1
|
Gupta S, Subhedar NV, Bell JL, Field D, Bowler U, Hutchison E, Johnson S, Kelsall W, Pepperell J, Roberts T, Sinha S, Stanbury K, Wyllie J, Hardy P, Juszczak E. Trial of Selective Early Treatment of Patent Ductus Arteriosus with Ibuprofen. N Engl J Med 2024; 390:314-325. [PMID: 38265644 PMCID: PMC7615774 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa2305582] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The 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. METHODS We 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. RESULTS A 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. CONCLUSIONS The 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.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- Division of Neonatology, Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar
- Department of Engineering, Durham University, UK
| | | | - Jennifer L. Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - David Field
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, UK
| | - Ursula Bowler
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Elizabeth Hutchison
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Sam Johnson
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, UK
| | - Wilf Kelsall
- NICU, Rosie Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Justine Pepperell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Tracy Roberts
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Sunil Sinha
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Jonathan Wyllie
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - on behalf of the Baby-OSCAR Collaborative Group.
- Division of Neonatology, Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar
- Department of Engineering, Durham University, UK
- Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, UK
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, UK
- NICU, Rosie Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Roehr CC, Marshall AS, Scrivens A, Sadarangani M, Williams R, Yong J, Linsell L, Chiocchia V, Bell JL, Stokes C, Santhanadass P, Nicoll I, Adams E, King A, Murray D, Bowler U, Stanbury K, Juszczak E. Techniques to increase lumbar puncture success in newborn babies: the NeoCLEAR RCT. Health Technol Assess 2023; 27:1-97. [PMID: 38149666 PMCID: PMC11017152 DOI: 10.3310/thjy0671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Background 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. Objectives 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Limitations 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. Conclusion 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. Future work 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. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN14040914 and as Integrated Research Application System registration 223737. Funding 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charles C Roehr
- Department of Paediatrics, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Andrew Sj Marshall
- Department of Paediatrics, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Alexandra Scrivens
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Newborn Care Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Manish Sadarangani
- Vaccine Evaluation Center, BC Children's Hospital Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Rachel Williams
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jean Yong
- Newborn Care Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Virginia Chiocchia
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Caz Stokes
- Support for the Sick Newborn And their Parents (SSNAP) Charity, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Patricia Santhanadass
- Support for the Sick Newborn And their Parents (SSNAP) Charity, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Ian Nicoll
- Newborn Care Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Eleri Adams
- Newborn Care Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Andrew King
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David Murray
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ursula Bowler
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Smith V, Delaney H, Hunter A, Torgerson D, Treweek S, Gamble C, Mills N, Stanbury K, Dempsey E, Daly M, O'Shea J, Weatherup K, Deshpande S, Ryan MA, Lowe J, Black G, Devane D. The development and acceptability of an educational and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials: the TRAIN project. BMC Med Res Methodol 2023; 23:265. [PMID: 37951890 PMCID: PMC10638723 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-023-02086-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Suboptimal or slow recruitment affects 30-50% of trials. Education and training of trial recruiters has been identified as one strategy for potentially boosting recruitment to randomised controlled trials (hereafter referred to as trials). The Training tRial recruiters, An educational INtervention (TRAIN) project was established to develop and assess the acceptability of an education and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. In this paper, we report the development and acceptability of TRAIN. METHODS TRAIN involved three sequential phases, with each phase contributing information to the subsequent phase(s). These phases were 1) evidence synthesis (systematic review of the effectiveness of training interventions and a content analysis of the format, content, and delivery of identified interventions), 2) intervention development using a Partnership (co-design/co-creation) approach, and 3) intervention acceptability assessments with recruiters to neonatal trials. RESULTS TRAIN, accompanied by a comprehensive intervention manual, has been designed for online or in-person delivery. TRAIN can be offered to recruiters before trial recruitment begins or as refresher sessions during a trial. The intervention consists of five core learning outcomes which are addressed across three core training units. These units are the trial protocol (Unit 1, 50 min, trial-specific), understanding randomisation (Unit 2, 5 min, trial-generic) and approaching and engaging with parents (Unit 3, 70 min, trial-generic). Eleven recruiters to neonatal trials registered to attend the acceptability assessment training workshops, although only four took part. All four positively valued the training Units and resources for increasing recruiter preparedness, knowledge, and confidence. More flexibility in how the training is facilitated, however, was noted (e.g., training divided across two workshops of shorter duration). Units 2 and 3 were considered beneficial to incorporate into Good Clinical Practice Training or as part of induction training for new staff joining neonatal units. CONCLUSION TRAIN offers a comprehensive co-produced training and education intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. TRAIN was deemed acceptable, with minor modification, to neonatal trial recruiters. The small number of recruiters taking part in the acceptability assessment is a limitation. Scale-up of TRAIN with formal piloting and testing for effectiveness in a large cluster randomised trial is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V Smith
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
| | - H Delaney
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - A Hunter
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - D Torgerson
- York Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK
| | - S Treweek
- Health Services Research Unit, Trial Forge, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - C Gamble
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - N Mills
- QuinteT, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - K Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - E Dempsey
- INFANT Centre, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - M Daly
- Irish Neonatal Health Alliance, Public and Patient Involvement Contributor, Bray, Co-Wicklow, Ireland
| | - J O'Shea
- Public and Patient Involvement Contributor, Royal Hospital for Children, Glasgow, UK
| | - K Weatherup
- Public and Patient Involvement Contributor, Oxford, UK
| | | | - M A Ryan
- INFANT Centre, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - J Lowe
- Centre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - G Black
- Royal Hospital for Children and Young People, Edinburgh, UK
| | - D Devane
