Associations with low rates of postpartum glucose screening after gestational diabetes among Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian women

OBJECTIVES To explore factors associated with postpartum glucose screening among women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM). METHODS A retrospective study using linked records from women with GDM who gave birth at Cairns Hospital in Far North Queensland, Australia, from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2010. RESULTS The rates of postpartum Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) screening, while having increased significantly among both Indigenous* and non-Indigenous women from 2004 to 2010 (HR 1.15 per year, 95%CI 1.08-1.22, p<0.0001), remain low, particularly among Indigenous women (10% versus 27%, respectively at six months postpartum). Indigenous women in Cairns had a longer time to postpartum OGTT than Indigenous women in remote areas (HR 0.58, 0.38-0.71, p=0.01). Non-Indigenous women had a longer time to postpartum OGTT if they: were born in Australia (HR 0.76, 0.59-1.00, 0.05); were aged <25 years (HR 0.45, 0.23-0.89, p=0.02); had parity >5 (HR 0.33, 0.12-0.90, p=0.03); smoked (HR 0.48, 0.31-0.76, p=0.001); and did not breastfeed (HR 0.09, 0.01-0.64, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS Postpartum diabetes screening rates following GDM in Far North Queensland are low, particularly among Indigenous women, with lower rates seen in the regional centre; and among non-Indigenous women with indicators of low socioeconomic status. IMPLICATIONS Strategies are urgently needed to improve postpartum diabetes screening after GDM that reach women most at risk.

Surgical fusion of early onset severe scoliosis increases survival in Rett syndrome: A cohort study

Aim Scoliosis is a common co-morbidity in Rett syndrome and spinal fusion may be recommended if severe. We investigated the impact of spinal fusion on survival and risk of severe lower respiratory tract infection in Rett syndrome. Method Data were ascertained from hospital medical records, the Australian Rett Syndrome Database, a longitudinal and population-based registry, and from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare National Death Index database. Cox regression and generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the effects of spinal surgery on survival and severe respiratory infection respectively in 140 females who developed severe scoliosis (Cobb angle ≥45°) before adulthood. Results After adjusting for mutation type and age of scoliosis onset, the rate of death was lower in the surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12–0.74; p=0.009) compared to those without surgery. Rate of death was particularly reduced for those with early onset scoliosis (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06–0.52; p=0.002). There was some evidence to suggest that spinal fusion was associated with a reduction in risk of severe respiratory infection among those with early onset scoliosis (risk ratio 0.41, 95% CI 0.16–1.03; p=0.06). Interpretation With appropriate cautions, spinal fusion confers an advantage to life expectancy in Rett syndrome.

Moving European research on work and ageing forward: Overview and agenda

This paper summarizes the state of affairs of European research on ageing and work. After a close inspection of the age construct, an overview is presented of research in four areas: the relationship between age and HR-policies, early retirement, age and performance/employability, age and health/well-being. The overview results in a research agenda on work and ageing and in recommendations for practice.

Sitting-time and 9-year all-cause mortality in older women

Background Studies of mid-aged adults provide evidence of a relationship between sitting-time and all-cause mortality, but evidence in older adults is limited. The aim is to examine the relationship between total sitting-time and all-cause mortality in older women. Methods The prospective cohort design involved 6656 participants in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health who were followed for up to 9 years (2002, age 76–81, to 2011, age 85–90). Self-reported total sitting-time was linked to all-cause mortality data from the National Death Index from 2002 to 2011. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the relationship between sitting-time and all-cause mortality, with adjustment for potential sociodemographic, behavioural and health confounders. Results There were 2003 (30.1%) deaths during a median follow-up of 6 years. Compared with participants who sat <4 h/day, those who sat 8–11 h/day had a 1.45 times higher risk of death and those who sat ≥11 h/day had a 1.65 times higher risk of death. These risks remained after adding sociodemographic and behavioural covariates, but were attenuated after adjustment for health covariates. A significant interaction (p=0.02) was found between sitting-time and physical activity (PA), with increased mortality risk for prolonged sitting only among participants not meeting PA guidelines (HR for sitting ≥8 h/day: 1.31, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.61); HR for sitting ≥11 h/day: 1.47, CI 1.15 to 1.93). Conclusions Prolonged sitting-time was positively associated with all-cause mortality. Women who reported sitting for more than 8 h/day and did not meet PA guidelines had an increased risk of dying within the next 9 years.

