Eligible Trials Research Articles

Trial selection criteria should not be used for clinical decisions and recommendations: the thrombectomy trials example

BackgroundDespite multiple calls for more inclusive studies, most clinical trial eligibility criteria remain too restrictive. Thrombectomy trials have been no exception. MethodsWe review the landmark trials that have shown the benefits of thrombectomy, their eligibility criteria, and consequences on clinical practice. We discuss the rationale behind various reasons for exclusions. We also examine the logical problem involved in using eligibility criteria as indications for treatment. ResultsMost thrombectomy trials have been too restrictive. This has been shown by a plethora of follow-up studies that have refuted most of the previously recommended trial eligibility restrictions. Meanwhile, the effect of clinical recommendations based on restrictive eligibility criteria is that treatment has been denied to the majority of patients who could have benefitted. Trial eligibility criteria cannot be used to make clinical decisions or recommendations unless, like any other medical diagnosis, they have been shown capable of reliably differentiating patients into those that will, and those that will not benefit from treatment. This goal can only be achieved with all-inclusive pragmatic trials. ConclusionRestrictive eligibility criteria render clinical trials incapable of guiding medical decisions or recommendations.

Prognostic clinical and biological markers for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis disease progression: validation and implications for clinical trial design and analysis

With increasing recognition of the value of incorporating prognostic markers into amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) trial design and analysis plans, there is a pressing need to understand which among the prevailing clinical and biochemical markers have real value, and how they can be optimally used. A subset of patients with ALS recruited through the multi-center Phenotype-Genotype-Biomarker study (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02327845) was identified as "trial-like" based on meeting common trial eligibility criteria. Clinical phenotyping was performed by evaluators trained in relevant assessments. Serum neurofilament light (NfL) and phosphorylated neurofilament heavy (pNfH), urinary p75ECD, plasma microRNA-181, and an array of biochemical and clinical measures were evaluated for their prognostic value. Associations with functional progression were estimated by random-slopes mixed models of ALS functional rating scale-revised (ALSFRS-R) score. Associations with survival were estimated by log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression. Potential sample size savings from adjusting for given biomarkers in a hypothetical trial were estimated. Baseline serum NfL is a powerful prognostic biomarker, predicting survival and ALSFRS-R rate of decline. Serum NfL <40pg/mL and >100pg/mL correspond to future ALSFRS-R slopes of ∼0.5 and ∼1.5 points/month, respectively. Serum NfL also adds value to the best available clinical predictors, encapsulated by the European Network to Cure ALS (ENCALS) predictor score. In models of functional decline, the addition of NfL yields ∼25% sample size saving above those achieved by inclusion of either clinical predictors or ENCALS score alone. The prognostic value of serum pNfH, urinary p75ECD, and plasma miR-181ab is more limited. Among the multitude of biomarkers considered, only blood NfL adds value to the ENCALS prediction model and should be incorporated into analysis plans for all ongoing and future ALS trials. Defined thresholds of NfL might also be used in trial design, for enrichment or stratified randomisation, to improve trial efficiency. NIH (U01-NS107027, U54-NS092091). ALSA (16-TACL-242).

A Real-World Data-Based Analysis of Prognostic Indices as Part of Trial Eligibility Criteria in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Patients.

Recent front-line clinical trials used the International Prognostic Index (IPI) to identify trial-eligible patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, many IPI-like variants with improved accuracy have been developed over the years for rituximab-treated patients. We assessed the impact of International Prognostic Indices on patient enrolment in clinical trials, aiming to exclude low-risk IPI patients based on POLARIX/EPCORE DLBCL-2 trial criteria. We identified 2877 patients in the Danish Lymphoma Registry who would have been eligible for the POLARIX trial if patients with IPI 0-1 scores were included. IPI and NCCN-IPI assigned 33.3% and 11.9% of patients to the low-risk group, respectively. Shorter 5-year overall survival (91.4% vs. 97.5%), higher relapse rate (9.9% vs. 4.4%), and more deaths (16.1% vs. 4.4%) occurred in the low-risk IPI group compared with low-risk NCCN-IPI group. Analyzed models failed to identify true high-risk patients with poor prognosis. Similar results were found in the confirmatory cohort developed based on EPCORE DLBCL-2 trial eligibility criteria. True low-risk patients are more optimal identified by NCCN-IPI and should be excluded from front-line clinical trials due to their excellent prognosis. However, additional high-risk factors besides clinical prognostic models need to be considered when selecting trial-eligible patients.