- Health Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Knight M, Ramakrishnan R, Ratushnyak S, Rivero-Arias O, Bell J, Bowler U, Buchanan P, Carter C, Cole C, Hewer O, Hurd M, King A, Juszczak E, Linsell L, Long AM, Mottram L, Murray D, Oddie S, Quigley M, Stalker V, Stanbury K, Welsh R, Hardy P. Frenotomy with breastfeeding support versus breastfeeding support alone for infants with tongue-tie and breastfeeding difficulties: the FROSTTIE RCT. Health Technol Assess 2023; 27:1-73. [PMID: 37839892 PMCID: PMC10591207 DOI: 10.3310/wbbw2302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Tongue-tie can be diagnosed in 3-11% of babies, with some studies reporting almost universal breastfeeding difficulties, and others reporting very few feeding difficulties that relate to the tongue-tie itself, instead noting that incorrect positioning and attachment are the primary reasons behind the observed breastfeeding difficulties and not the tongue-tie itself. The only existing trials of frenotomy are small and underpowered and/or include only very short-term or subjective outcomes. Objective To investigate whether frenotomy is clinically and cost-effective to promote continuation of breastfeeding at 3 months in infants with breastfeeding difficulties diagnosed with tongue-tie. Design A multicentre, unblinded, randomised, parallel group controlled trial. Setting Twelve infant feeding services in the UK. Participants Infants aged up to 10 weeks referred to an infant feeding service (by a parent, midwife or other breastfeeding support service) with breastfeeding difficulties and judged to have tongue-tie. Interventions Infants were randomly allocated to frenotomy with standard breastfeeding support or standard breastfeeding support without frenotomy. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was any breastmilk feeding at 3 months according to maternal self-report. Secondary outcomes included mother's pain, exclusive breastmilk feeding, exclusive direct breastfeeding, frenotomy, adverse events, maternal anxiety and depression, maternal and infant NHS health-care resource use, cost-effectiveness, and any breastmilk feeding at 6 months of age. Results Between March 2019 and November 2020, 169 infants were randomised, 80 to the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm and 89 to the breastfeeding support arm from a planned sample size of 870 infants. The trial was stopped in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic due to withdrawal of breastfeeding support services, slow recruitment and crossover between arms. In the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm 74/80 infants (93%) received their allocated intervention, compared to 23/89 (26%) in the breastfeeding support arm. Primary outcome data were available for 163/169 infants (96%). There was no evidence of a difference between the arms in the rate of breastmilk feeding at 3 months, which was high in both groups (67/76, 88% vs. 75/87, 86%; adjusted risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.16). Adverse events were reported for three infants after surgery [bleeding (n = 1), salivary duct damage (n = 1), accidental cut to the tongue and salivary duct damage (n = 1)]. Cost-effectiveness could not be determined with the information available. Limitations The statistical power of the analysis was extremely limited due to not achieving the target sample size and the high proportion of infants in the breastfeeding support arm who underwent frenotomy. Conclusions This trial does not provide sufficient information to assess whether frenotomy in addition to breastfeeding support improves breastfeeding rates in infants diagnosed with tongue-tie. Future work There is a clear lack of equipoise in the UK concerning the use of frenotomy, however, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the procedure still need to be established. Other study designs will need to be considered to address this objective. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN 10268851. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 16/143/01) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder had no role in study design or data collection, analysis and interpretation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marian Knight
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Rema Ramakrishnan
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Svetlana Ratushnyak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Oliver Rivero-Arias
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jennifer Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ursula Bowler
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Phyll Buchanan
- PPI representative, The Breastfeeding Network, Paisley, UK
| | | | - Christina Cole
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Oliver Hewer
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Madeleine Hurd
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Andy King
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ed Juszczak
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anna-May Long
- Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Linda Mottram
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David Murray
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Sam Oddie
- Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Maria Quigley
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Victoria Stalker
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Richard Welsh
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mitchell TK, Hall NJ, Yardley I, Cole C, Hardy P, King A, Murray D, Nuthall E, Roehr C, Stanbury K, Williams R, Pearce J, Woolfall K. Mixed-methods feasibility study to inform a randomised controlled trial of proton pump inhibitors to reduce strictures following neonatal surgery for oesophageal atresia. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e066070. [PMID: 37080617 PMCID: PMC10124212 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066070] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/22/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This mixed-methods feasibility study aimed to explore parents' and medical practitioners' views on the acceptability and design of a clinical trial to determine whether routine prophylactic proton pump inhibitors (PPI) reduce the incidence of anastomotic stricture in infants with oesophageal atresia (OA). DESIGN Semi-structured interviews with UK parents of an infant with OA and an online survey, telephone interviews and focus groups with clinicians. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING We interviewed 18 parents of infants with OA. Fifty-one clinicians (49 surgeons, 2 neonatologists) from 20/25 (80%) units involved in OA repair completed an online survey and 10 took part in 1 of 2 focus groups. Interviews were conducted with two clinicians whose survey responses indicated they had concerns about the trial. OUTCOME MEASURES Parents and clinicians ranked the same top four outcomes ('Severity of anastomotic stricture', 'Incidence of anastomotic stricture', 'Need for treatment of reflux' and 'Presence of symptoms of reflux') as important to measure for the proposed trial. RESULTS All parents and most clinicians found the use, dose and duration of omeprazole as the intervention medication, and the placebo control, as acceptable. Parents stated they would hypothetically consent to their child's participation in the trial. Concerns of a few parents and clinicians about infants suffering with symptomatic reflux, and the impact of this for study retention, appeared to be alleviated through the symptomatic reflux treatment pathway. Hesitant clinician views appeared to change through discussion of parental support for the study and by highlighting existing research that questions current practice of PPI treatment. CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that parents and most clinicians view the proposed Treating Oesophageal Atresia with prophylactic proton pump inhibitors to prevent STricture (TOAST) trial to be feasible and acceptable so long as infants can be given PPI if clinicians deem it clinically necessary. This insight into parent and clinician views and concerns will inform pilot phase trial monitoring, staff training and the development of the trial protocol.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tracy Karen Mitchell
- Department of Public Health, Policy and Systems, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Nigel J Hall
- University Surgery Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Iain Yardley
- Evelina Children's Hospital, Guy's & St. Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College, London, UK
| | - Christina Cole
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Andy King
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David Murray
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Elizabeth Nuthall
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Charles Roehr
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Rachel Williams
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Kerry Woolfall