Validity of a self-report recall tool for estimating sedentary behaviour in adults

BACKGROUND Sedentary behavior is continuing to emerge as an important target for health promotion. The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of a self-report use of time recall tool, the Multimedia Activity Recall for Children and Adults (MARCA) in estimating time spent sitting/lying, compared with a device-based measure. METHODS Fifty-eight participants (48% female, [mean±standard deviation] 28±7.4 years of age, 23.9±3.05 kg/m2) wore an activPAL device for 24-h and the following day completed the MARCA. Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were used to analyse convergent validity of the adult MARCA compared with activPAL estimates of total sitting/lying time. Agreement was examined using Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS According to activPAL estimates, participants spent 10.4 hr/day [standard deviation (SD)=2.06] sitting or lying down while awake. The correlation between MARCA and activPAL estimates of total sit/lie time was r=0.77 (95% confidence interval = 0.64-0.86; p<0.001). Bland-Altman analyses revealed a mean bias of +0.59 hr/day with moderately wide limits of agreement (-2.35 hours to +3.53 hr/day). CONCLUSIONS This study found a moderate to strong agreement between the adult MARCA and the activPAL, suggesting that the MARCA is an appropriate tool for the measurement of time spent sitting or lying down in an adult population.

What the problem may be with family intervention . . . and with dissemination more generally: A commentary

While the two decades since the study by Kavanagh et al. (1993) has given additional insights into effective dissemination of family interventions, the accompanying papers show that progress remains limited. The effectiveness trial that triggered this series of papers offers a cautionary tale. Despite management support, 30–35 hr of workshop training and training of local supervisors who could act as champions, use of the full intervention was limited. In part, this seemed due to the demanding nature of the intervention and its incompatibility with practitioners’ roles, in part, to limitations in the training, among other factors. While the accompanying papers note these and other barriers to dissemination, they miss a more disturbing finding in the original paper: Practitioners said they were using several aspects in routine care, despite being unable to accurately describe what they were. This finding highlights the risks in taking practitioners’ reports of their practice in files or supervision sessions at face value and potentially has implications for reports of other clinical work. The fidelity of disseminated treatments can only be assured by audits of practice, accompanied by affirming but also corrective feedback.

The effect of high versus low intensity heat acclimation on performance and neuromuscular responses

This study examined the effect of exercise intensity and duration during 5-day heat acclimation (HA) on cycling performance and neuromuscular responses. 20 recreationally trained males completed a ‘baseline’ trial followed by 5 consecutive days HA, and a ‘post-acclimation’ trial. Baseline and post-acclimation trials consisted of maximal voluntary contractions (MVC), a single and repeated countermovement jump protocol, 20 km cycling time trial(TT) and 5x6 s maximal sprints (SPR). Cycling trials were undertaken in 33.0 ± 0.8 °C and 60 ± 3% relative humidity.Core(Tcore), and skin temperatures (Tskin), heart rate (HR), rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and thermal sensation were recorded throughout cycling trials. Participants were assigned to either 30 min high-intensity (30HI) or 90 min low-intensity (90LI) cohorts for HA, conducted in environmental conditions of 32.0 ± 1.6 °C. Percentage change time to complete the 20 km TT for the 90LI cohort was significantly improved post-acclimation(-5.9 ± 7.0%; P=0.04) compared to the 30HI cohort (-0.18 ± 3.9%; P<0.05). The 30HI cohort showed greatest improvements in power output (PO) during post-acclimation SPR1 and 2 compared to 90LI (546 ± 128 W and 517 ± 87 W,respectively; P<0.02). No differences were evident for MVC within 30HI cohort, however, a reduced performance indicated by % change within the 90LI (P=0.04). Compared to baseline, mean Tcore was reduced post-acclimation within the 30HI cohort (P=0.05) while mean Tcore and HR were significantly reduced within the 90LI cohort (P=0.01 and 0.04, respectively). Greater physiological adaptations and performance improvements were noted within the 90LI cohort compared to the 30HI. However, 30HI did provide some benefit to anaerobic performance including sprint PO and MVC. These findings suggest specifying training duration and intensity during heat acclimation may be useful for specific post-acclimation performance.