Understanding why restrictive trial eligibility criteria are inappropriate

BackgroundAn important difference between explanatory and pragmatic clinical trials concerns eligibility criteria. Eligibility criteria are restrictive in explanatory trials, while pragmatic trials are more inclusive or even all-inclusive. MethodsTo better understand the diverging views regarding eligibility criteria, we examine the contrast between theoretical and clinical medicine, and 3 different research contexts: laboratory research, population studies and clinical trials. In each context we review the purpose for selecting study subjects or research material, as well as the type of inductive inference or generalization that is sought by such selection. ResultsIn each context, selection concerns different things and serves different purposes: In the laboratory, selection concerns the homogenous research material that will help isolate a causal signal. In the epidemiological context selection concerns the (random) sampling method, designed to produce a representative sample of the population. In the clinical trial setting, selection concerns patients in need of care. Restrictive eligibility criteria become inappropriate in the care setting because the aim of the trial is not to represent a population nor to isolate a causal signal, but to find out which patients benefit from treatment. ConclusionThe idea of selecting patients comes from methods that belong to theoretical medicine. In the care setting, most clinical trials should be pragmatic and as inclusive as possible.

Meticulous nursing care for coronary CT angiography: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This study aimed to investigate the effects of meticulous nursing care (MNC) for patients with coronary heart disease undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA). We conducted a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wangfang databases from inception to January 1, 2024. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of MNC for CCTA were included. Outcomes assessed included self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), self-rating depression scale (SDS), overall satisfaction of nursing care (OSNC), examination time (ET, min), radiation dose received (RDR, mSv), breathing control time (BCT), and heart rate control time (HRCT).The methodological quality of all included RCTs was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, while statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Six eligible trials involving 1064 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed significant differences in SAS (MD = -2.84, 95% CI [-3.31, -2.37], I2 = 0%, P < .001), SDS (MD = -2.55, 95% CI [-3.51, -1.58], I2 = 0%, P < .001), OSNC (OR = 3.13, 95% CI [1.59, 6.17], I2 = 23%, P = .001), BCT (MD = -23.43, 95% CI [-25.07, -21.80], I2 = 45%, P < .001), HRCT (MD = -20.08, 95% CI [-21.70, -18.46], I2 = 29%, P < .001), ET (MD = -2.31, 95% CI [-2.56, -2.06], I2 = 5%, P < .001), and RDR (MD = -2.11, 95% CI [-2.45, -1.77], I2 = 0%, P < .001). MNC may benefit for patients with coronary heart disease undergoing CCTA. Future studies are still needed to warrant the current findings.

Sodium–glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors for hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a prospective meta-analysis of randomised trials

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been proposed as a potential treatment for adults hospitalised with COVID-19, due to their potential anti-inflammatory and endothelial protective effects. Published evidence from randomised control trials (RCTs) does not provide evidence of benefit. We aimed to estimate the effect of oral administration of SGLT2 inhibitors compared with usual care or placebo in adults hospitalised with COVID-19. Eligible RCTs that estimated the effect of oral administration of SGLT2 inhibitors compared with usual care or placebo on 28-day all-cause mortality (primary outcome) were included in this prospective meta-analysis. The primary safety outcome was ketoacidosis by 28 days. Trials were identified through systematic searches of ClinicalTrials.gov, EudraCT, and the WHO ISRCTN registry between Nov 1, 2022 and Jan 31, 2023. The search terms were "random*" AND "COVID" AND each SGLT2i, not restricted by trial status or language. Individual searches were then combined. Prespecified summary outcome data, overall and within subgroups of interest, were provided by each trial. The primary analyses were inverse variance weighted meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023406442. Three eligible trials randomly assigned 6096 participants (3025 to the SGLT2 inhibitor group and 3071 to the usual care or placebo group). 2381 (39%) patients were women and 1547 (25%) had type 2 diabetes at randomisation. By 28 days, there were 351 deaths in the SGLT2 inhibitor group and 382 deaths in the usual care or placebo group (summary OR 0·93 [95% CI 0·79-1·08]; p=0·33, I2 for inconsistency across trials 0%). The risk of bias was assessed as being low. Ketoacidosis was observed in seven participants in the SGLT2 inhibitor group and two patients in the usual care or placebo group. Although administration of SGLT2 inhibitor was safe, we found no clear evidence that adding SGLT2 inhibitor therapy improved outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with usual care or placebo. These data do not support the use of SGLT2 inhibitors as standard treatment in adults hospitalised for COVID-19. None.

