Health Technology Assessment Programme Research Articles

Abstract PO4-16-02: Can high progesterone receptor (PgR) expression identify tumours with low-risk tumour gene expression scores?

Abstract Background Strong PgR expression predicts favorable outcomes for ER+ve HER2-ve breast cancer and has been proposed as a surrogate marker to distinguish between IHC-defined luminal A and luminal B subtypes. It is therefore possible that strong PgR expression may be able to predict tumor gene expression test results and independently identify tumors that are unlikely to be chemotherapy sensitive. PgR expression is traditionally determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Several validated RNA-based PGR expression tests have been developed that may outperform IHC. Methods We compared Oncotype DX RS with Oncotype DX reported PGR in 4 independent datasets which included 407 cases from the OPTIMA prelim trial. We further analyzed 251 OPTIMA prelim cases which had additional tumor gene expression data. All gene expression assays were performed by the test vendor, including PGR gene expression determined using the Mammatyper assay. PgR IHC was determined in a single laboratory on triplicate tissue micro-arrays using quantitative image analysis including a 10% manual quality control check. We analyzed PGR expression using cutoffs that correspond to approximately 20% staining; the standard Oncotype DX PGR assay is reported as positive if the score is >5.4, corresponding to approximately 1% staining by IHC. We used Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to compare PGR data. Results The four Oncotype DX datasets consistently demonstrated that high Oncotype PGR expression was associated with a low RS (table). Combining the 3 validation data sets consisting of 633 cases, 70.9% had high PGR expression of which 92.7% had a an Oncotype RS ≤25. Approximately 50% of cases with low Oncotype PGR expression had an Oncotype RS >25. Mammatyper and Oncotype PGR were highly correlated (Rs = 0.9258, P< 0.001) in the OPTIMA prelim dataset (n=251), with only 8.4% of tumors having discordant high/low Mammatyper and Oncotype PGR scores. 93.2% of 176 Mammatyper high PGR expression cases had an RS ≤25. The Mammatyper PGR and PgR IHC correlation was weaker (Rs=0.763, P< 0.001); 87.2% of 211 cases with >20% staining had RS ≤25. PgR IHC staining had a bimodal distribution and there was little effect on the prediction of low RS score up to a 67% cut-off. Mammatyper and Oncotype PGR scores both appear to have a normal distribution. We took advantage of this to perform an exploratory analysis using a higher Mammatyper PGR cutoff. We were able to show superior prediction of a low RS (96.8%) but with a reduced proportion (50.2%) of high PGR score tumors. High PGR gene expression was weakly associated with low (≤60) Prosigna ROR_PT score and MammaPrint low risk (72.2% and 65.9% respectively) and with Prosigna and MammaPrint luminal A subtype (both 64.8%). Conclusion High progesterone receptor gene expression measured using locally performed RNA-based assays may allow the reliable prediction of Oncotype DX low-risk tumours. This analysis provides additional information for the clinical utility of PGR measurement. Additional data will be presented on the optimal PGR cutoff. OPTIMA prelim is registered as ISRCTN42400492 and funded by the UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme, award number 10/34/01. Views expressed are those of the authors and not those of the HTA Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health. Table. Oncotype DX RS and PGR in 4 datasets Distribution of RS according to %cases with high or low PGR Citation Format: Robert Stein, Ralph Wirtz, Andrea Marshall, Jane Bayani, Sebastian Eidt, Claudia Schumacher, Hans-Peter Sinn, Andreas Schneeweiss, Andreas Makris, Iain Macpherson, Luke Hughes-Davies, Tammy Piper, Monika Sobol, Georgina Dotchin, Helen Higgins, Sarah Pinder, Abeer Shaaban, Janet Dunn, John MS Bartlett. Can high progesterone receptor (PgR) expression identify tumours with low-risk tumour gene expression scores? [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO4-16-02.

Extended pleurectomy decortication and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for pleural mesothelioma (MARS 2): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

