Objective

Clinical studies of patients with bone sarcomas have been challenged by insufficient numbers at individual centres to draw valid conclusions. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive multi-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether a five-day regimen of post-operative antibiotics, in comparison to a 24-hour regimen, decreases surgical site infections in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for lower extremity primary bone tumours.

Methods

We performed a pilot international multi-centre RCT. We used central randomisation to conceal treatment allocation and sham antibiotics to blind participants, surgeons, and data collectors. We determined feasibility by measuring patient enrolment, completeness of follow-up, and protocol deviations for the antibiotic regimens.

Results

We screened 96 patients and enrolled 60 participants (44 men and 16 women) across 21 sites from four countries over 24 months (mean 2.13 participants per site per year, standard deviation 2.14). One participant was lost to follow-up and one withdrew consent. Complete data were obtained for 98% of eligible patients at two weeks, 83% at six months, and 73% at one year (the remainder with partial data or pending queries). In total, 18 participants missed at least one dose of antibiotics or placebo post-operatively, but 93% of all post-operative doses were administered per protocol.

Conclusions

It is feasible to conduct a definitive multi-centre RCT of post-operative antibiotic regimens in patients with bone sarcomas, but further expansion of our collaborative network will be critical. We have demonstrated an ability to coordinate in multiple countries, enrol participants, maintain protocol adherence, and minimise losses to follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res;4:154-162.

Although sunburn and intermittent sun exposures are associated with increased melanoma risk, most studies have found null or inverse associations between occupational (more continuous pattern) sun exposure and melanoma risk. The association of melanoma with occupational sun exposure may differ according to anatomical site, with some studies finding a positive association with melanoma on the head and neck. We examined the association between occupational sun exposure (self-reported weekday sun exposure) and melanoma risk according to anatomical site, using data from two multicentre population-based case-control studies: the Australian Melanoma Family Study (588 cases, 472 controls) and the Genes, Environment and Melanoma study (GEM; 1079 cases, 2,181 controls). Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals, adjusting for potential confounders. Occupational sun exposure was not positively associated with melanoma risk overall or at different body sites in both studies. The GEM study found inverse associations between occupational sun exposure and melanoma on the head and neck [OR for highest vs. lowest quartile: 0.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.36-0.86, ptrend 0.02], and between the proportion of total sun exposure occurring on weekdays and melanoma on the upper limbs (OR for highest vs. lowest quartile: 0.66, 95% CI 0.42-1.02, ptrend 0.03). Our results suggest that occupational sun exposure does not increase risk of melanoma, even of melanomas situated on the head and neck. This finding seemed not to be due to negative confounding of occupational sun exposure by weekend sun.

Purpose

Although epilepsy and migraine are known to co-occur within individuals, the contribution of a shared genetic susceptibility to this comorbidity remains unclear. We investigated the hypothesis of shared genetic effects on migraine and epilepsy in the Epilepsy Phenome/Genome Project (EPGP) cohort.

Methods

We studied prevalence of a history of migraine in 730 EPGP participants aged ≥ 12 years with nonacquired focal epilepsy (NAFE) or generalized epilepsy (GE) from 501 families containing two or more individuals with epilepsy of unknown cause. Information on migraine without aura (MO) and migraine with aura (MA) was collected using an instrument validated for individuals ≥ 12 years. Because many individuals have both MO and MA, we considered two nonoverlapping groups of individuals with migraine: those who met criteria for MA in any of their headaches (MA), and those who did not ("MO-only"). EPGP participants were interviewed about the history of seizure disorders in additional nonenrolled family members. We evaluated associations of migraine prevalence in enrolled subjects with a family history of seizure disorders in additional nonenrolled relatives, using generalized estimating equations to control for the nonindependence of observations within families.

Key findings

Prevalence of a history of MA (but not MO-only) was significantly increased in enrolled participants with two or more additional affected first-degree relatives.

Significance

These findings support the hypothesis of a shared genetic susceptibility to epilepsy and MA.