- Department of Public Health, Policy and Systems, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chappell LC, Brocklehurst P, Green M, Hardy P, Hunter R, Beardmore-Gray A, Bowler U, Brockbank A, Chiocchia V, Cox A, Duhig K, Fleminger J, Gill C, Greenland M, Hendy E, Kennedy A, Leeson P, Linsell L, McCarthy FP, O'Driscoll J, Placzek A, Poston L, Robson S, Rushby P, Sandall J, Scholtz L, Seed PT, Sparkes J, Stanbury K, Tohill S, Thilaganathan B, Townend J, Juszczak E, Marlow N, Shennan A. Planned delivery for pre-eclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation: the PHOENIX RCT. Health Technol Assess 2022:10.3310/CWWH0622. [PMID: 36547875 PMCID: PMC10068586 DOI: 10.3310/cwwh0622] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia (i.e. at 34+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation), the optimal delivery time is unclear because limitation of maternal-fetal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether or not planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of perinatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management, in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS We undertook an individually randomised, triple non-masked controlled trial in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, with an embedded health economic evaluation, comparing planned delivery and expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. The co-primary maternal outcome was a maternal morbidity composite or recorded systolic blood pressure of ≥ 160 mmHg (superiority hypothesis). The co-primary short-term perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission (non-inferiority hypothesis). Analyses were by intention to treat, with an additional per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The primary 2-year infant neurodevelopmental outcome was measured using the PARCA-R (Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised) composite score. The planned sample size of the trial was 900 women; the trial is now completed. We undertook two linked substudies. RESULTS Between 29 September 2014 and 10 December 2018, 901 women were recruited; 450 women [448 women (two withdrew consent) and 471 infants] were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants) were allocated to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group [289 (65%) women] than in the expectant management group [338 (75%) women] (adjusted relative risk 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.94; p = 0.0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome was significantly higher in the planned delivery group [196 (42%) infants] than in the expectant management group [159 (34%) infants] (adjusted relative risk 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.47; p = 0.0034), but indicators of neonatal morbidity were similar in both groups. At 2-year follow-up, the mean PARCA-R scores were 89.5 points (standard deviation 18.2 points) for the planned delivery group (290 infants) and 91.9 points (standard deviation 18.4 points) for the expectant management group (256 infants), both within the normal developmental range (adjusted mean difference -2.4 points, 95% confidence interval -5.4 to 0.5 points; non-inferiority p = 0.147). Planned delivery was significantly cost-saving (-£2711, 95% confidence interval -£4840 to -£637) compared with expectant management. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group. CONCLUSION In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, planned delivery reduces short-term maternal morbidity compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater short-term neonatal morbidity (such as need for respiratory support). At 2-year follow-up, around 60% of parents reported follow-up scores. Average infant development was within the normal range for both groups; the small between-group mean difference in PARCA-R scores is unlikely to be clinically important. Planned delivery was significantly cost-saving to the health service. These findings should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision-making on timing of delivery. LIMITATIONS Limitations of the trial include the challenges of finding a perinatal outcome that adequately represented the potential risks of both groups and a maternal outcome that reflects the multiorgan manifestations of pre-eclampsia. The incidences of maternal and perinatal primary outcomes were higher than anticipated on the basis of previous studies, but this did not limit interpretation of the analysis. The trial was limited by a higher loss to follow-up rate than expected, meaning that the extent and direction of bias in outcomes (between responders and non-responders) is uncertain. A longer follow-up period (e.g. up to 5 years) would have enabled us to provide further evidence on long-term infant outcomes, but this runs the risk of greater attrition and increased expense. FUTURE WORK We identified a number of further questions that could be prioritised through a formal scoping process, including uncertainties around disease-modifying interventions, prognostic factors, longer-term follow-up, the perspectives of women and their families, meta-analysis with other studies, effect of a similar intervention in other health-care settings, and clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of other related policies around neonatal unit admission in late preterm birth. TRIAL REGISTRATION The trial was prospectively registered as ISRCTN01879376. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in Health Technology Assessment. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy C Chappell
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Peter Brocklehurst
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Rachael Hunter
- Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Ursula Bowler
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anna Brockbank
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Virginia Chiocchia
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Alice Cox
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Kate Duhig
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | | | - Carolyn Gill
- Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Melanie Greenland
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Eleanor Hendy
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Ann Kennedy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Paul Leeson
- Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Fergus P McCarthy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - Jamie O'Driscoll
- School of Psychology and Life Sciences, Canterbury Christ Church University, Kent, UK
| | - Anna Placzek
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Lucilla Poston
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Robson
- Population Health Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Pauline Rushby
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jane Sandall
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Laura Scholtz
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Paul T Seed
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Jenie Sparkes
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Sue Tohill
- Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Basky Thilaganathan
- Fetal Medicine Unit, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Edmund Juszczak
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Neil Marlow
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Andrew Shennan