Extended pleurectomy decortication for complete macroscopic resection for pleural mesothelioma has never been evaluated in a randomised trial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after extended pleurectomy decortication plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. MARS 2 was a phase 3, national, multicentre, open-label, parallel two-group, pragmatic, superiority randomised controlled trial conducted in the UK. The trial took place across 26 hospitals (21 recruiting only, one surgical only, and four recruiting and surgical). Following two cycles of chemotherapy, eligible participants with pleural mesothelioma were randomly assigned (1:1) to surgery and chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone using a secure web-based system. Individuals aged 16 years or older with resectable pleural mesothelioma and adequate organ and lung function were eligible for inclusion. Participants in the chemotherapy only group received two to four further cycles of chemotherapy, and participants in the surgery and chemotherapy group received pleurectomy decortication or extended pleurectomy decortication, followed by two to four further cycles of chemotherapy. It was not possible to mask allocation because the intervention was a major surgical procedure. The primary outcome was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation to death from any cause. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population for all outcomes, unless specified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02040272, and is closed to new participants. Between June 19, 2015, and Jan 21, 2021, of 1030 assessed for eligibility, 335 participants were randomly assigned (169 to surgery and chemotherapy, and 166 to chemotherapy alone). 291 (87%) participants were men and 44 (13%) women, and 288 (86%) were diagnosed with epithelioid mesothelioma. At a median follow-up of 22·4 months (IQR 11·3-30·8), median survival was shorter in the surgery and chemotherapy group (19·3 months [IQR 10·0-33·7]) than in the chemotherapy alone group (24·8 months [IQR 12·6-37·4]), and the difference in restricted mean survival time at 2 years was -1·9 months (95% CI -3·4 to -0·3, p=0·019). There were 318 serious adverse events (grade ≥3) in the surgery group and 169 in the chemotherapy group (incidence rate ratio 3·6 [95% CI 2·3 to 5·5], p<0·0001), with increased incidence of cardiac (30 vs 12; 3·01 [1·13 to 8·02]) and respiratory (84 vs 34; 2·62 [1·58 to 4·33]) disorders, infection (124 vs 53; 2·13 [1·36 to 3·33]), and additional surgical or medical procedures (15 vs eight; 2·41 [1·04 to 5·57]) in the surgery group. Extended pleurectomy decortication was associated with worse survival to 2 years, and more serious adverse events for individuals with resectable pleural mesothelioma, compared with chemotherapy alone. National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (15/188/31), Cancer Research UK Feasibility Studies Project Grant (A15895).

Lifetime effects and cost-effectiveness of standard and higher-intensity statin therapy across population categories in the UK: a microsimulation modelling study

Cardiovascular disease incidence and mortality have declined across developed economies and granular up-to-date cost-effectiveness evidence is required for treatments targeting large populations. To assess the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of standard and higher intensity statin therapy in the contemporary UK population 40-70 years old. A cardiovascular disease microsimulation model, developed using the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration data (117,896 participants; 5 years follow-up), and calibrated in the UK Biobank cohort (501,854 participants; 9 years follow-up), projected risks of myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, diabetes, cancer and vascular and nonvascular death for all UK Biobank participants without and with statin treatment. Meta-analyses of trials and cohort studies informed statins' relative effects on cardiovascular events, incident diabetes, myopathy and rhabdomyolysis. UK healthcare perspective was taken (2020/2021 UK£) with costs per 28 tablets of £1.10 for standard (35%-45% LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction) and £1.68 for higher intensity (≥45% LDL-C reduction) generic statin. Across categories by sex, age, LDL-C, and cardiovascular disease history/10-year cardiovascular risk, lifetime standard statin increased survival by 0.28-1.85 years (0.20-1.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), and higher intensity statin by further 0.06-0.40 years (0.03-0.20 QALYs) per person. Standard statin was cost-effective across all categories with incremental cost per QALY from £280 to £8530, with higher intensity statin cost-effective at higher cardiovascular risks and higher LDL-C levels. Stopping statin early reduced benefits and was not cost-effective. Lifetime low-cost statin therapy is cost-effective across all 40-70 years old in UK. Strengthening and widening statin treatment could cost-effectively improve population health. UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (17/140/02).

Advice only versus advice and a physiotherapy programme for acute traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: the ARTISAN RCT.

The extra benefit of a programme of physiotherapy in addition to advice alone, following first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation, is uncertain. We compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a single session of advice with a single session of advice and a programme of physiotherapy. The primary objective was to quantify and draw inferences about observed differences in the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score between the trial treatment groups 6 months post randomisation, in adults with a first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation. A pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative study. Forty-one hospitals in the UK NHS. Adults with a radiologically confirmed first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, being managed non-operatively. People with neurovascular complications or bilateral dislocations, and those unable to adhere to trial procedures or unable to attend physiotherapy within 6 weeks of injury, or who had previously been randomised, were excluded. All participants received the same initial shoulder examination followed by advice to aid self-management, lasting up to 1 hour and administered by a physiotherapist (control). Participants randomised to receive an additional programme of physiotherapy were offered sessions lasting for up to 30 minutes, over a maximum duration of 4 months from the date of randomisation (intervention). The primary outcome measure was the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score. This is a self-completed outcome measure containing 12 questions (0-4 points each), with possible scores from 0 (worst function) to 48 (best function). Measurements were collected at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months by postal questionnaire; 6 months was the primary outcome time point. The primary health outcome for economic evaluation was the quality-adjusted life-year, in accordance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Between 14 November 2018 and 14 March 2022, 482 participants were randomised to advice (n = 240) or advice and a programme of physiotherapy (n = 242). Participants were 34% female, with a mean age of 45 years, and treatment arms were balanced at baseline. There was not a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome between advice only and advice plus a programme of physiotherapy at 6 months for the primary intention-to-treat adjusted analysis (favours physiotherapy: 1.5, 95% confidence interval -0.3 to 3.5) or at earlier 3-month and 6-week time points on the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (0-48; higher scores indicate better function). The probability of physiotherapy being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 0.95. We found little difference in the primary outcome or other secondary outcomes. Advice with additional physiotherapy sessions was found likely to be cost-effective. However, small imprecise incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years raise questions on whether it is the best use of scarce physiotherapy resources given current service demands. Loss to follow-up was 27%; however, the observed standard deviation was much smaller than anticipated. These changes in parameters reduced the number of participants required to observe the planned target difference of four points. Our post hoc sensitivity analysis, accounting for missing data, gives similar results. Further research should be directed towards optimising self-management strategies. This study is registered as ISRCTN63184243. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/167/56) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 22. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Bisphosphonate alternative regimens for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: BLAST-OFF, a mixed-methods study.

Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both treatment compliance and persistence) is poor. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which can be given intravenously and have been shown to improve long-term adherence. However, the most clinically effective and cost-effective alternative bisphosphonate regimen remains unclear. What is the most cost-effective bisphosphonate in clinical trials may not be the most cost-effective or acceptable to patients in everyday clinical practice. 1. Explore patient, clinician and stakeholder views, experiences and preferences of alendronate compared to alternative bisphosphonates. 2. Update and refine the 2016 systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of bisphosphonates, and estimate the value of further research into their benefits. 3. Undertake stakeholder/consensus engagement to identify important research questions and further rank research priorities. The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: • Stage 1A - we elicited patient and healthcare experiences to understand their preferences of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. This was undertaken by performing a systematic review and framework synthesis of qualitative studies, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews with participants. • Stage 1B - we updated and expanded the existing Health Technology Assessment systematic review and clinical and cost-effectiveness model, incorporating a more comprehensive review of treatment efficacy, safety, side effects, compliance and long-term persistence. • Stage 2 - we identified and ranked further research questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonates. Patients and healthcare professionals identified a number of challenges in adhering to bisphosphonate medication, balancing the potential for long-term risk reduction against the work involved in adhering to oral alendronate. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable, with such regimens perceived to be more straightforward to engage in, although a portion of patients taking alendronate were satisfied with their current treatment. Intravenous zoledronate was found to be the most effective, with higher adherence rates compared to the other bisphosphonates, for reducing the risk of fragility fracture. However, oral bisphosphonates are more cost-effective than intravenous zoledronate due to the high cost of zoledronate administration in hospital. The importance of including patients and healthcare professionals when setting research priorities is recognised. Important areas for research were related to patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, how to optimise long-term care and the cost-effectiveness of delivering zoledronate in an alternative, non-hospital setting. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients and found to be the most effective bisphosphonate and with greater adherence; however, the cost-effectiveness relative to oral alendronate is limited by its higher zoledronate hospital administration costs. Further research is needed to support people to make decisions influencing treatment selection, effectiveness and optimal long-term care, together with the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intravenous zoledronate administered in a non-hospital (community) setting. Lack of clarity and limitations in the many studies included in the systematic review may have under-interpreted some of the findings relating to effects of bisphosphonates. This trial is registered as ISRCTN10491361. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127550) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Long-term efficacy and safety of a treatment strategy for HIV infection using protease inhibitor monotherapy: 8-year routine clinical care follow-up from a randomised, controlled, open-label pragmatic trial (PIVOT)

Treatment-simplification strategies are important tools for patient-centred management. We evaluated long-term outcomes from a PI monotherapy switch strategy. Eligible participants attending 43 UK treatment centres had a viral load (VL) below 50 copies/ml for at least 24 weeks on combination ART. Participants were randomised to maintain ongoing triple therapy (OT) or switch to a strategy of physician-selected PI monotherapy (PI-mono) with prompt return to combination therapy if VL rebounded. The primary outcome, previously reported, was loss of future drug options after 3 years, defined as new intermediate/high level resistance to at least one drug to which the participant's virus was considered sensitive at trial entry. Here we report resistance and disease outcomes after further extended follow-up in routine care. The study was registered as ISRCTN04857074. We randomised 587 participants to OT (291) or PI-mono (296) between Nov 4, 2008, and July 28, 2010 and followed them for a median of more than 8 years (100 months) until 2018. At the end of this follow-up time, one or more future drug options had been lost in 7 participants in the OT group and 6 in the PI-mono group; estimated cumulative risk by 8 years of 2.7% and 2.1% respectively (difference-0.6%, 95% CI-3.2% to 2.0%). Only one PI-mono participant developed resistance to the protease inhibitor they were taking (atazanavir). Serious clinical events (death, serious AIDS, and serious non-AIDS) were infrequent; reported in a total of 12 (4.1%) participants in the OT group and 23 (7.8%) in the PI-mono group (P=0.08) over the entire follow-up period. A strategy of PI monotherapy, with regular VL monitoring and prompt reintroduction of combination treatment following rebound, preserved future treatment options. Findings confirm the high genetic barrier to resistance of the PI drug class that makes them well suited for creative, patient-centred, treatment-simplification approaches. The possibility of a small excess risk of serious clinical events with the PI monotherapy strategy cannot be excluded. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa (OPEN): A protocol for an open-label feasibility study.

