints in RWD. Using a multi-stage learning framework applied to RCT data, we first identify features considered significant drivers of disease available within RWD. To create endpoint proxy models, we use Explainable Boosting Machines (EBMs) which allow for both end-user interpretability and modeling of non-linear relationships., Results: We demonstrate our approach on two diseases, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and atopic dermatitis (AD). As we show, our combined feature selection and prediction method achieves good results for both disease areas, improving upon prior methods proposed for predictive disease severity scoring., Conclusion: Having disease severity over time for a patient is important to further disease understanding and management. Our results open the door to more use cases in the space of RA and AD such as treatment effect estimates or prognostic scoring on RWD. Our framework may be extended beyond RA and AD to other diseases where the severity score is not well measured in electronic health records., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors are Sanofi employees and may hold shares and/or stock options in the company., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. RIFM staff are employees of the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM). The Expert Panel receives a small honorarium for time spent reviewing the subject work.