The prognostic effect of blast count in TP53 mutant myeloid neoplasms –the Minnesota experience

In 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Consensus Classification (ICC) recognized TP53 as an entity-defining alteration in myeloid neoplasms, yet with differing criteria that could lead to discrepant diagnoses and affect clinical trial eligibility. We studied 67 patients with TP53 mutant myeloid neoplasms, reclassifying them using both criteria. While most cases fulfill the criteria for TP53 mutant defined entities, most discrepancies were found in cases with ≥20% blasts. Patients were stratified into three groups based on blast count (<10%, 10–19%, and ≥20%) which revealed comparable clinicopathologic features, genetic characteristics, and outcomes. Notably, patients with ≥10% blasts had shorter overall survival compared to those with <10% blasts (8.1 vs. 12.4 months; p = 0.03). This study is among the few to examine TP53 mutant myeloid neoplasms as a single entity and suggests that the 10% blast count threshold could serve as a gateway to a more harmonized classification for these patients.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical site infections following colorectal surgery: protocol for network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BackgroundSurgical site infections continue to be a significant challenge following colorectal surgery. These can result in extended hospital stays, hospital readmissions, increased treatment costs, and negative effects on patients’ quality of life. Antibiotic prophylaxis plays a crucial role in preventing infection during surgery, specifically in preventing surgical site infections after colorectal surgery in adult patients. However, the optimal antibiotic regimen is still unclear based on current evidence. Considering the limitations of existing reviews, our goal is to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of available antibiotic prophylaxis regimens for preventing surgical site infections following colorectal surgery in adult patients.MethodsWe will search the Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. We will include trials that (1) enrolled adults who underwent colorectal surgeries and (2) randomized them to any systemic administration of antibiotic (single or combined) prophylaxis before surgery compared to an alternative systemic antibiotic (single or combined antibiotic), placebo, control, or no prophylactic treatment. Pairs of reviewers will independently assess the risk of bias among eligible trials using a modified Cochrane risk of bias instrument for randomized trials. Our outcomes of interest include the rate of surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, hospital length of stay, 30-day mortality, and treatment-related adverse effects. We will perform a contrast-based network meta-analysis using a frequentist random-effects model assuming a common heterogeneity parameter. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be utilized to assess the certainty of evidence for treatment effects.DiscussionBy synthesizing evidence from available RCTs, this study will provide valuable insight for clinicians, patients, and health policymakers on the most effective antibiotics for preventing surgical site infection.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42023434544.

Cancer Trial Eligibility and Therapy Modifications for Individuals With Duffy Null–Associated Neutrophil Count