Antipsychotics are routinely prescribed off-label for anorexia nervosa (AN) despite limited evidence. This article presents a protocol of a study aiming to assess the feasibility of a future definitive trial on olanzapine in young people with AN. In an open-label, one-armed feasibility study, 55 patients with AN or atypical AN, aged 12-24, receiving outpatient, inpatient or day-care treatment who are considered for olanzapine treatment will be recruited from NHS sites based in England. Assessments will be conducted at screening, baseline and at 8-, 16weeks, 6- and 12months. Primary feasibility parameters will be proportions of patients who agree to take olanzapine and who adhere to treatment and complete study assessments. Qualitative methods will be used to explore acceptability of the intervention and study design. Secondary feasibility parameters will be changes in body mass index, psychopathology, side effects, health-related quality of life, carer burden and proportion of participants who would enrol in a future randomised controlled trial. The study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research via Health Technology Assessment programme. Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa will inform a future randomised controlled trial on the efficacy and safety of prescribing olanzapine in young people with AN.

Trial of Selective Early Treatment of Patent Ductus Arteriosus with Ibuprofen

BackgroundThe cyclooxygenase inhibitor ibuprofen may be used to treat patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants. Whether selective early treatment of large PDAs with ibuprofen would improve short-term outcomes is not known.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating early treatment (≤72 hours after birth) with ibuprofen for a large PDA (diameter of ≥1.5 mm with pulsatile flow) in extremely preterm infants (born between 23 weeks 0 days’ and 28 weeks 6 days’ gestation). The primary outcome was a composite of death or moderate or severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia evaluated at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age.ResultsA total of 326 infants were assigned to receive ibuprofen and 327 to receive placebo; 324 and 322, respectively, had data available for outcome analyses. A primary-outcome event occurred in 220 of 318 infants (69.2%) in the ibuprofen group and 202 of 318 infants (63.5%) in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98 to 1.20; P=0.10). A total of 44 of 323 infants (13.6%) in the ibuprofen group and 33 of 321 infants (10.3%) in the placebo group died (adjusted risk ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.90). Among the infants who survived to 36 weeks of postmenstrual age, moderate or severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia occurred in 176 of 274 (64.2%) in the ibuprofen group and 169 of 285 (59.3%) in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.23). Two unforeseeable serious adverse events occurred that were possibly related to ibuprofen.ConclusionsThe risk of death or moderate or severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age was not significantly lower among infants who received early treatment with ibuprofen than among those who received placebo. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; Baby-OSCAR ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN84264977.)

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of an adapted intervention for preschoolers with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities displaying behaviours that challenge: the EPICC-ID RCT.

Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent-child relationship. To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30-59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; n = 155) or treatment as usual arm (n = 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle. Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge. We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (-4.23, 95% CI -9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by -10.77 (95% CI -19.12 to -2.42, p = 0.014) and -11.53 (95% CI -26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as -7.12 (95% CI -13.44 to -0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI -5.43 to 20.64), respectively (p = 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (-£1057.88; 95% CI -£3218.6 to -£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention. There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks. Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes. This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1). This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme.

