A prospective cohort study of obesity and risk of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study

Objective: The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has increased rapidly over the past 40 years and accumulating evidence suggests that obesity, as measured by body mass index (BMI), is a major risk factor. It remains unclear whether abdominal obesity is associated with EAC and gastric adenocarcinoma.

Design: Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine associations between overall and abdominal obesity with EAC and gastric adenocarcinoma among 218 854 participants in the prospective NIHeAARP cohort.

Results: 253 incident EAC, 191 gastric cardia adenocarcinomas and 125 gastric non-cardia adenocarcinomas accrued to the cohort. Overall obesity (BMI) was positively associated with EAC and gastric
cardia adenocarcinoma risk (highest ($35 kg/m2) vs referent (18.5e<25 kg/m2); HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.09 and HR 3.67, 95% CI 2.00 to 6.71, respectively). Waist circumference was also positively associated with EAC and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma risk (highest vs referent; HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.00 and HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.47, respectively), whereas waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) was positively associated with EAC risk only (highest vs referent; HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.64) and persisted in patients with normal BMI (18.5e<25 kg/m2). Mutual adjustment of WHR and BMI attenuated
both, but did not eliminate the positive associations for either with risk of EAC. In contrast, the majority of the anthropometric variables were not associated with adenocarcinomas of the gastric non-cardia.

Conclusion Overall obesity was associated with a higher risk of EAC and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, whereas abdominal obesity was found to be associated with increased EAC risk; even in people with normal BMI

Monitoring treatment fidelity in a randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention.

Aim. This paper is a report of a study to describe how treatment fidelity is being enhanced and monitored, using a model from the National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium. Background. The objective of treatment fidelity is to minimize errors in interpreting research trial outcomes, and to ascribe those outcomes directly to the intervention at hand. Treatment fidelity procedures are included in trials of complex interventions to account for inferences made from study outcomes. Monitoring treatment fidelity can help improve study design, maximize reliability of results, increase statistical power, determine whether theory-based interventions are responsible for observed changes, and inform the research dissemination process. Methods. Treatment fidelity recommendations from the Behavior Change Consortium were applied to the SPHERE study (Secondary Prevention of Heart DiseasE in GeneRal PracticE), a randomized controlled trial of a complex intervention. Procedures to enhance and monitor intervention implementation included standardizing training sessions, observing intervention consultations, structuring patient recall systems, and using written practice and patient care plans. The research nurse plays an important role in monitoring intervention implementation. Findings. Several methods of applying treatment fidelity procedures to monitoring interventions are possible. The procedure used may be determined by availability of appropriate personnel, fiscal constraints, or time limits. Complex interventions are not straightforward and necessitate a monitoring process at trial stage. Conclusion. The Behavior Change Consortium’s model of treatment fidelity is useful for structuring a system to monitor the implementation of a complex intervention, and helps to increase the reliability and validity of evaluation findings.

Job strain as a risk factor for coronary heart disease:a collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND: Published work assessing psychosocial stress (job strain) as a risk factor for coronary heart disease is inconsistent and subject to publication bias and reverse causation bias. We analysed the relation between job strain and coronary heart disease with a meta-analysis of published and unpublished studies. METHODS: We used individual records from 13 European cohort studies (1985-2006) of men and women without coronary heart disease who were employed at time of baseline assessment. We measured job strain with questions from validated job-content and demand-control questionnaires. We extracted data in two stages such that acquisition and harmonisation of job strain measure and covariables occurred before linkage to records for coronary heart disease. We defined incident coronary heart disease as the first non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary death. FINDINGS: 30?214 (15%) of 197?473 participants reported job strain. In 1·49 million person-years at risk (mean follow-up 7·5 years [SD 1·7]), we recorded 2358 events of incident coronary heart disease. After adjustment for sex and age, the hazard ratio for job strain versus no job strain was 1·23 (95% CI 1·10-1·37). This effect estimate was higher in published (1·43, 1·15-1·77) than unpublished (1·16, 1·02-1·32) studies. Hazard ratios were likewise raised in analyses addressing reverse causality by exclusion of events of coronary heart disease that occurred in the first 3 years (1·31, 1·15-1·48) and 5 years (1·30, 1·13-1·50) of follow-up. We noted an association between job strain and coronary heart disease for sex, age groups, socioeconomic strata, and region, and after adjustments for socioeconomic status, and lifestyle and conventional risk factors. The population attributable risk for job strain was 3·4%. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that prevention of workplace stress might decrease disease incidence; however, this strategy would have a much smaller effect than would tackling of standard risk factors, such as smoking. FUNDING: Finnish Work Environment Fund, the Academy of Finland, the Swedish Research Council for Working Life and Social Research, the German Social Accident Insurance, the Danish National Research Centre for the Working Environment, the BUPA Foundation, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, and the US National Institutes of Health.

Ataluren for the treatment of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background: Ataluren was developed to restore functional protein production in genetic disorders caused by nonsense mutations, which are the cause of cystic fibrosis in 10% of patients. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ataluren in patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis. 