- School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Levene I, Bell JL, Cole C, Stanbury K, O'Brien F, Fewtrell M, Quigley MA. Comparing the effect of a lactation-specific relaxation and visualisation intervention versus standard care on lactation and mental health outcomes in mothers of very premature infants (the EXPRESS trial): study protocol for a multi-centre, unmasked, randomised, parallel-group trial. Trials 2022; 23:611. [PMID: 35906655 PMCID: PMC9335469 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06570-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Premature birth is the leading cause of neonatal death and can cause major morbidity. Maximising the amount of maternal breastmilk given to very premature infants is important to improve outcomes, but this can be challenging for parents. Parents of infants receiving neonatal care also have high rates of anxiety and distress. There is growing evidence for the impact of maternal relaxation interventions on lactation, as well as mental health. The trial will assess whether a brief self-directed relaxation and visualisation intervention, recommended for use several times a day during expression of milk, improves lactation and mental health outcomes for mothers of very premature infants. Methods Multi-centre, randomised, controlled, unmasked, parallel-group trial with planned 132 participants who have experienced premature birth between 23 weeks and 31 weeks and 6 days of gestation and plan to express milk for at least 14 days. The primary outcome is the highest 24-h expressed milk yield recorded on any of day 4, day 14 or day 21 after birth. Secondary outcomes include exclusive breastmilk feeding at 36 weeks post-menstrual age and at 4 months after the estimated date of delivery, Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Index at day 21 and Post-traumatic stress Check List (for DSM 5) at day 21. Discussion Breastmilk feeding for premature infants is an important research priority, but there are few randomised controlled trials assessing interventions to help parents reach lactation goals in this challenging context. This trial will assess whether a no cost, easily scalable relaxation tool has a role in this setting. Given the lack of harm and potential for immediate dissemination, even a small benefit could have an important global impact. Trial registration ISRCTN16356650. Date assigned: 19/04/2021. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06570-9.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilana Levene
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Christina Cole
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Frances O'Brien
- Newborn Care, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust & Faculty of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Mary Fewtrell
- UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Maria A Quigley
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Maheshwari A, Bari V, Bell JL, Bhattacharya S, Bhide P, Bowler U, Brison D, Child T, Chong HY, Cheong Y, Cole C, Coomarasamy A, Cutting R, Goodgame F, Hardy P, Hamoda H, Juszczak E, Khalaf Y, King A, Kurinczuk JJ, Lavery S, Lewis-Jones C, Linsell L, Macklon N, Mathur R, Murray D, Pundir J, Raine-Fenning N, Rajkohwa M, Robinson L, Scotland G, Stanbury K, Troup S. Transfer of thawed frozen embryo versus fresh embryo to improve the healthy baby rate in women undergoing IVF: the E-Freeze RCT. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-142. [PMID: 35603917 PMCID: PMC9376799 DOI: 10.3310/aefu1104] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Freezing all embryos, followed by thawing and transferring them into the uterine cavity at a later stage (freeze-all), instead of fresh-embryo transfer may lead to improved pregnancy rates and fewer complications during in vitro fertilisation and pregnancies resulting from it. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate if a policy of freeze-all results in a higher healthy baby rate than the current policy of transferring fresh embryos. DESIGN This was a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial. SETTING Eighteen in vitro fertilisation clinics across the UK participated from February 2016 to April 2019. PARTICIPANTS Couples undergoing their first, second or third cycle of in vitro fertilisation treatment in which the female partner was aged < 42 years. INTERVENTIONS If at least three good-quality embryos were present on day 3 of embryo development, couples were randomly allocated to either freeze-all (intervention) or fresh-embryo transfer (control). OUTCOMES The primary outcome was a healthy baby, defined as a live, singleton baby born at term, with an appropriate weight for their gestation. Secondary outcomes included ovarian hyperstimulation, live birth and clinical pregnancy rates, complications of pregnancy and childbirth, health economic outcome, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory scores. RESULTS A total of 1578 couples were consented and 619 couples were randomised. Most non-randomisations were because of the non-availability of at least three good-quality embryos (n = 476). Of the couples randomised, 117 (19%) did not adhere to the allocated intervention. The rate of non-adherence was higher in the freeze-all arm, with the leading reason being patient choice. The intention-to-treat analysis showed a healthy baby rate of 20.3% in the freeze-all arm and 24.4% in the fresh-embryo transfer arm (risk ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.15). Similar results were obtained using complier-average causal effect analysis (risk ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.10), per-protocol analysis (risk ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.26) and as-treated analysis (risk ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.29). The risk of ovarian hyperstimulation was 3.6% in the freeze-all arm and 8.1% in the fresh-embryo transfer arm (risk ratio 0.44, 99% confidence interval 0.15 to 1.30). There were no statistically significant differences between the freeze-all and the fresh-embryo transfer arms in the live birth rates (28.3% vs. 34.3%; risk ratio 0.83, 99% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.06) and clinical pregnancy rates (33.9% vs. 40.1%; risk ratio 0.85, 99% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.11). There was no statistically significant difference in anxiety scores for male participants (mean difference 0.1, 99% confidence interval -2.4 to 2.6) and female participants (mean difference 0.0, 99% confidence interval -2.2 to 2.2) between the arms. The economic analysis showed that freeze-all had a low probability of being cost-effective in terms of the incremental cost per healthy baby and incremental cost per live birth. LIMITATIONS We were unable to reach the original planned sample size of 1086 and the rate of non-adherence to the allocated intervention was much higher than expected. CONCLUSION When efficacy, safety and costs are considered, freeze-all is not better than fresh-embryo transfer. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered as ISRCTN61225414. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abha Maheshwari
- Aberdeen Fertility Centre, NHS Grampian and University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Vasha Bari
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Priya Bhide
- Assisted Conception Unit, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ursula Bowler
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Daniel Brison
- Assisted Conception Unit, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Tim Child
- Oxford Fertility, The Fertility Partnership, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Huey Yi Chong
- Aberdeen Fertility Centre, NHS Grampian and University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Ying Cheong
- Complete Fertility Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Christina Cole
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Arri Coomarasamy
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Rachel Cutting
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London, UK
| | - Fiona Goodgame
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Haitham Hamoda
- Assisted Conception Unit, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Yacoub Khalaf
- Assisted Conception Unit and Centre for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital and King's College London, London, UK
| | - Andrew King
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jennifer J Kurinczuk
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Stuart Lavery
- Assisted Conception Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Louise Linsell
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Nick Macklon
- London Women's Clinic, London, UK.,Gynaecology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Raj Mathur
- Assisted Conception Unit, St Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK
| | - David Murray
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jyotsna Pundir
- Assisted Conception Unit, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK
| | | | | | - Lynne Robinson
- Gyanecology and Assisted Conception, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Graham Scotland