Randomised controlled trials ('trials') are susceptible to poor participant recruitment and retention. Studies Within A Trial are the strongest methods for testing the effectiveness of strategies to improve recruitment and retention. However, relatively few of these have been conducted. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to facilitate at least 25 Studies Within A Trial evaluating recruitment or retention strategies. We share our experience of delivering the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme, and the lessons learnt for undertaking randomised Studies Within A Trial. A network of 10 Clinical Trials Units and 1 primary care research centre committed to conducting randomised controlled Studies Within A Trial of recruitment and/or retention strategies was established. Promising recruitment and retention strategies were identified from various sources including Cochrane systematic reviews, the Study Within A Trial Repository, and existing prioritisation exercises, which were reviewed by patient and public members to create an initial priority list of seven recruitment and eight retention interventions. Host trial teams could apply for funding and receive support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to undertake Studies Within A Trial. We also tested the feasibility of undertaking co-ordinated Studies Within A Trial, across multiple host trials simultaneously. Clinical trials unit-based trials recruiting or following up participants in any setting in the United Kingdom were eligible. Clinical trials unit-based teams undertaking trials in any clinical context in the United Kingdom. Funding of up to £5000 and support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to design, implement and report Studies Within A Trial. Number of host trials funded. Forty-two Studies Within A Trial were funded (31 host trials), across 12 Clinical Trials Units. The mean cost of a Study Within A Trial was £3535. Twelve Studies Within A Trial tested the same strategy across multiple host trials using a co-ordinated Study Within A Trial design, and four used a factorial design. Two recruitment and five retention strategies were evaluated in more than one host trial. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial will add 18% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane systematic review of recruitment strategies, and 79% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane review of retention strategies. For retention, we found that pre-notifying participants by card, letter or e-mail before sending questionnaires was effective, as was the use of pens, and sending personalised text messages to improve questionnaire response. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others planning Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient and public involvement partners; prioritising and selecting strategies to evaluate and elements to consider when designing a Study Within A Trial; obtaining governance approvals; implementing Studies Within A Trial, including individual and co-ordinated Studies Within A Trials; and reporting Study Within A Trials. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted five Studies Within A Trial, being either delayed (n = 2) or prematurely terminated (n = 3). PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial significantly increased the evidence base for recruitment and retention strategies. When provided with both funding and practical support, host trial teams successfully implemented Studies Within A Trial. Future research should identify and target gaps in the evidence base, including widening Study Within A Trial uptake, undertaking more complex Studies Within A Trial and translating Study Within A Trial evidence into practice. All Studies Within A Trial in the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme had to be registered with the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research Study Within A Trial Repository. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/55/80) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Fifteen Lessons from Fifteen Years of the Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program in Thailand

ABSTRACT The Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP) was established in 2007. This article highlights 15 lessons from over 15 years of experience, noting five achievements about what HITAP has done well, five areas that it is currently working on, and five aims for work in the future. HITAP built capacity for HTA and linked research to policy and practice in Thailand. With collaborators from academic and policy spheres, HITAP has mobilized regional and global support, and developed global public goods to enhance the field of HTA. HITAP’s semi-autonomous structure has facilitated these changes, though they have not been without their challenges. HITAP aims to continue its work on HTA for public health interventions and disinvestments, effectively engaging with stakeholders and strategically managing its human resources. Moving forward, HITAP will develop and update global public goods on HTA, work on emerging topics such as early HTA, address issues in digital health, real-world evidence and equity, support HTA development globally, particularly in low-income settings, and seek to engage more effectively with the public. HITAP seeks to learn from its experience and invest in the areas identified so that it can grow sustainably. Its journey may be relevant to other countries and institutions that are interested in developing HTA programs.

OP151 Health Technology Assessment In Switzerland – Current And Future Challenges

IntroductionThe Swiss Health Technology Assessment (HTA) program is a unique, innovative program that connects research with policy making. In 2017, a HTA unit was established within the Federal Office of Public Health following a decision by the Federal Council in 2015 to intensify efforts in HTA.MethodsThe legal basis of the HTA program is Article 32 of the Federal Health Insurance Act, which specifies that health technologies (i.e., all preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic interventions in health care) covered by the compulsory health insurance must be effective (E), appropriate (A), and economically efficient (E).Health technologies that do not meet the EAE criteria are not eligible for coverage. For health technologies that are already reimbursed, re-evaluation of the criteria can result in the removal of technologies from the catalog of benefits or limitations being placed on their reimbursement.ResultsThe initial focus of the HTA program was the re-evaluation of controversial health technologies. This focus was later expanded to evaluating new and upcoming technologies through horizon scanning. Challenges encountered since the start of the program include:•aligning the classic HTA domains with the EAE criteria;•identifying suitable re-evaluation topics;•tailoring HTA processes to regulation options and decision-making processes; and•involving stakeholders in the HTA process without jeopardizing the quality and objectivity of the research.ConclusionsDespite various initial challenges, the HTA program has become an acknowledged and appreciated actor within the Swiss reimbursement policy landscape. An outlook on the program’s future will also be shared.

Techniques to increase lumbar puncture success in newborn babies: the NeoCLEAR RCT.