Absolute neutrophil counts (ANCs) are used to determine cancer clinical trial (CCT) eligibility and systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) dose modifications. Duffy null-associated ANC (DANC) is a nonpathologic phenotype associated with lower ANC and most frequently seen in individuals with African and Middle Eastern ancestry. It is unclear whether CCTs exclude or SACT regimens modify doses for individuals with ANC within the DANC reference range. To investigate CCT exclusions and SACT dose modifications for ANC within the DANC reference range. This cross-sectional study of contemporary CCTs and SACT regimens included adult, interventional, phase 3 CCTs for the 5 most prevalent cancers in the US and United Kingdom (prostate, breast, melanoma, colorectal, and lung cancers) testing SACTs with start dates between November 1, 2021, and November 1, 2023, and that were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Preferred curative-intent SACT regimens were listed in National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Cancer clinical trial exclusions and SACT regimen modifications. Proportions of CCTs that exclude and SACT regimens that modify doses for individuals with an ANC within the DANC reference range. For CCTs, 289 of 382 trials (75.7%) were eligible, of which 221 (76.5% [95% CI, 71.1%-81.2%]) excluded patients with ANC values within the DANC reference range. Colorectal CCTs had the highest (38 of 44 [86.4% (95% CI, 72.6%-94.8%)]) and prostate CCTs had the lowest (11 of 23 [47.8% (95% CI, 26.8%-69.4%)]) proportions of exclusions. Of CCTs testing cytotoxic chemotherapy, 116 of 142 (81.7% [95% CI, 74.3%-87.7%]) had exclusions; 93 of 123 (75.6% [95% CI, 67.0%-82.9%]) CCTs testing targeted therapies alone and 12 of 24 (50.0% [95% CI, 29.1%-70.9%]) testing hormonal therapies alone had exclusions. Among the 113 US- and UK-based trials, exclusions were present in 89 (78.8% [95% CI, 70.1%-85.9%]). Of 71 SACT regimens, 38 (53.5% [95% CI, 41.3%-65.5%]) included dose modifications for ANC values within the DANC reference range. Lung cancer regimens had the highest (23 of 31 [74.2% (95% CI, 55.4%-88.1%)]) and prostate cancer had the lowest (0 of 12 [0 (95% CI, 0%-26.4%)]) proportions of modifications. Regimens including chemotherapy had modifications in 32 of 44 (72.7% [95% CI, 57.2%-85.0%]); 11 of 20 (55.0% [95% CI, 31.5%-76.9%]) of targeted therapy regimens and 0 of 16 (0% [95% CI, 0%-20.6%]) of hormonal therapy regimens had modifications. Among regimens including chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy, modifications were present in 38 of 55 (69.1% [95% CI, 49.7%-73.2%]). In this cross-sectional study, substantial proportions of CCTs excluded and SACT regimens modified doses for patients with ANCs in the DANC reference range. These practices structurally discriminate against patients of African and Middle Eastern ancestry. While determining optimal SACT dose modifications requires further study, CCT exclusion criteria should be revised.

Collecting and reporting adverse events in low-income settings—perspectives from vaccine trials in the Gambia

BackgroundDespite Africa’s significant infectious disease burden, it is underrepresented in global vaccine clinical trials. While this trend is slowly reversing, it is important to recognize and mitigate the challenges that arise when conducting vaccine clinical trials in this environment. These challenges stem from a variety of factors peculiar to the population and may negatively impact adverse event collection and reporting if not properly addressed.MethodsAs a team of clinical researchers working within the MRCG (Medical Research Council Unit The Gambia), we have conducted 12 phase 1 to 3 vaccine trials over the past 10 years. In this article, we discuss the challenges we face and the strategies we have developed to improve the collection and reporting of adverse events in low-income settings.Outcome.Healthcare-seeking behaviors in the Gambia are influenced by spiritual and cultural beliefs as well as barriers to accessing orthodox healthcare; participants in trials may resort to non-orthodox care, reducing the accuracy of reported adverse events. To address this, trial eligibility criteria prohibit self-treatment and herbal product use during trials. Instead, round-the-clock care is provided to trial participants, facilitating safety follow-up.Constraints in the healthcare system in the Gambia such as limitations in diagnostic tools limit the specificity of diagnosis when reporting adverse events. To overcome these challenges, the Medical Research Council Unit maintains a Clinical Services Department, offering medical care and diagnostic services to study participants.Sociocultural factors, including low literacy rates and social influences, impact adverse event collection. Solicited adverse events are collected during home visits on paper-based or electronic report forms.Community engagement meetings are held before each study starts to inform community stakeholders about the study and answer any questions they may have. These meetings ensure that influential members of the community understand the purpose of the study and the risks and benefits of participating in the trial. This understanding makes them more likely to support participation within their communities.ConclusionConducting ethical vaccine clinical trials in resource-limited settings requires strategies to accurately collect and report adverse events. Our experiences from the Gambia offer insights into adverse event collection in these settings.

Screening log: Challenges in community patient recruitment for gynecologic oncology clinical trials

