Monitoring dendritic cells in clinical practice using a new whole blood single-platform TruCOUNT assay

Dendritic cells (DC) from distinct DC subsets are essential contributors to normal human immune responses. Despite this, reliable assays that enable DC to be counted precisely have been slow to evolve. We have now developed a new single-platform flow cytometric assay based on TruCOUN(TM) beads and the whole blood Lyse/No-Wash protocol that allows precise counting of the CD14(-) blood DC subsets: CD11c(+)CD16(-) DC, CD11c(+)CD16(+) DC, CD123(hi) DC, CD1c(+) DC and BDCA-3(+) DC. This assay requires 50 mul of whole blood; does not rely on a hematology blood analyser for the absolute DC counts; allows DC counting in EDTA samples 24 It after collection; and is suitable for cord blood and peripheral blood. The data is highly reproducible with intra-assay and inter-assay coefficients of variation less than 3% and 11%, respectively. This assay does not produce the DC-T lymphocyte conjugates that result in DC counting abnormalities in conventional gradient-density separation procedures. Using the TruCOUNT assay, we established that absolute blood DC counts reduce with age in healthy individuals. In preliminary studies, we found a significantly lower absolute blood CD11c(+)CD16(+) DC count in stage III/IV versus stage I/II breast carcinoma patients and a lower absolute blood CD123(hi) DC count in multiple myeloma patients, compared to age-matched controls. These data indicate that scientific progress in DC counting technology will lead to the global standardization of DC counting and allow clinically meaningful data to be obtained. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer

The ‘Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Psychosocial Care of Adults with Cancer’ was launched by the Federal Minister of Health on 14th August 2003.1 Developed by the National Breast Cancer Centre and the National Cancer Control Initiative and approved by the National Health and Medical Research Council in April 2003, these guidelines are the first of their kind for health professionals who treat, or are involved with cancer patients at all stages of care from diagnosis, through to treatment and palliation. The guidelines are aimed particularly at general practitioners, and cancer specialists such as radiation and medical oncologists, surgeons, nurses, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, physiotherapists and occupational therapists. The guidelines are based on comprehensive and systematic reviews of the international research literature and an extensive consultative process to ensure their clinical relevance. They were informed by a multidisciplinary steering group with expertise across a wide range of cancers and health professions and included consumer representation.

Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer

Clinical practice guidelines are increasingly being developed in medical settings to provide evidence-based recommendations to guide the clinical care of patients. The development of Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of patients with medical illness is a newer initiative, and more complex as the target audience includes health care professionals from diverse backgrounds. In Australia, the National Breast Cancer Centre and National Cancer Control Initiative have collaborated to develop Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer, funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. This paper outlines the development of these guidelines in the international context, gives an overview of their content, and describes strategies for their implementation and evaluation. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley C Sons, Ltd.

An n-of-1 trial service in clinical practice: Testing the effectiveness of stimulants for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE. We sought to describe the clinical use of n-of-1 trials for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in publicly and privately funded family and specialized pediatric practice in Australia. METHODS. We used a within-patient randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison of stimulant (dexamphetamine or methylphenidate) versus placebo or alternative stimulant using 3 pairs of treatment periods. Trials were conducted from a central location using mail and telephone communication, with local supervision by the patients' clinicians. PATIENTS. Our study population included children with clinically diagnosed attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder who were aged 5 to 16 years and previously stabilized on an optimal dose of stimulant. They were selected because treatment effectiveness was uncertain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES. Our measures included number of patients recruited, number of doctors who used the service, geographic spread, completion rates, response rate, and post-n-of-1 trial decisions. RESULTS. Forty-five doctors across Australia requested 108 n-of-1 trials, of which 86 were completed. In 69 drug-versus-placebo comparisons, 29 children responded better to stimulant than placebo. Immediately posttrial, 19 of 25 drug-versus-placebo responders stayed on the same stimulant, and 13 of 24 nonresponders ceased or switched stimulants. In 40 of 63 for which data were available, posttrial management was consistent with the trial results. For all types of n-of-1 trials, management changed for 28 of 64 children for whom information was available. DISCUSSION. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder n-of-1 trials can be implemented successfully by mail and telephone communication. This type of trial can be valuable in clarifying treatment effect when it is uncertain, and in this series, they had a noticeable impact on short-term management.

Promoting better use of the PSA test in general practice: Randomized controlled trial of educational strategies based on outreach visits and mailout

Background. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer is controversial. Demand for PSA testing is likely to rise in the UK, Australia and other western countries. Primary care needs to develop appropriate strategies to respond to this demand. Objectives. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of educational outreach visits (EOVs) and mailout strategies targeting PSA testing in Australian primary care. Methods. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in general practices in southern Adelaide. The main outcome measures at baseline, 6 months and 12 months post-intervention were PSA testing rates and GP knowledge in key areas relating to prostate cancer and PSA testing. Results. The interventions were able to demonstrate a change in clinical practice. In the 6 months post-intervention, median PSA testing rate in the EOV group was significantly lower than in the postal group, which in turn was significantly lower than the control group (P < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were not, however, maintained in the 6-12 month post-intervention period. The EOV group, at 6 months follow-up, had a significantly greater proportion of 'correct' responses than the control group to questions about prostate cancer treatment effectiveness (P = 0.004) and endorsement of PSA screening by professional bodies (P = 0.041). Conclusions. Primary care has a central role in PSA testing for prostate cancer. Clinical practice in this area is receptive to evidence-based interventions.

Profile of paediatric occupational therapy practice in Australia

Background: The purpose of the present study was to describe a profile of Australian paediatric occupational therapy practice in terms of theories, assessments and interventions used with the most frequently seen client groups. Methods: An ex post facto survey design was utilised. A purpose-designed survey was mailed to 600 occupational therapists identified by OT Australia as working in paediatrics. Results: The response rate was 55% (n = 330). Respondents in the sample worked chiefly with children with developmental delays, learning disabilities, neurological impairments, and infants/toddlers. Theoretical models used by paediatric clinicians that were common to the most frequently seen client groups focused on sensory integration/multisensory approaches, occupational performance, and client-centred practice. Assessment tools most frequently used were the Test of Visual Motor Integration, Sensory Profile, Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Handwriting Speed Test, and Motor-Free Visual Perception Test. The most often used treatment methods across the four most frequently seen client groups were parent/caregiver education, sensory integration/stimulation techniques, and managing activities of daily living. Conclusions: Paediatric occupational therapists appeared to draw on a range of theoretical models. With the exception of the Sensory Profile, the assessment and treatment methods most frequently used are not congruent with the most commonly used theoretical models. It is critical that the assessment and treatment methods used are conceptually consistent with the theoretical models that guide practice. Occupational therapists need to examine the evidence and determine whether their clinical practice is grounded in the best contemporary theoretical models, assessments and interventions.