Lumbar puncture is an essential tool for diagnosing meningitis. Neonatal lumbar puncture, although frequently performed, has low success rates (50-60%). Standard technique includes lying infants on their side and removing the stylet 'late', that is, after the needle is thought to have entered the cerebrospinal fluid. Modifications to this technique include holding infants in the sitting position and removing the stylet 'early', that is, following transection of the skin. To the best of our knowledge, modified techniques have not previously been tested in adequately powered trials. The aim of the Neonatal Champagne Lumbar punctures Every time - An RCT (NeoCLEAR) trial was to compare two modifications to standard lumbar puncture technique, that is, use of the lying position rather than the sitting position and of 'early' rather than 'late' stylet removal, in terms of success rates and short-term clinical, resource and safety outcomes. This was a multicentre 2 × 2 factorial pragmatic non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Infants requiring lumbar puncture (with a working weight ≥ 1000 g and corrected gestational age from 27+0 to 44+0 weeks), and whose parents provided written consent, were randomised by web-based allocation to lumbar puncture (1) in the sitting or lying position and (2) with early or late stylet removal. The trial was powered to detect a 10% absolute risk difference in the primary outcome, that is, the percentage of infants with a successful lumbar puncture (cerebrospinal fluid containing < 10,000 red cells/mm3). The primary outcome was analysed by modified intention to treat. Of 1082 infants randomised (sitting with early stylet removal, n = 275; sitting with late stylet removal, n = 271; lying with early stylet removal, n = 274; lying with late stylet removal, n = 262), 1076 were followed up until discharge. Most infants were term born (950/1076, 88.3%) and were aged < 3 days (936/1076, 87.0%) with a working weight > 2.5 kg (971/1076, 90.2%). Baseline characteristics were balanced across groups. In terms of the primary outcome, the sitting position was significantly more successful than lying [346/543 (63.7%) vs. 307/533 (57.6%), adjusted risk ratio 1.10 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.21); p = 0.029; number needed to treat = 16 (95% confidence interval 9 to 134)]. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between early stylet removal and late stylet removal [338/545 (62.0%) vs. 315/531 (59.3%), adjusted risk ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.15); p = 0.447]. Resource consumption was similar in all groups, and all techniques were well tolerated and safe. This trial predominantly recruited term-born infants who were < 3 days old, with working weights > 2.5 kg. The impact of practitioners' seniority and previous experience of different lumbar puncture techniques was not investigated. Limited data on resource use were captured, and parent/practitioner preferences were not assessed. Lumbar puncture success rate was higher with infants in the sitting position but was not affected by timing of stylet removal. Lumbar puncture is a safe, well-tolerated and simple technique without additional cost, and is easily learned and applied. The results support a paradigm shift towards sitting technique as the standard position for neonatal lumbar puncture, especially for term-born infants during the first 3 days of life. The superiority of the sitting lumbar puncture technique should be tested in larger populations of premature infants, in those aged > 3 days and outside neonatal care settings. The effect of operators' previous practice and the impact on family experience also require further investigation, alongside in-depth analyses of healthcare resource utilisation. Future studies should also investigate other factors affecting lumbar puncture success, including further modifications to standard technique. This trial is registered as ISRCTN14040914 and as Integrated Research Application System registration 223737. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 15/188/106) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 33. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Prognostic indicators of severe disease in late preterm pre-eclampsia to guide decision making on timing of delivery: the PEACOCK study

Objective To assess the diagnostic performance of angiogenic biomarkers in determining need for delivery in seven days in women with late preterm preeclampsia. Study design In a prospective observational cohort study in 36 maternity units across England and Wales, we studied the diagnostic accuracy of placental growth factor (PlGF) and sFlt-1 in determining the risk of complications requiring delivery in late preterm (34+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation) preeclampsia. Angiogenic biomarkers were measured using the Quidel (PlGF) and Roche (sFlt-1 : PlGF ratio) assays. Additional clinical data was obtained for use within the established ʻPrediction of complications in early-onset pre-eclampsiaʼ (PREP)-S prognostic model. Biomarkers were assessed using standard methods (sensitivity, specificity, Receiver Operator Curve areas). Estimated probability of early delivery from PREP-S was compared to actual event rates. Main outcome measures Clinically indicated need for delivery for pre-eclampsia within seven days. Results PlGF (Quidel) testing had high sensitivity (97.9%) for delivery within seven days, but negative predictive value was only 71.4%, with low specificity (8.4%), with similar results from sFlt-1/PlGF assay. The area under the curve for PlGF was 0.60 (SE 0.03), and 0.65 (0.03), and 0.64 (0.03) for PREP-S in combination with PlGF, and sFlt-1 : PlGF, respectively. Conclusions Angiogenic biomarkers do not add to clinical assessment to help determine need for delivery for women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. Existing models developed in women with early-onset pre-eclampsia to predict complications cannot be used to predict clinically indicated need for delivery in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia.