BackgroundClinical trial participation can improve overall survival and mitigate healthcare disparities for gynecologic cancer patients in low-volume community centers. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a centrally regulated but administratively decentralized electronic screening log system to identify eligible patients across a large catchment area for a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center's open clinical trials. MethodsElectronic screening log data collected between 2014 and 2021 from ten community partner sites in a single NCI-designated cancer center's catchment area were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical factors assessed included cancer site, primary versus recurrent disease status, and histology. Identification efficiency (the ratio of patients screened identified with an available trial) was calculated. Identification inefficiencies (failures to identify patients with a potentially relevant trial) were assessed, and etiologies were characterized. ResultsAcross ten community partner sites, 492 gynecologic cancer patients were screened for seven open clinical trials during the study period. This included 170 (34.5 %) ovarian cancer patients, 156 (31.7 %) endometrial cancer patients, and 119 (24.2 %) cervical cancer patients. Over 40 % had advanced stage disease, and 10.6 % had recurrent disease. Only three patients were identified as having a relevant open trial; none ultimately enrolled due to not meeting trial eligibility criteria. An additional 2–52 patients were retrospectively found to have a relevant trial available despite not being identified as such within the electronic screening log system. Up to 14.4 % of patients had one or more missing minimum data elements that hindered full evaluation of clinical trial availability. Re-screening patients when new trials open may identify 12-15 additional patients per recurrent disease trial. ConclusionsAn electronic screening log system can increase awareness of gynecologic oncology clinical trials at a NCI-designated cancer center's community partner sites. However, it is inadequate as a single intervention to increase clinical trial enrollment. Providing adequate support staff, documenting clinical factors consistently, re-screening patients at relevant intervals, and coordinating with central study personnel may increase its utility.

Mediastinal lymph node dissection in segmentectomy for peripheral c-stage IA (≤2 cm) non–small-cell lung cancer

ObjectiveAlthough recent trials on intentional segmentectomy have made mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) mandatory, the necessity of MLND in segmentectomy remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the necessity of MLND in segmentectomy for patients with peripheral stage IA (≤2 cm) non–small cell lung cancer. MethodsOf the 5222 surgical cases for non–small cell lung cancer from 3 institutions between 2010 and 2021, 1457 patients met the JCOG0802 trial eligibility criteria. Initially, we analyzed 574 patients who underwent lobectomy with MLND to identify preoperative risk factors for cN0-pN2 occurrence (cohort 1). Subsequently, we evaluated the relationship between these factors and the cumulative postoperative recurrence in 390 patients who underwent segmentectomy (cohort 2). ResultsIn cohort 1, risk factors for cN0-pN2 occurrence were consolidation-to-tumor ratio = 1.0 and maximum standardized uptake value ≥2.0. When classifying patients into 3 groups (group A, without any factors, group B, with either factor, and group C, with both factors), the occurrence of cN0-pN2 was significantly greater in group C than in the other groups (0.9%, 3.4%, and 8.4%, respectively, P = .005). When classifying patients in cohort 2 using the classification identified in cohort 1 (117, 131, and 142 were categorized into group A, group B, and group C, respectively), the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence rate was significantly greater in group C than in others (2.0%, 2.0%, and 15.9%, respectively, P < .001). ConclusionsMLND is unlikely to be beneficial in intentional segmentectomy for patients with tumors showing consolidation-to-tumor ratio <1.0 and maximum standardized uptake value <2.0.

Investigating patient eligibility for anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment of Alzheimer's disease: real-world data from an Austrian psychiatric memory clinic population.

Pharmacological treatment options for patients with dementia owing to Alzheimer's disease are limited to symptomatic therapy. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the monoclonal antibody lecanemab for the treatment of amyloid-positive patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and early Alzheimer´s dementia. European approval is expected in 2024. Data on the applicability and eligibility for treatment with anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies outside of a study population are lacking. This study examined eligibility criteria for lecanemab in a real-world memory clinic population between 1 January 2022 and 31 July 2023. We conducted a retrospective, single-centre study applying the clinical trial eligibility criteria for lecanemab to out-patients of a specialised psychiatric memory clinic. Eligibility for anti-amyloid treatment was assessed following the phase 3 inclusion and exclusion criteria and the published recommendations for lecanemab. The study population consisted of 587 out-patients. Two-thirds were diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (probable or possible Alzheimer's disease dementia in 43.6% of cases, n = 256) or MCI (23%, n = 135), and 33.4% (n = 196) were diagnosed with dementia or neurocognitive disorder owing to another aetiology. Applying all lecanemab eligibility criteria, 11 (4.3%) patients with dementia and two (1.5%) patients with MCI would have been eligible for treatment with this compound, whereas 13 dementia (5.1%) and 14 (10.4%) MCI patients met clinical inclusion criteria, but had no available amyloid status. Even in a memory clinic with a good infrastructure and sufficient facilities for dementia diagnostics, most patients do not meet the eligibility criteria for treatment with lecanemab.