- Aberdeen Fertility Centre, NHS Grampian and University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- Clinical Trials Unit National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Maheshwari A, Bell JL, Bhide P, Brison D, Child T, Chong HY, Cheong Y, Cole C, Coomarasamy A, Cutting R, Hardy P, Hamoda H, Juszczak E, Khalaf Y, Kurinczuk JJ, Lavery S, Linsell L, Macklon N, Mathur R, Pundir J, Raine-Fenning N, Rajkohwa M, Scotland G, Stanbury K, Troup S, Bhattacharya S. Elective freezing of embryos versus fresh embryo transfer in IVF: a multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK (E-Freeze). Hum Reprod 2022; 37:476-487. [PMID: 34999830 PMCID: PMC9206534 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deab279] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Revised: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION Does a policy of elective freezing of embryos, followed by frozen embryo transfer result in a higher healthy baby rate, after first embryo transfer, when compared with the current policy of transferring fresh embryos? SUMMARY ANSWER This study, although limited by sample size, provides no evidence to support the adoption of a routine policy of elective freeze in preference to fresh embryo transfer in order to improve IVF effectiveness in obtaining a healthy baby. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The policy of freezing all embryos followed by frozen embryo transfer is associated with a higher live birth rate for high responders but a similar/lower live birth after first embryo transfer and cumulative live birth rate for normal responders. Frozen embryo transfer is associated with a lower risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), preterm delivery and low birthweight babies but a higher risk of large babies and pre-eclampsia. There is also uncertainty about long-term outcomes, hence shifting to a policy of elective freezing for all remains controversial given the delay in treatment and extra costs involved in freezing all embryos. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A pragmatic two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (E-Freeze) was conducted across 18 clinics in the UK from 2016 to 2019. A total of 619 couples were randomized (309 to elective freeze/310 to fresh). The primary outcome was a healthy baby after first embryo transfer (term, singleton live birth with appropriate weight for gestation); secondary outcomes included OHSS, live birth, clinical pregnancy, pregnancy complications and cost-effectiveness. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Couples undergoing their first, second or third cycle of IVF/ICSI treatment, with at least three good quality embryos on Day 3 where the female partner was ≥18 and <42 years of age were eligible. Those using donor gametes, undergoing preimplantation genetic testing or planning to freeze all their embryos were excluded. IVF/ICSI treatment was carried out according to local protocols. Women were followed up for pregnancy outcome after first embryo transfer following randomization. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Of the 619 couples randomized, 307 and 309 couples in the elective freeze and fresh transfer arms, respectively, were included in the primary analysis. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in outcomes in the elective freeze group compared to the fresh embryo transfer group: healthy baby rate {20.3% (62/307) versus 24.4% (75/309); risk ratio (RR), 95% CI: 0.84, 0.62 to 1.15}; OHSS (3.6% versus 8.1%; RR, 99% CI: 0.44, 0.15 to 1.30); live birth rate (28.3% versus 34.3%; RR, 99% CI 0.83, 0.65 to 1.06); and miscarriage (14.3% versus 12.9%; RR, 99% CI: 1.09, 0.72 to 1.66). Adherence to allocation was poor in the elective freeze group. The elective freeze approach was more costly and was unlikely to be cost-effective in a UK National Health Service context. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION We have only reported on first embryo transfer after randomization; data on the cumulative live birth rate requires further follow-up. Planned target sample size was not obtained and the non-adherence to allocation rate was high among couples in the elective freeze arm owing to patient preference for fresh embryo transfer, but an analysis which took non-adherence into account showed similar results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Results from the E-Freeze trial do not lend support to the policy of electively freezing all for everyone, taking both efficacy, safety and costs considerations into account. This method should only be adopted if there is a definite clinical indication. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (13/115/82). This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (NIHR unique award identifier) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care. J.L.B., C.C., E.J., P.H., J.J.K., L.L. and G.S. report receipt of funding from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. J.L.B., E.J., P.H., K.S. and L.L. report receipt of funding from NIHR, during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work. A.M. reports grants from NIHR personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees for lectures from Merck Serono, Ferring and Cooks outside the submitted work; travel/meeting support from Ferring and Pharmasure and participation in a Ferring advisory board. S.B. reports receipt of royalties and licenses from Cambridge University Press, a board membership role for NHS Grampian and other financial or non-financial interests related to his roles as Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and Editor and Contributing Author of Reproductive Medicine for the MRCOG, Cambridge University Press. D.B. reports grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study; grants from European Commission, grants from Diabetes UK, grants from NIHR, grants from ESHRE, grants from MRC, outside the submitted work. Y.C. reports speaker fees from Merck Serono, and advisory board role for Merck Serono and shares in Complete Fertility. P.H. reports membership of the HTA Commissioning Committee. E.J. reports membership of the NHS England and NIHR Partnership Programme, membership of five Data Monitoring Committees (Chair of two), membership of six Trial Steering Committees (Chair of four), membership of the Northern Ireland Clinical Trials Unit Advisory Group and Chair of the board of Oxford Brain Health Clinical Trials Unit. R.M. reports consulting fees from Gedeon Richter, honorarium from Merck, support fees for attendance at educational events and conferences for Merck, Ferring, Bessins and Gedeon Richter, payments for participation on a Merck Safety or Advisory Board, Chair of the British Fertility Society and payments for an advisory role to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. G.S. reports travel and accommodation fees for attendance at a health economic advisory board from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. N.R.-F. reports shares in Nurture Fertility. Other authors' competing interests: none declared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN: 61225414. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 29 December 2015. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 16 February 2016.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abha Maheshwari
- Aberdeen Fertility Centre, NHS Grampian and University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Priya Bhide
- Assisted Conception Unit, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Daniel Brison
- Assisted Conception Unit, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Tim Child
- Oxford Fertility, TFP, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Huey Yi Chong
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Ying Cheong
- Complete Fertility, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Christina Cole
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Arri Coomarasamy
- Department of Metabolomics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Haitham Hamoda
- Assisted Conception Unit, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.,Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Yacoub Khalaf
- Assisted Conception Unit and Centre for Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital and King's College London, London, UK
| | - Jennifer J Kurinczuk
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Nick Macklon
- London Women's Clinic, London, UK.,University of Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Raj Mathur
- Assisted Conception Unit, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester, UK
| | - Jyotsna Pundir
- Assisted Conception Unit, St. Bartholomew's Hospital and Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | | | - Graham Scotland
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gupta S, Juszczak E, Hardy P, Subhedar N, Wyllie J, Kelsall W, Sinha S, Johnson S, Roberts T, Hutchison E, Pepperell J, Linsell L, Bell JL, Stanbury K, Laube M, Edwards C, Field D. Correction to: Study protocol: baby-OSCAR Trial: Outcome after Selective early treatment for Closure of patent ductus ARteriosus in preterm babies, a multicentre, masked, randomised placebo-controlled parallel group trial. BMC Pediatr 2021; 21:326. [PMID: 34315421 PMCID: PMC8314597 DOI: 10.1186/s12887-021-02785-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- University Hospital of North Tees, Hardwick Road, Stockton-On-Tees, TS19 8PE, UK.