Project publication: Two-year follow-up of infant and maternal outcomes after planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial

Objective We evaluated the best time to initiate delivery in late preterm pre-eclampsia in order to optimise long-term infant and maternal outcomes. Design Parallel-group, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Setting 46 UK maternity units. Population Women with pre-eclampsia between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks’ gestation, without severe disease, were randomised to planned delivery or expectant management. Primary long-term outcome Infant neurodevelopmental outcome at 2 years of age, using the PARCA-R (Parent Report of Children’s Abilities-Revised) composite score. Results Between 29 September 2014 and 10 December 2018, 901 women were enrolled in the trial, with 450 allocated to planned delivery and 451 to expectant management. At 2-year follow-up, the intention-to-treat analysis population included 276 women (290 infants) allocated to planned delivery and 251 women (256 infants) to expectant management. The mean composite standardised PARCA-R scores were 89.5 [standard deviation (SD) 18.2] in the planned delivery group and 91.9 (SD 18.4) in the expectant management group, with an adjusted mean difference of −2.4 (95% CI −5.4 to 0.5) points. Conclusion In infants of women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, average neurodevelopmental assessment at 2 years lies within the normal range, regardless of whether planned delivery or expectant management is pursued. Because of lower than anticipated follow-up, there was limited power to demonstrate these scores were not different, but the small between-group difference in PARCA-R scores is unlikely to be clinically important.

Project publication: Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial

This article consists of a citation of a published article describing research funded by the Health Technology Assessment programme under project number 12/25/03, and is provided as as part of the complete record of research outputs for this project. The original publication is available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31963-4

The potential impact of policies and structural interventions in reducing cardiovascular disease and mortality: a systematic review of simulation-based studies.

The aim of the study was to investigate the potential effect of different structural interventions for preventing cardiovascular disease. Medline and EMBASE were searched for peer-reviewed simulation-based studies of structural interventions for prevention of cardiovascular disease. We performed a systematic narrative synthesis. A total of 54 studies met the inclusion criteria. Diet, nutrition, tobacco and alcohol control and other programmes are among the policy simulation models explored. Food tax and subsidies, healthy food and lifestyles policies, palm oil tax, processed meat tax, reduction in ultra-processed foods, supplementary nutrition assistance programmes, stricter food policy and subsidised community-supported agriculture were among the diet and nutrition initiatives. Initiatives to reduce tobacco and alcohol use included a smoking ban, a national tobacco control initiative and a tax on alcohol. Others included the NHS Health Check, WHO 25 × 25 and air quality management policy. There is significant heterogeneity in simulation models, making comparisons of output data impossible. While policy interventions typically include a variety of strategies, none of the models considered possible interrelationships between multiple policies or potential interactions. Research that investigates dose-response interactions between numerous modifications as well as longer-term clinical outcomes can help us better understand the potential impact of policy-level interventions. The reviewed studies underscore the potential of structural interventions in addressing cardiovascular diseases. Notably, interventions in areas such as diet, tobacco, and alcohol control demonstrate a prospective decrease in cardiovascular incidents. However, to realize the full potential of such interventions, there is a pressing need for models that consider the interplay and cumulative impacts of multiple policies. Rigorous research into holistic and interconnected interventions will pave the way for more effective policy strategies in the future. The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019154836. This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/148/05.

Ablative and non-surgical therapies for early and very early hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

A wide range of ablative and non-surgical therapies are available for treating small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with very early or early-stage disease and preserved liver function. To review and compare the effectiveness of all current ablative and non-surgical therapies for patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (≤ 3 cm). Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Nine databases (March 2021), two trial registries (April 2021) and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials of ablative and non-surgical therapies, versus any comparator, for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Randomised controlled trials were quality assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and mapped. The comparative effectiveness of therapies was assessed using network meta-analysis. A threshold analysis was used to identify which comparisons were sensitive to potential changes in the evidence. Where comparisons based on randomised controlled trial evidence were not robust or no randomised controlled trials were identified, a targeted systematic review of non-randomised, prospective comparative studies provided additional data for repeat network meta-analysis and threshold analysis. The feasibility of undertaking economic modelling was explored. A workshop with patients and clinicians was held to discuss the findings and identify key priorities for future research. Thirty-seven randomised controlled trials (with over 3700 relevant patients) were included in the review. The majority were conducted in China or Japan and most had a high risk of bias or some risk of bias concerns. The results of the network meta-analysis were uncertain for most comparisons. There was evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection is inferior to radiofrequency ablation for overall survival (hazard ratio 1.45, 95% credible interval 1.16 to 1.82), progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.36, 95% credible interval 1.11 to 1.67), overall recurrence (relative risk 1.19, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 1.39) and local recurrence (relative risk 1.80, 95% credible interval 1.19 to 2.71). Percutaneous acid injection was also inferior to radiofrequency ablation for progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% credible interval 1.05 to 2.51). Threshold analysis showed that further evidence could plausibly change the result for some comparisons. Fourteen eligible non-randomised studies were identified (n ≥ 2316); twelve had a high risk of bias so were not included in updated network meta-analyses. Additional non-randomised data, made available by a clinical advisor, were also included (n = 303). There remained a high level of uncertainty in treatment rankings after the network meta-analyses were updated. However, the updated analyses suggested that microwave ablation and resection are superior to percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection for some outcomes. Further research on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy was recommended at the workshop, although it is only appropriate for certain patient subgroups, limiting opportunities for adequately powered trials. Many studies were small and of poor quality. No comparative studies were found for some therapies. The existing evidence base has limitations; the uptake of specific ablative therapies in the United Kingdom appears to be based more on technological advancements and ease of use than strong evidence of clinical effectiveness. However, there is evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection are inferior to radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation and resection. PROSPERO CRD42020221357. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR131224) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