Kidney function assessment for eligibility in clinical cancer trials – Data from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

PurposeThere is no consensus on how to estimate kidney function for the assessment of eligibility in clinical cancer trials. Patients and methodsWe recalculated the creatinine clearance (CrCl)/glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at baseline in a total of 1768 patients enrolled in twelve clinical trials using the Cockcroft-Gault (CG), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), 2021 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI 2021) and European Kidney Function Consortium (EKFC) formulas. Patients were classified as having renal impairment (RI; CrCl/GFR <60 mL/min) or no renal impairment (NRI; CrCl/GFR ≥60 mL/min) with each of the four formulas, respectively. Furthermore, we analyzed the number of adverse events (AE) per month under study treatment using measures of central tendency, variability and regression models. ResultsUsing CG, EKFC, MDRD and CKD-EPI 2021, 152 (8 %), 140 (8 %), 110 (6 %), and 61 (4 %) patients had RI respectively. Indeed, 47 (3 %) patients had RI using all 4 formulas, while 158 (9 %) had RI by at least one but not all four methods. CG showed the broadest variability and inconsistencies with other methods. All calculation methods performed similarly for excluding patients at risk of severe AE. EKFC demonstrated superior predictive ability for excluding patients at risk of renal and urinary tract AE. ConclusionThis post hoc analysis highlights the importance of choosing accurate and representative methods for kidney function estimation in clinical cancer trials. CG should be replaced by newer methods. While CKD-EPI 2021 may maximize trial accrual, EKFC should be considered for treatment affecting kidney function.

Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Patients Ineligible for Front-line Clinical Trials.

Clinical trials for immunotherapy-based regimens in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have extensive inclusion and exclusion criteria. We investigated the clinical outcomes in a real-world cohort of patients who would not have met the criteria for inclusion in front-line mRCC trials. Patients treated with ipilimumab/nivolumab and axitinib/pembrolizumab for front-line mRCC were identified and divided into clinical trial eligible (CTE) and clinical trial ineligible (CTI) cohorts based on key inclusion or exclusion criteria from their respective Phase-3 registration trials. Clinical outcomes were compared in CTE and CTI cohorts. A total of 62 patients treated with axitinib/pembrolizumab and 103 treated with ipilimumab/nivolumab were identified. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria were similar across CTE and CTI patients in axitinib/pembrolizumab and ipilimumab/nivolumab cohorts. In the axitinib/pembrolizumab cohort (n = 62), 24 (39%) patients were CTI. The major reasons for the ineligibility were lab abnormalities (n = 11), histology (n = 9), and brain metastases (n = 3). There was no significant difference in response rates (P = 0.08). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was numerically longer in CTE patients (28 vs 12 months; P = 0.09). The overall survival (OS) was higher in the CTE patients (P = 0.02). In the ipilimumab/nivolumab cohort (n = 103), 59 (57%) were CTI. The most common reasons for ineligibility were brain metastases (n = 18), lab abnormalities (n = 16), and histology (n = 16). There was no significant difference in response rates (P = 0.22). However, PFS (P = 0.003) and OS (P < 0.0001) were higher in the CTE patients. In conclusion, many real-world patients are ineligible for RCC clinical trials and had worse outcomes when compared to trial-eligible patients. Additional treatment options are needed for these patients, as well as strategies to include them in prospective trials.

Hyaluronic Acid/Platelet-Rich Plasma Mixture Improves Temporomandibular Joint Biomechanics: A Systematic Review.

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is the main component of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) synovial fluid. Arthritis in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) disrupts HA metabolism, resulting in shorter polymeric chain predominance and increased friction. Intra-articular injections of HA supplement the larger molecules of this glycosaminoglycan, and the platelet-rich plasma (PRP) delivered in this way releases growth factors, suppressing inflammation. This PRISMA-compliant PROSPERO-registered (CRD42024564382) systematic review aimed to assess the validity of mixing HA with PRP in the injectable treatment of TMJ disorders. We searched the medical literature for eligible randomized clinical trials using BASE, Google Scholar, PubMed and Scopus engines on 9 May 2024, with no time frame limit. Selected reports were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB2 tool. Numerical data were collected on articular pain and mandibular mobility. We provided mean differences from baseline and between study and control groups at each observation point. The efficacy of TMD treatment with HA/PRP versus HA or PRP alone was assessed meta-analytically. Of 171 identified records, we selected 6 studies. In the 6-month follow-up, the mean advantage of PRP supplementation with HA was 2.52 (SE = 2.44; d = 0.83) mm and the benefit of adding PRP to HA was 1.47 (SE = 2.68; d = 0.34) mm in mandibular abduction. The pain-improvement scores were -1.33 (SE = 1.02; d = -1.05) and -1.18 (SE = 0.92; d = 0.80), respectively. Presumably, the HA/PRP range of therapeutic efficiency includes cases non-respondent to HA or PRP alone.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of substituting soymilk for cow’s milk and intermediate cardiometabolic outcomes: understanding the impact of dairy alternatives in the transition to plant-based diets on cardiometabolic health