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.,Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, University Park Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.,Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Nimish Subhedar
- Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK
| | - Jonathan Wyllie
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK
| | - Wilf Kelsall
- NICU, Rosie Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital Foundation Trust, Cambridge, CB2 2QQ, UK
| | - Sunil Sinha
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK
| | - Sam Johnson
- Department of Health Science, The University of Leicester, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
| | - Tracy Roberts
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Elisabeth Hutchison
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Justine Pepperell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Marketa Laube
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Clare Edwards
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road, Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - David Field
- Department of Health Science, The University of Leicester, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Gupta S, Juszczak E, Hardy P, Subhedar N, Wyllie J, Kelsall W, Sinha S, Johnson S, Roberts T, Hutchison E, Pepperell J, Linsell L, Bell JL, Stanbury K, Laube M, Edwards C, Field D. Study protocol: baby-OSCAR trial: Outcome after Selective early treatment for Closure of patent ductus ARteriosus in preterm babies, a multicentre, masked, randomised placebo-controlled parallel group trial. BMC Pediatr 2021; 21:100. [PMID: 33637074 PMCID: PMC7908699 DOI: 10.1186/s12887-021-02558-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2020] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The question of whether to treat patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) early or wait until symptoms appear remains high on the research agenda for neonatal medicine. Around 7000 extremely preterm babies under 29 weeks' gestation are born in the UK every year. In 40% of cases the PDA will fail to close spontaneously, even by 4 months of age. Untreated PDA can be associated with several serious and life-threatening short and long-term complications. Reliable data to support clinical decisions about PDA treatment are needed to prevent serious complications in high risk babies, while minimising undue exposure of infants. With the availability of routine bedside echocardiography, babies with a large PDA can be diagnosed before they become symptomatic. METHODS This is a multicentre, masked, randomised, placebo-controlled parallel group trial to determine if early-targeted treatment of a large PDA with parenteral ibuprofen in extremely preterm babies (23+ 0-28+ 6 weeks' gestation) improves short and long-term health and economic outcomes. With parental informed consent, extremely preterm babies (born between 23+ 0-28+ 6 weeks' gestation) admitted to tertiary neonatal units are screened using echocardiography. Babies with a large PDA on echocardiography, defined by diameter of at least 1.5 mm and unrestricted pulsatile PDA flow pattern, are randomly allocated to either ibuprofen or placebo within 72 h of birth. The primary endpoint is the composite outcome of death by 36 weeks' postmenstrual age or moderate or severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. DISCUSSION Prophylactic pharmacological treatment of all preterm babies unnecessarily exposes them to potentially serious side effects of drug treatment, when their PDA may have closed spontaneously. However, delaying treatment until babies become symptomatic could result in loss of treatment benefit as irreversible damage may have already been done. Targeted, early pharmacological treatment of PDA in asymptomatic babies has the potential to overcome the disadvantages of both prophylactic (overtreatment) and symptomatic approaches (potentially too late). This could result in improvements in the clinically important short-term clinical (mortality and moderate or severe BPD at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age) and long-term health outcomes (moderate or severe neurodevelopment disability and respiratory morbidity) measured at 2 years corrected age. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN84264977 . Date assigned: 15/09/2010.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samir Gupta
- University Hospital of North Tees, Hardwick Road, Stockton-On-Tees, TS19 8PE, UK.