OP102 Towards Universal Health Coverage: Health Technology Assessment Roadmap Development In The Emirate Of Abu Dhabi Involving The Whole Ecosystem

IntroductionThe mission of the Department of Health (DoH) of Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates is to provide its population with a healthy life and world leading preventive and curative services. While the DoH has regulations in place to grant market approval to new health technologies, there is a need to develop a clear overall framework for reimbursement and disinvestment decisions. Establishing a structured health technology assessment (HTA) framework is critical for informing decisions on health technologies that offer value for money, with the aim of improving equitable access to health care, financial risk protection, and, ultimately, better health outcomes.MethodsDuring 2022, the DoH collaborated with the Radboud University Medical Center to explore the feasibility of applying an evidence-informed deliberative process (EDP) HTA approach through workshops and interviews involving all stakeholders in the ecosystem, such as policy makers, principal investigators, providers, patients and public groups, product manufacturers, payers, and purchasers. A situational analysis was conducted to collect stakeholders’ views and build EDPs. Based on this analysis, a structured roadmap was developed.ResultsThe comprehensive five-year roadmap to implement a holistic HTA framework in Abu Dhabi consisted of five major elements, starting with the establishment of an appropriate HTA policy framework as a foundation. Abu Dhabi should firmly establish its HTA structure and program (in one to two years), and at the same time invest in developing and retaining HTA training capacity so that over time (within three to five years) the country can build up its own expertise to sustain the program. This needs to be accompanied by continuous awareness raising among all relevant stakeholders.ConclusionsThis roadmap is the first and most important step toward implementing a holistic HTA framework in Abu Dhabi. Technical work needs to be complemented by continuously raising awareness and involving all relevant stakeholders. Looking at the initial results and international benchmarks, HTA will significantly contribute to achieving a sustainable, high quality healthcare system.

Conservative versus liberal oxygenation targets in critically ill children (Oxy-PICU): a UK multicentre, open, parallel-group, randomised clinical trial

The optimal target for systemic oxygenation in critically ill children is unknown. Liberal oxygenation is widely practiced, but has been associated with harm in paediatric patients. We aimed to evaluate whether conservative oxygenation would reduce duration of organ support or incidence of death compared to standard care. Oxy-PICU was a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in 15 UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Children admitted as an emergency, who were older than 38 weeks corrected gestational age and younger than 16 years receiving invasive ventilation and supplemental oxygen were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio via a concealed, central, web-based randomisation system to conservative peripheral oxygen saturations ([SpO2] 88-92%) or liberal (SpO2 >94%) targets. The primary outcome was the duration of organ support at 30 days following random allocation, a rank-based endpoint with death either on or before day 30 as the worst outcome (a score equating to 31 days of organ support), with survivors assigned a score between 1 and 30 depending on the number of calendar days of organ support received. The primary effect estimate was the probabilistic index, a value greater than 0·5 indicating more than 50% probability that conservative oxygenation is superior to liberal oxygenation for a randomly selected patient. All participants in whom consent was available were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The completed study was registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN92103439). Between Sept 1, 2020, and May 15, 2022, 2040 children were randomly allocated to conservative or liberal oxygenation groups. Consent was available for 1872 (92%) of 2040 children. The conservative oxygenation group comprised 939 children (528 [57%] of 927 were female and 399 [43%] of 927 were male) and the liberal oxygenation group included 933 children (511 [56%] of 920 were female and 409 [45%] of 920 were male). Duration of organ support or death in the first 30 days was significantly lower in the conservative oxygenation group (probabilistic index 0·53, 95% CI 0·50-0·55; p=0·04 Wilcoxon rank-sum test, adjusted odds ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·72-0·99]). Prespecified adverse events were reported in 24 (3%) of 939 patients in the conservative oxygenation group and 36 (4%) of 933 patients in the liberal oxygenation group. Among invasively ventilated children who were admitted as an emergency to a PICU receiving supplemental oxygen, a conservative oxygenation target resulted in a small, but significant, greater probability of a better outcome in terms of duration of organ support at 30 days or death when compared with a liberal oxygenation target. Widespread adoption of a conservative oxygenation saturation target (SpO2 88-92%) could help improve outcomes and reduce costs for the sickest children admitted to PICUs. UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.