Methods: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study enrolled patients from 36 sites in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Eligible patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis (aged ≥6 years; abnormal nasal potential difference; sweat chloride >40 mmol/L; forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁] ≥40% and ≤90%) were randomly assigned by interactive response technology to receive oral ataluren (10 mg/kg in morning, 10 mg/kg midday, and 20 mg/kg in evening) or matching placebo for 48 weeks. Randomisation used a block size of four, stratified by age, chronic inhaled antibiotic use, and percent-predicted FEV₁. The primary endpoint was relative change in percent-predicted FEV₁ from baseline to week 48, analysed in all patients with a post-baseline spirometry measurement. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00803205. 

Findings: Between Sept 8, 2009, and Nov 30, 2010, 238 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 116 in each treatment group had a valid post-baseline spirometry measurement. Relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ did not differ significantly between ataluren and placebo at week 48 (-2·5% vs -5·5%; difference 3·0% [95% CI -0·8 to 6·3]; p=0·12). The number of pulmonary exacerbations did not differ significantly between treatment groups (rate ratio 0·77 [95% CI 0·57-1·05]; p=0·0992). However, post-hoc analysis of the subgroup of patients not using chronic inhaled tobramycin showed a 5·7% difference (95% CI 1·5-10·1) in relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ between the ataluren and placebo groups at week 48 (-0·7% [-4·0 to 2·1] vs -6·4% [-9·8 to -3·7]; nominal p=0·0082), and fewer pulmonary exacerbations in the ataluern group (1·42 events [0·9-1·9] vs 2·18 events [1·6-2·7]; rate ratio 0·60 [0·42-0·86]; nominal p=0·0061). Safety profiles were generally similar for ataluren and placebo, except for the occurrence of increased creatinine concentrations (ie, acute kidney injury), which occurred in 18 (15%) of 118 patients in the ataluren group compared with one (<1%) of 120 patients in the placebo group. No life-threatening adverse events or deaths were reported in either group. I

nterpretation: Although ataluren did not improve lung function in the overall population of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis patients who received this treatment, it might be beneficial for patients not taking chronic inhaled tobramycin. 

Funding: PTC Therapeutics, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, US Food and Drug Administration's Office of Orphan Products Development, and the National Institutes of Health. 

Management of Hyperphosphataemia in Chronic Kidney Disease:Summary of National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guideline

Bone disease and ectopic calcification are the two main consequences of hyperphosphataemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Observational studies have demonstrated that hyperphosphataemia in CKD is associated with increased mortality. Furthermore, the use of phosphate binders in dialysis patients is associated with significantly lower mortality. The UK Renal Registry data show significant underachievement of phosphate targets in dialysis patients. It is believed to be due to wide variation in how management interventions are used. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has developed a guideline on the management of hyperphosphataemia in CKD. This is based on the evidence currently available using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This review outlines the recommendations including research recommendations and discusses methodology, rationale and challenges faced in developing this guideline and the health economic model used to assess the cost-effectiveness of different phosphate binders. © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Effects of a demand-led evidence briefing service on the uptake and use of research evidence by commissioners of health services: protocol for a controlled before and after study

Background: Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) are mandated to use research evidence effectively to ensure optimum use of resources by the National Health Service (NHS), both in accelerating innovation and in stopping the use of less effective practices and models of service delivery. We intend to evaluate whether access to a demand-led evidence service improves uptake and use of research evidence by NHS commissioners compared with less intensive and less targeted alternatives. 

Methods/design: This is a controlled before and after study involving CCGs in the North of England. Participating CCGs will receive one of three interventions to support the use of research evidence in their decision-making:1) consulting plus responsive push of tailored evidence; 2) consulting plus an unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence; or 3) standard service unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence. Our primary outcome will be changed at 12 months from baseline of a CCGs ability to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making. Secondary outcomes will measure individual clinical leads and managers’ intentions to use research evidence in decision making. Documentary evidence of the use of the outputs of the service will be sought. A process evaluation will evaluate the nature and success of the interactions both within the sites and between commissioners and researchers delivering the service. 

Discussion: The proposed research will generate new knowledge of direct relevance and value to the NHS. The findings will help to clarify which elements of the service are of value in promoting the use of research evidence.Those involved in NHS commissioning will be able to use the results to inform how best to build the infrastructure they need to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making and to fulfil their statutory duties under the Health and Social Care Act.

The Role and Effectiveness of Public – Private Partnerships (NHS LIFT) in the Development of Enhanced Primary Care Premises and Services:Report for the National Institute for Health Research Service Delivery and Organisation programme

The research project analysed the role and effectiveness of LIFT via a multi-method study which included semi-structured interviews with policy elites and users, as well as case studies and an exploratory analysis of the financial characteristics of three LIFT Companies. While the team felt that it was able to identify key aspects relating to the advantages and drawbacks surrounding LIFT, some aspects relating to the representativeness of the study was adversely affected by a reluctance of PCTs to participate in the case study analysis and commercial confidentiality restrictions. The study was nonetheless able to identify important issues in relation to the funding and procurement of primary care premises and services.