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, University Park Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
| | - Pollyanna Hardy
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Nimish Subhedar
- Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK
| | - Jonathan Wyllie
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK
| | - Wilf Kelsall
- NICU, Rosie Hospital, Cambridge University Hospital Foundation Trust, Cambridge, CB2 2QQ, UK
| | - Sunil Sinha
- South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK
| | - Sam Johnson
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
| | - Tracy Roberts
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
| | - Elisabeth Hutchison
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Justine Pepperell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Jennifer L Bell
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Marketa Laube
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - Clare Edwards
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK
| | - David Field
- The University of Leicester, Department of Health Science, University Road, George Davies Centre, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Gale C, Modi N, Jawad S, Culshaw L, Dorling J, Bowler U, Forster A, King A, McLeish J, Linsell L, Turner MA, Robberts H, Stanbury K, van Staa T, Juszczak E. The WHEAT pilot trial-WithHolding Enteral feeds Around packed red cell Transfusion to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in preterm neonates: a multicentre, electronic patient record (EPR), randomised controlled point-of-care pilot trial. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e033543. [PMID: 31542771 PMCID: PMC6756449 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033543] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) is a potentially devastating neonatal disease. A temporal association between red cell transfusion and NEC is well described. Observational data suggest that withholding enteral feeds around red cell transfusions may reduce the risk of NEC but this has not been tested in randomised trials; current UK practice varies. Prevention of NEC is a research priority but no appropriately powered trials have addressed this question. The use of a simplified opt-out consent model and embedding trial processes within existing electronic patient record (EPR) systems provide opportunities to increase trial efficiency and recruitment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will undertake a randomised, controlled, multicentre, unblinded, pilot trial comparing two care pathways: continuing milk feeds (before, during and after red cell transfusions) and withholding milk feeds (for 4 hours before, during and for 4 hours after red cell transfusions), with infants randomly assigned with equal probability. We will use opt-out consent. A nested qualitative study will explore parent and health professional views. Infants will be eligible if born at <30+0 gestational weeks+days. Primary feasibility outcomes will be rate of recruitment, opt-out, retention, compliance, data completeness and data accuracy; clinical outcomes will include mortality and NEC. The trial will recruit in two neonatal networks in England for 9 months. Data collection will continue until all infants have reached 40+0 corrected gestational weeks or neonatal discharge. Participant identification and recruitment, randomisation and all trial data collection will be embedded within existing neonatal EPR systems (BadgerNet and BadgerEPR); outcome data will be extracted from routinely recorded data held in the National Neonatal Research Database. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study holds Research Ethics Committee approval to use an opt-out approach to consent. Results will inform future EPR-embedded and data-enabled trials and will be disseminated through conferences, publications and parent-centred information. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN registry ISRCTN62501859; Pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chris Gale
- Neonatal Medicine, School of Public Health, Chelsea and Westminster campus, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Neena Modi
- Neonatal Medicine, School of Public Health, Chelsea and Westminster campus, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Sena Jawad
- Neonatal Medicine, School of Public Health, Chelsea and Westminster campus, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Lucy Culshaw
- Bliss - The National Charity for the Newborn, London, UK
| | - Jon Dorling
- Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Ursula Bowler
- Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| | - Amanda Forster
- Neonatal Unit, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Andy King
- Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| | - Jenny McLeish
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| | - Louise Linsell
- Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| | - Mark A Turner
- Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Helen Robberts
- Parent of Preterm Twins, Bliss - The National Charity for the Newborn, London, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| | - Tjeerd van Staa
- Centre for Health Informatics, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Science, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Ed Juszczak
- Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Williams FLR, Ogston S, Hume R, Watson J, Stanbury K, Willatts P, Boelen A, Juszczak E, Brocklehurst P. Supplemental Iodide for Preterm Infants and Developmental Outcomes at 2 Years: An RCT. Pediatrics 2017; 139:peds.2016-3703. [PMID: 28557747 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-3703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/23/2017] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The recommendation for enteral iodide intake for preterm infants is 30 to 40 μg/kg per day and 1 μg/kg per day for parenteral intake. Preterm infants are vulnerable to iodide insufficiency and thyroid dysfunction. The hypothesis tested whether, compared with placebo, iodide supplementation of preterm infants improves neurodevelopment. METHODS A randomized controlled trial of iodide supplementation versus placebo in infants <31 weeks' gestation. Trial solutions (sodium iodide or sodium chloride; dose 30 μg/kg per day) were given within 42 hours of birth to the equivalent of 34 weeks' gestation. The only exclusion criterion was maternal iodide exposure during pregnancy or delivery. Whole blood levels of thyroxine, thyrotropin, and thyroid-binding globulin were measured on 4 specific postnatal days. The primary outcome was neurodevelopmental status at 2 years of age, measured by using the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III. The primary analyses are by intention-to-treat, and data are presented also for survivors. RESULTS One thousand two hundred seventy-three infants (637 intervention, 636 placebo) were recruited from 21 UK neonatal units. One hundred thirty-one infants died, and neurodevelopmental assessments were undertaken in 498 iodide and 499 placebo-supplemented infants. There were no significant differences between the intervention and placebo groups in the primary outcome: mean difference cognitive score, -0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.57 to 1.89; motor composite score, 0.21, 95% CI -2.23 to 2.65; and language composite score, -0.05, 95% CI -2.48 to 2.39. There was evidence of weak interaction between iodide supplementation and hypothyroxinemic status in the language composite score and 1 subtest score. CONCLUSIONS Overall iodide supplementation provided no benefit to neurodevelopment measured at 2 years of age.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona L R Williams
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom;
| | - Simon Ogston
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
| | - Robert Hume
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
| | - Jennifer Watson
- Division of Population Health Sciences, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, NPEU Clinical Trials Unit, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Willatts
- Department of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
| | - Anita Boelen
- Neonatal Screening Laboratory, Laboratory of Endocrinology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands; and
| | - Edmund Juszczak
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, NPEU Clinical Trials Unit, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Brocklehurst
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
de Groot N, Stanbury K, de Vos-Rouweler AJM, de Groot NG, Poirier N, Blancho G, de Luna C, Doxiadis GGM, Bontrop RE. A quick and robust MHC typing method for free-ranging and captive primate species. Immunogenetics 2017; 69:231-240. [PMID: 28084496 PMCID: PMC5350218 DOI: 10.1007/s00251-016-0968-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2016] [Accepted: 12/27/2016] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Gene products of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) of human and non-human primates play a crucial role in adaptive immunity, and most of the relevant genes not only show a high degree of variability (polymorphism) but also copy number variation (CNV) is observed. Due to this diversity, MHC proteins influence the capability of individuals to cope with various pathogens. MHC and/or MHC-linked gene products such as odorant receptor genes are thought to influence mate choice and reproductive success. Therefore, MHC typing of wild and captive primate populations is considered to be useful in conservation biology, which is, however, often hampered by the need of invasive and time-consuming methods. All intact Mhc-DRB genes in primates appear to possess a complex and highly divergent microsatellite, DRB-STR. A panel of 154 pedigreed olive baboons (Papio anubis) was examined for their DRB content by DRB-STR analysis of genomic DNA. Using the same methodology on DNA of feces samples, DRB variability of a silvery gibbon population (Hylobates moloch) (N = 24), an endangered species, could successfully be studied. In both species, length determination of the DRB-STR resulted in the definition of unique genotyping patterns that appeared to be specific for a certain chromosome. Moreover, the different STR lengths were shown to segregate with the allelic variation of the respective gene. The results obtained expand data gained previously on DRB-STR typing in macaques, great apes, and humans and strengthen the conclusion that this protocol is applicable in molecular ecology, conservation biology, and colony management, especially of endangered primate species.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N de Groot
- Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Department of Comparative Genetics and Refinement, Lange Kleiweg 161, 2288 GJ, Rijswijk, The Netherlands
| | - K Stanbury
- Writtle College, Essex University, Lordship Road, Writtle, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 3RR, UK
| | - A J M de Vos-Rouweler
- Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Department of Comparative Genetics and Refinement, Lange Kleiweg 161, 2288 GJ, Rijswijk, The Netherlands
| | - N G de Groot
- Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Department of Comparative Genetics and Refinement, Lange Kleiweg 161, 2288 GJ, Rijswijk, The Netherlands
| | - N Poirier
- Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) UMR1064, Institut de Transplantation-Urologie-Nephrologie (ITUN), 30 Bd Jean Monnet, 44093, Nantes, France
| | - G Blancho
- Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) UMR1064, Institut de Transplantation-Urologie-Nephrologie (ITUN), 30 Bd Jean Monnet, 44093, Nantes, France
| | - C de Luna
- Writtle College, Essex University, Lordship Road, Writtle, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 3RR, UK
| | - G G M Doxiadis
- Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Department of Comparative Genetics and Refinement, Lange Kleiweg 161, 2288 GJ, Rijswijk, The Netherlands.