BackgroundDietary guidelines recommend a shift to plant-based diets. Fortified soymilk, a prototypical plant protein food used in the transition to plant-based diets, usually contains added sugars to match the sweetness of cow’s milk and is classified as an ultra-processed food. Whether soymilk can replace minimally processed cow’s milk without the adverse cardiometabolic effects attributed to added sugars and ultra-processed foods remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, to assess the effect of substituting soymilk for cow’s milk and its modification by added sugars (sweetened versus unsweetened) on intermediate cardiometabolic outcomes.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched (through June 2024) for randomized controlled trials of ≥ 3 weeks in adults. Outcomes included established markers of blood lipids, glycemic control, blood pressure, inflammation, adiposity, renal disease, uric acid, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). A sub-study of lactose versus sucrose outside of a dairy-like matrix was conducted to explore the role of sweetened soymilk which followed the same methodology.ResultsEligibility criteria were met by 17 trials (n = 504 adults with a range of health statuses), assessing the effect of a median daily dose of 500 mL of soymilk (22 g soy protein and 17.2 g or 6.9 g/250 mL added sugars) in substitution for 500 mL of cow’s milk (24 g milk protein and 24 g or 12 g/250 mL total sugars as lactose) on 19 intermediate outcomes. The substitution of soymilk for cow’s milk resulted in moderate reductions in non-HDL-C (mean difference, − 0.26 mmol/L [95% confidence interval, − 0.43 to − 0.10]), systolic blood pressure (− 8.00 mmHg [− 14.89 to − 1.11]), and diastolic blood pressure (− 4.74 mmHg [− 9.17 to − 0.31]); small important reductions in LDL-C (− 0.19 mmol/L [− 0.29 to − 0.09]) and c-reactive protein (CRP) (− 0.82 mg/L [− 1.26 to − 0.37]); and trivial increases in HDL-C (0.05 mmol/L [0.00 to 0.09]). No other outcomes showed differences. There was no meaningful effect modification by added sugars across outcomes. The certainty of evidence was high for LDL-C and non-HDL-C; moderate for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, CRP, and HDL-C; and generally moderate-to-low for all other outcomes. We could not conduct the sub-study of the effect of lactose versus added sugars, as no eligible trials could be identified.ConclusionsCurrent evidence provides a good indication that replacing cow’s milk with soymilk (including sweetened soymilk) does not adversely affect established cardiometabolic risk factors and may result in advantages for blood lipids, blood pressure, and inflammation in adults with a mix of health statuses. The classification of plant-based dairy alternatives such as soymilk as ultra-processed may be misleading as it relates to their cardiometabolic effects and may need to be reconsidered in the transition to plant-based diets.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05637866.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis

The clinical benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments in treating individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remain controversial. We aimed to review the literature to comprehensively investigate the individual and comparative clinical outcomes of various ICI-based treatment strategies in this population. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we used single-arm, pairwise, and network meta-analytical approaches. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant international conference proceedings from database inception to Jan 31, 2024, without language restrictions, to identify eligible clinical trials that assessed ICI-based treatments for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who progressed on EGFR-TKIs. Studies considered eligible were published and unpublished phase 1, 2, or 3 clinical trials enrolling participants with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had progressed after at least one EGFR-TKI treatment, and that evaluated ICI-based treatment strategies on at least one of the clinical outcomes of interest. The primary outcome analysed was progression-free survival. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021292626. 17 single-arm trials and 15 randomised controlled trials, involving 2886 participants and seven ICI-based treatment strategies (ICI monotherapy, ICI plus chemotherapy [ICI-chemo], ICI plus antiangiogenesis [ICI-antiangio], ICI plus antiangiogenesis plus chemotherapy [ICI-antiangio-chemo], dual ICIs [ICI-ICI], dual ICIs plus chemotherapy [ICI-ICI-chemo], and ICI plus EGFR-TKI [ICI-TKI]), were included. Three of these strategies-ICI monotherapy, ICI-antiangio-chemo, and ICI-chemo-had sufficient data across the included studies to perform a pairwise meta-analysis. The pairwise meta-analysis showed that, compared with chemotherapy, ICI monotherapy led to shorter progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·73 [95% CI 1·30-2·29], I2=0%), whereas ICI-antiangio-chemo (HR 0·54 [0·44-0·67], I2=0%) and ICI-chemo (HR 0·77 [0·67-0·88], I2=0%) prolonged progression-free survival. The network meta-analysis showed that ICI-antiangio-chemo yielded the best progression-free survival results, with substantial benefits over ICI-chemo (HR 0·71 [95% credible interval 0·59-0·85]), ICI monotherapy (HR 0·30 [0·22-0·41]), and non-ICI treatment strategies including antiangio-chemo (HR 0·76 [0·58-1·00]) and chemotherapy alone (HR 0·54 [0·45-0·64]). ICI-antiangio-chemo was associated with higher risks of both any-grade and grade 3 or worse adverse events over ICI-chemo and chemotherapy in the network meta-analysis. For individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who progressed on EGFR-TKIs, ICI-antiangio-chemo was identified as the optimal treatment option. The toxicity of this treatment was acceptable but needs careful attention. ICI-chemo showed appreciably greater efficacy than the standard-of-care chemotherapy. These findings clarified the roles of ICI-based treatment strategies in this difficult-to-treat refractory population, potentially complementing recent guidelines. None.

Do proprioceptive training strategies with dual-task exercises positively influence gait parameters in chronic stroke? A systematic review.

This study aims to assess the impact of proprioceptive training strategies with dual-task exercises on gait in people with chronic stroke. Systematic review. Chronic stroke. Searches were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and PICOS criteria. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were systematically searched from November 2020 to February 2022, for eligible clinical trials. Two independent reviewers thoroughly screened potential articles for relevance and assessed the methodology quality. In accordance with the GRADE, PICOS criteria, and Cochrane risk of bias tools, the authors included articles concerning the effectiveness of dual-task in proprioceptive training on gait parameters in people with chronic stroke. Of 3075 identified studies, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria: 7 were randomized clinical trials, 1 was not randomized, and 3 were observational studies. The overall quality of evidence, assessed using the GRADE framework, was high, indicating a high level of confidence in the systematic review's findings. The papers involved 393 stroke patients; 241 underwent dual-task in proprioceptive training, with 152 participants in other stroke rehabilitation; within the dual-task group, 71 engaged in cognitive tasks, and 170 participated in motor tasks. dual-task in proprioceptive training improved gait speed, cadence, stride time, stride length, and step length. The best effects were observed with training 3 times a week for 4 weeks, with each session lasting 30 minutes, on speed, cadence, stride length, and step length. Current evidence suggests that proprioceptive training strategies with dual-task exercises improved walking abilities in people with chronic stroke. Specifically, it enhanced gait speed, a key indicator of clinical severity.

Global Trial Representation and Availability of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Treatment of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

Background: Evaluating clinical trial representation for countries with different socio-demographic index (SDI) and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) availability for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Methods: CML incidence rates (IRs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) (1999-2019) from the Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation were analyzed. Trials investigating TKI use in CML were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov. Site data for eligible trials (N = 30) and DALYs were analyzed. TKI approvals, DALYs, and IRs were summarized by SDI. Results: North America (NA) had significant decreases in annual percent change (APC) in DALYs and incidence rates from 1999 to 2004. IRs were highest in Europe and Central Asia (ECA) and NA, while DALYs were highest in South Asia (SAsia) and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Countries in the high-SDI quintile were likely to have lower DALYs than lower-SDI quintiles. Differences in regional DALYs vs. sites in TKI trials were significant for SAsia, SSA, and ECA. High-SDI countries were included in all 30 trials, and TKI approvals were prominent in high-SDI (142) vs. low-SDI (14) countries. Conclusions: The inclusion of disproportionately affected countries during the design of and recruitment into clinical trials should occur, as should TKI availability. The lack of representation demonstrates healthcare disparities.