Tumour islet Foxp3+ T-cell infiltration predicts poor outcome in nonsmall cell lung cancer

The impact of host immunity on outcome in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial. We examined the relationship between lymphoid infiltration patterns in NSCLC and prognosis. Tumour- and stroma-infiltrating CD3+, CD8+ and forkhead box P3 (Foxp3)+ T-lymphocytes were identified using immunohistochemistry and a novel image analysis algorithm to assess total, cytotoxic and regulatory T-lymphocyte counts, respectively, in 196 NSCLC cases. The median cell count was selected as a cut-point to define patient subgroups and the ratio of the corresponding tumour islet:stroma (TI/S) counts was determined. There was a positive association between overall survival and increased CD8+ TI/S ratio (hazard ratio (HR) for death 0.44, p<0.001) but an inverse relationship between Foxp3+ TI/S ratio and overall survival (HR 4.86, p<0.001). Patients with high CD8+ islet (HR 0.48, p<0.001) and Foxp3+ stromal (HR 0.23, p<0.001) counts had better survival, whereas high CD3+ and CD8+ stromal counts and high Foxp3+ islet infiltration conferred a worse survival (HR 1.55, 2.19 and 3.14, respectively). By multivariate analysis, a high CD8+ TI/S ratio conferred an improved survival (HR 0.48, p=0.002) but a high Foxp3+ TI/S ratio was associated with worse survival (HR 3.91, p<0.001). Microlocalisation of infiltrating T-lymphocytes is a powerful predictor of outcome in resected NSCLC.

Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6–12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1–11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57–0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9–15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1–13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58–0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.

First-Line afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with non–small cell lung cancer and common epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations and brain metastases

Introduction Metastatic spread to the brain is common in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but these patients are generally excluded from prospective clinical trials. The studies, phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations (LUX-Lung 3) and a randomized, open-label, phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an EGFR activating mutation (LUX-Lung 6) investigated first-line afatinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation-positive patients with NSCLC and included patients with brain metastases; prespecified subgroup analyses are assessed in this article. Methods For both LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6, prespecified subgroup analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and objective response rate were undertaken in patients with asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline (n = 35 and n = 46, respectively). Post hoc analyses of clinical outcomes was undertaken in the combined data set (n = 81). Results In both studies, there was a trend toward improved PFS with afatinib versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (LUX-Lung 3: 11.1 versus 5.4 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.54, p = 0.1378; LUX-Lung 6: 8.2 versus 4.7 months, HR = 0.47, p = 0.1060). The magnitude of PFS improvement with afatinib was similar to that observed in patients without brain metastases. In combined analysis, PFS was significantly improved with afatinib versus with chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases (8.2 versus 5.4 months; HR, 0.50; p = 0.0297). Afatinib significantly improved the objective response rate versus chemotherapy in patients with brain metastases. Safety findings were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions These findings lend support to the clinical activity of afatinib in EGFR mutation–positive patients with NSCLC and asymptomatic brain metastases.