| | - R E Bontrop
- Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Department of Comparative Genetics and Refinement, Lange Kleiweg 161, 2288 GJ, Rijswijk, The Netherlands.,Department of Theoretical Biology and Bioinformatics, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Slater R, Hartley C, Moultrie F, Adams E, Juszczak E, Rogers R, Norman JE, Patel C, Stanbury K, Hoskin A, Green G. A blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial investigating the efficacy of morphine analgesia for procedural pain in infants: Trial protocol. Wellcome Open Res 2016; 1:7. [PMID: 28066825 PMCID: PMC5218543 DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.10005.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Infant pain has both immediate and long-term negative consequences, yet in clinical practice it is often undertreated. To date, few pain-relieving drugs have been tested in infants. Morphine is a potent analgesic that provides effective pain relief in adults, but there is inconclusive evidence for its effectiveness in infants. The purpose of this study is to establish whether oral morphine provides effective analgesia for procedural pain in infants. A blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group randomized, phase II, clinical trial will be undertaken to determine whether morphine sulphate administered orally prior to clinically-required retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and heel lancing provides effective analgesia.
156 infants between 34 and 42 weeks' gestational age who require a clinical heel lance and ROP screening on the same test occasion will be included in the trial. Infants will be randomised to receive either a single dose of morphine sulphate (100 μg/kg) or placebo. Each infant will be monitored for 48 hours and safety data will be collected during the 24 hours following drug administration. The primary outcome will be the Premature Infant Pain Profile-revised (PIPP-R) score 30 seconds after ROP screening. The co-primary outcome will be the magnitude of nociceptive-specific brain activity evoked by a clinically-required heel lance. Infant clinical stability will be assessed by comparing the number of episodes of bradycardia, tachycardia, desaturation and apnoea, and changes in respiratory support requirements in the 24-hour periods before and after the clinical intervention. In addition, drug safety will be assessed by considering the occurrence of apnoeic and hypotensive episodes requiring intervention in the 24-hour period following drug administration. This study has been published as an Accepted Protocol Summary by The Lancet.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Fiona Moultrie
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Eleri Adams
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ed Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Richard Rogers
- Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Jane E Norman
- MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Chetan Patel
- Oxford Eye Hospital, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Amy Hoskin
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Slater R, Hartley C, Moultrie F, Adams E, Juszczak E, Rogers R, Norman JE, Patel C, Stanbury K, Hoskin A, Green G. A blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial investigating the efficacy of morphine analgesia for procedural pain in infants: Trial protocol. Wellcome Open Res 2016. [PMID: 28066825 DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.10005.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Infant pain has both immediate and long-term negative consequences, yet in clinical practice it is often undertreated. To date, few pain-relieving drugs have been tested in infants. Morphine is a potent analgesic that provides effective pain relief in adults, but there is inconclusive evidence for its effectiveness in infants. The purpose of this study is to establish whether oral morphine provides effective analgesia for procedural pain in infants. A blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group randomized, phase II, clinical trial will be undertaken to determine whether morphine sulphate administered orally prior to clinically-required retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and heel lancing provides effective analgesia.
156 infants between 34 and 42 weeks' gestational age who require a clinical heel lance and ROP screening on the same test occasion will be included in the trial. Infants will be randomised to receive either a single dose of morphine sulphate (100 μg/kg) or placebo. Each infant will be monitored for 48 hours and safety data will be collected during the 24 hours following drug administration. The primary outcome will be the Premature Infant Pain Profile-revised (PIPP-R) score 30 seconds after ROP screening. The co-primary outcome will be the magnitude of nociceptive-specific brain activity evoked by a clinically-required heel lance. Infant clinical stability will be assessed by comparing the number of episodes of bradycardia, tachycardia, desaturation and apnoea, and changes in respiratory support requirements in the 24-hour periods before and after the clinical intervention. In addition, drug safety will be assessed by considering the occurrence of apnoeic and hypotensive episodes requiring intervention in the 24-hour period following drug administration. This study has been published as an Accepted Protocol Summary by The Lancet.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Fiona Moultrie
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Eleri Adams
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Ed Juszczak
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Richard Rogers
- Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Jane E Norman
- MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Chetan Patel
- Oxford Eye Hospital, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Kayleigh Stanbury
- National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Amy Hoskin
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|