Little is known about the ethnic and racial differences in the prevalence of generalized and focal epilepsy among patients with non-acquired epilepsies. In this study, we examined epilepsy classification and race/ethnicity in 813 probands from sibling or parent-child pairs with epilepsy enrolled in the Epilepsy Genome/Phenome Project (EPGP). Subjects were classified as generalized epilepsy (GE), non-acquired focal epilepsy (NAFE), mixed epilepsy syndrome (both generalized and focal), and unclassifiable, based on consensus review of semiology and available clinical, electrophysiology, and neuroimaging data. In this cohort, 628 (77.2%) subjects identified exclusively as Caucasian/white and 65 (8.0%) subjects reported African ancestry, including subjects of mixed-race. Of the Caucasian/white subjects, 357 (56.8%) had GE, 207 (33.0%) had NAFE, 32 (5.1%) had a mixed syndrome, and 32 (5.1%) were unclassifiable. Among subjects of African ancestry, 28 (43.1%) had GE, 27 (41.5%) had NAFE, 2 (3.1%) had a mixed syndrome, and 8 (12.3%) were unclassifiable. There was a higher proportion of subjects with GE compared to other syndromes among Caucasians/whites compared to subjects with African ancestry (OR 1.74, 95% CI: 1.04-2.92, two-tailed Fisher's exact test, p=0.036). There was no difference in the rate of GE among subjects reporting Hispanic ethnicity (7.6% of total) when adjusted for race (Caucasian/white vs non-Caucasian/white; OR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.40-1.06, p>0.05). The proportion of participants with unclassifiable epilepsy was significantly greater in those of African-American descent. In a group of patients with epilepsy of unknown etiology and an affected first degree relative, GE is more common among Caucasian/white subjects than among those with African ancestry. These findings suggest there may be geographical differences in the distribution of epilepsy susceptibility genes and an effect of genetic background on epilepsy phenotype. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the low numbers of African-Americans in this cohort and more limited diagnostic data available for epilepsy classification in these subjects compared to Caucasians/whites.

There are few medical issues that have generated as much controversy as screening for breast cancer. In science, controversy often stimulates innovation; however, the intensely divisive debate over mammographic screening has had the opposite effect and has stifled progress. The same two questions-whether it is better to screen annually or bi-annually, and whether women are best served by beginning screening at 40 or some later age-have been debated for 20 years, based on data generated three to four decades ago. The controversy has continued largely because our current approach to screening assumes all women have the same risk for the same type of breast cancer. In fact, we now know that cancers vary tremendously in terms of timing of onset, rate of growth, and probability of metastasis. In an era of personalized medicine, we have the opportunity to investigate tailored screening based on a woman's specific risk for a specific tumor type, generating new data that can inform best practices rather than to continue the rancorous debate. It is time to move from debate to wisdom by asking new questions and generating new knowledge. The WISDOM Study (Women Informed to Screen Depending On Measures of risk) is a pragmatic, adaptive, randomized clinical trial comparing a comprehensive risk-based, or personalized approach to traditional annual breast cancer screening. The multicenter trial will enroll 100,000 women, powered for a primary endpoint of non-inferiority with respect to the number of late stage cancers detected. The trial will determine whether screening based on personalized risk is as safe, less morbid, preferred by women, will facilitate prevention for those most likely to benefit, and adapt as we learn who is at risk for what kind of cancer. Funded by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, WISDOM is the product of a multi-year stakeholder engagement process that has brought together consumers, advocates, primary care physicians, specialists, policy makers, technology companies and payers to help break the deadlock in this debate and advance towards a new, dynamic approach to breast cancer screening.

Background

A systematic assessment of potential disease-modifying compounds for Parkinson's disease concluded that pioglitazone could hold promise for the treatment of patients with this disease. We assessed the effect of pioglitazone on the progression of Parkinson's disease in a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, futility clinical trial.

Methods

Participants with the diagnosis of early Parkinson's disease on a stable regimen of 1 mg/day rasagiline or 10 mg/day selegiline were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 15 mg/day pioglitazone, 45 mg/day pioglitazone, or placebo. Investigators were masked to the treatment assignment. Only the statistical centre and the central pharmacy knew the treatment name associated with the randomisation number. The primary outcome was the change in the total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score between the baseline and 44 weeks, analysed by intention to treat. The primary null hypothesis for each dose group was that the mean change in UPDRS was 3 points less than the mean change in the placebo group. The alternative hypothesis (of futility) was that pioglitazone is not meaningfully different from placebo. We rejected the null if there was significant evidence of futility at the one-sided alpha level of 0·10. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01280123.