Cilengitide combined with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients: Results of an open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study (CERTO)

Background: This multicentre, open-label, randomized, controlled phase II study evaluated cilengitide in combination with cetuximab and platinum-based chemotherapy, compared with cetuximab and chemotherapy alone, as first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive cetuximab plus platinum-based chemotherapy alone (control), or combined with cilengitide 2000 mg 1×/week i.v. (CIL-once) or 2×/week i.v. (CIL-twice). A protocol amendment limited enrolment to patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) histoscore ≥200 and closed the CIL-twice arm for practical feasibility issues. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; independent read); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker analyses. A comparison between the CIL-once and control arms is reported, both for the total cohorts, as well as for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200. Results: There were 85 patients in the CIL-once group and 84 in the control group. The PFS (independent read) was 6.2 versus 5.0 months for CIL-once versus control [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72; P = 0.085]; for patients with EGFR histoscore ≥200, PFS was 6.8 versus 5.6 months, respectively (HR 0.57; P = 0.0446). Median OS was 13.6 for CIL-once versus 9.7 months for control (HR 0.81; P = 0.265). In patients with EGFR ≥200, OS was 13.2 versus 11.8 months, respectively (HR 0.95; P = 0.855). No major differences in adverse events between CIL-once and control were reported; nausea (59% versus 56%, respectively) and neutropenia (54% versus 46%, respectively) were the most frequent. There was no increased incidence of thromboembolic events or haemorrhage in cilengitide-treated patients. αvβ3 and αvβ5 expression was neither a predictive nor a prognostic indicator. Conclusions: The addition of cilengitide to cetuximab/chemotherapy indicated potential clinical activity, with a trend for PFS difference in the independent-read analysis. However, the observed inconsistencies across end points suggest additional investigations are required to substantiate a potential role of other integrin inhibitors in NSCLC treatment.

Afatinib versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy for EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma (LUX-Lung 3 and LUX-Lung 6): analysis of overall survival data from two randomised, phase 3 trials

Background We aimed to assess the effect of afatinib on overall survival of patients with EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma through an analysis of data from two open-label, randomised, phase 3 trials. Methods Previously untreated patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage IIIB or IV lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled in LUX-Lung 3 (n=345) and LUX-Lung 6 (n=364). These patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive afatinib or chemotherapy (pemetrexed-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 3] or gemcitabine-cisplatin [LUX-Lung 6]), stratified by EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion [del19], Leu858Arg, or other) and ethnic origin (LUX-Lung 3 only). We planned analyses of mature overall survival data in the intention-to-treat population after 209 (LUX-Lung 3) and 237 (LUX-Lung 6) deaths. These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00949650 and NCT01121393. Findings Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 3 was 41 months (IQR 35–44); 213 (62%) of 345 patients had died. Median follow-up in LUX-Lung 6 was 33 months (IQR 31–37); 246 (68%) of 364 patients had died. In LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 28·2 months (95% CI 24·6–33·6) in the afatinib group and 28·2 months (20·7–33·2) in the pemetrexed-cisplatin group (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·66–1·17, p=0·39). In LUX-Lung 6, median overall survival was 23·1 months (95% CI 20·4–27·3) in the afatinib group and 23·5 months (18·0–25·6) in the gemcitabine-cisplatin group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·72–1·22, p=0·61). However, in preplanned analyses, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with del19-positive tumours in the afatinib group than in the chemotherapy group in both trials: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 33·3 months (95% CI 26·8–41·5) in the afatinib group versus 21·1 months (16·3–30·7) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·36–0·79, p=0·0015); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 31·4 months (95% CI 24·2–35·3) versus 18·4 months (14·6–25·6), respectively (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·44–0·94, p=0·023). By contrast, there were no significant differences by treatment group for patients with EGFR Leu858Arg-positive tumours in either trial: in LUX-Lung 3, median overall survival was 27·6 months (19·8–41·7) in the afatinib group versus 40·3 months (24·3–not estimable) in the chemotherapy group (HR 1·30, 95% CI 0·80–2·11, p=0·29); in LUX-Lung 6, it was 19·6 months (95% CI 17·0–22·1) versus 24·3 months (19·0–27·0), respectively (HR 1·22, 95% CI 0·81–1·83, p=0·34). In both trials, the most common afatinib-related grade 3–4 adverse events were rash or acne (37 [16%] of 229 patients in LUX-Lung 3 and 35 [15%] of 239 patients in LUX-Lung 6), diarrhoea (33 [14%] and 13 [5%]), paronychia (26 [11%] in LUX-Lung 3 only), and stomatitis or mucositis (13 [5%] in LUX-Lung 6 only). In LUX-Lung 3, neutropenia (20 [18%] of 111 patients), fatigue (14 [13%]) and leucopenia (nine [8%]) were the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events, while in LUX-Lung 6, the most common chemotherapy-related grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (30 [27%] of 113 patients), vomiting (22 [19%]), and leucopenia (17 [15%]). Interpretation Although afatinib did not improve overall survival in the whole population of either trial, overall survival was improved with the drug for patients with del19 EGFR mutations. The absence of an effect in patients with Leu858Arg EGFR mutations suggests that EGFR del19-positive disease might be distinct from Leu858Arg-positive disease and that these subgroups should be analysed separately in future trials.

Dacomitinib versus erlotinib in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Pooled subset analyses from two randomized trials

Background: The irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in NSCLC patients with activating EGFR mutations, but it is unknown if they are superior to the reversible inhibitors. Dacomitinib is an oral, small-molecule irreversible inhibitor of all enzymatically active HER family tyrosine kinases. Methods: The ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067) studies randomized patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC following progression with one or two prior chemotherapy regimens to dacomitinib or erlotinib. EGFR mutation testing was performed centrally on archived tumor samples. We pooled patients with exon 19 deletion and L858R EGFR mutations from both studies to compare the efficacy of dacomitinib to erlotinib. Results: One hundred twenty-one patients with any EGFR mutation were enrolled; 101 had activating mutations in exon 19 or 21. For patients with exon19/21 mutations, the median progression-free survival was 14.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0–18.2] with dacomitinib and 9.6 months (95% CI 7.4–12.7) with erlotinib [unstratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.717 (95% CI 0.458–1.124), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.146]. The median survival was 26.6 months (95% CI 21.6–41.5) with dacomitinib versus 23.2 months (95% CI 16.0–31.8) with erlotinib [unstratified HR 0.737 (95% CI 0.431–1.259), two-sided log-rank, P = 0.265]. Dacomitinib was associated with a higher incidence of diarrhea and mucositis in both studies compared with erlotinib. Conclusions: Dacomitinib is an active agent with comparable efficacy to erlotinib in the EGFR mutated patients. The subgroup with exon 19 deletion had favorable outcomes with dacomitinib. An ongoing phase III study will compare dacomitinib to gefitinib in first-line therapy of patients with NSCLC harboring common activating EGFR mutations (ARCHER 1050; NCT01774721). Clinical trials number: ARCHER 1009 (NCT01360554) and A7471028 (NCT00769067).

Leading Digital Transformation: Building Technology and Information Governance Capability in Boards of Directors and the C-Suite

Information and technology and its use in organisation transformation presents unprecedented opportunities and risks. Increasingly, the Governance of Enterprise Information and Technology (GEIT) competency in the board room and executive is needed. Whether your organization is small or large, public, private or not for profit or whether your industry is not considered high-tech, IT is impacting your sector – no exceptions. But there is a skill shortage in boards: GEIT capability is concerningly low. This capability is urgently needed across the board, including those directors who come from finance, legal, marketing, operations and HR backgrounds. Digital disruption also affects all occupations. Putting in place a vision will help ensure emergency responses will meet technology-related duty of care responsibilities. When GEIT-related forward thinking and planning is carried out at the same time that you put your business strategy and plan in place, your organization has a significantly increased chance of not only surviving, but thriving into the future. Those organizations that don’t build GEIT capability risk joining the growing list of once-leading firms left behind in the digital ‘cloud of smoke’. Those organizations that do will be better placed to reap the benefits and hedge against the risks of a digital world. This chapter provides actionable, research-based considerations and processes for boards to use, to build awareness, knowledge and skills in governing technology-related organization strategy, risk and value creation.