Findings

210 patients from 35 sites in the USA were enrolled between May 10, 2011, and July 31, 2013. The primary analysis included 72 patients in the 15 mg group, 67 in the 45 mg group, and 71 in the placebo group. The mean total UPDRS change at 44 weeks was 4·42 (95% CI 2·55-6·28) for 15 mg pioglitazone, 5·13 (95% CI 3·17-7·08) for 45 mg pioglitazone, and 6·25 (95% CI 4·35-8·15) for placebo (higher change scores are worse). The mean difference between the 15 mg and placebo groups was -1·83 (80% CI -3·56 to -0·10) and the null hypothesis could not be rejected (p=0·19). The mean difference between the 45 mg and placebo groups was -1·12 (80% CI -2·93 to 0·69) and the null hypothesis was rejected in favour of futility (p=0·09). Planned sensitivity analyses of the primary outcome, using last value carried forward (LVCF) to handle missing data and using the completers' only sample, suggested that the 15 mg dose is also futile (p=0·09 for LVCF, p=0·09 for completers) but failed to reject the null hypothesis for the 45 mg dose (p=0·12 for LVCF, p=0·19 for completers). Six serious adverse events occurred in the 15 mg group, nine in the 45 mg group, and three in the placebo group; none were thought to be definitely or probably related to the study interventions.

Interpretation

These findings suggest that pioglitazone at the doses studied here is unlikely to modify progression in early Parkinson's disease. Further study of pioglitazone in a larger trial in patients with Parkinson's disease is not recommended.

Funding

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Introduction

Preclinical studies suggest that growth factors in the early days after stroke improve final outcome. A prior study found three doses of human choriogonadotropin alfa followed by three doses of erythropoietin to be safe after stroke in humans. A proof of concept trial (REGENESIS) was initiated but placed on regulatory hold during review of an erythropoietin neuroprotective trial. Due to financial constraints, the trial was largely moved to India, using lower erythropoietin doses, as the REGENESIS-LED trial.

Methods

Entry criteria included National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale 8-20, supratentorial ischemic stroke, and 24-48 h poststroke at start of therapy. Patients were randomized to three QOD doses of subcutaneous human choriogonadotropin alfa followed by three QD doses of intravenous erythropoietin (three escalating dose cohorts, 4000-20,000 IU/dose) vs. placebo. Primary outcomes were safety and neurological recovery.

Results

The study was halted early by the sponsor after 96 enrollees. There was no significant difference across treatment groups in the proportion of patients experiencing death, serious adverse events, or any adverse event. There was no significant difference in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score change from baseline to Day 90 between placebo and active treatment, whether active cohorts were analyzed together or separately, and no exploratory secondary measure of neurological recovery showed a significant difference between groups.

Discussion

Administration of human choriogonadotropin alfa followed by erythropoietin is safe after a new ischemic stroke. At the doses studied, placebo and active groups did not differ significantly in neurological recovery. Study limitations, such as the use of multiple assessors, differences in rehabilitation care, and being underpowered to show efficacy, are discussed.

Participant recruitment challenges pervade the majority of publicly funded clinical trials. However, little is known about methods for enhancing participant accrual. The Epilepsy Phenome/Genome Project (EPGP), a multicenter study funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), aimed to enroll a total of 5,250 participants to better understand the genetic causes and phenotypic manifestations of epilepsy. However, similar to other trials, EPGP encountered recruitment challenges, and by the end of its first year, net enrollment was only 48% of the target for that time. To address this, EPGP established a National Participant Recruitment Campaign and began implementing and tracking the enrollment outcomes of a variety of proven and relatively novel recruitment methods. At the conclusion of the project, EPGP had successfully enrolled a total of 5,445 participants, thus surpassing its enrollment target. Data pertaining to EPGP's National Participant Recruitment Campaign was analyzed retrospectively, and the results are reported here, so that other multicenter trials may consider these methods in their recruitment planning and potentially avoid the costly repercussions of participant accrual issues.

Early treatment of prolonged seizures with benzodiazepines given intravenously by paramedics in the prehospital setting had been shown to be associated with improved outcomes, but the comparative efficacy and safety of an intramuscular (IM) route, which is faster and consistently achievable, was previously unknown. RAMPART (the Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial) was a double-blind randomized clinical trial to determine if the efficacy of intramuscular (IM) midazolam is noninferior by a margin of 10% to that of intravenous (IV) lorazepam in patients treated by paramedics for status epilepticus (SE). In children and adults with >5 min of convulsions and who are still seizing at paramedic arrival, midazolam administered by IM autoinjector was noninferior to IV lorazepam on the primary efficacy outcome with comparable safety. Patients treated with IM midazolam were more likely to have stopped seizing at emergency department (ED) arrival, without emergency medical services (EMS) rescue therapy, and were less likely to require any hospitalization or admission to an intensive care unit. Lessons from the RAMPART study's findings and potential implications on clinical practice, on the potential role of other routes of administration, on the effect of timing of interventions, and on future clinical trials are discussed.