Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported. Hypothesis: Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

Methods and analysis Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).

How can we use systematic reviews to inform clinical practice?

Aims/purpose: Systematic reviews provide the highest quality evidence and inform clinical practice. For patient benefit, it is imperative that nurses keep abreast of evidence-based practice. This presentation highlights where to find systematic reviews and how the information presented can be used to inform care.
Presentation description: Clinical research is increasing at an incredible rate. In the clinical trials database alone, more than 2000 new studies are registered/month and this does not include qualitative studies that do not require registration. Keeping abreast of current evidence can not only be a time consuming process, but can be problematic when studies produce conflicting results. Systematic reviews can be useful for summarizing the increasing amount of knowledge that is gained from scientific papers. In addition, combining individual studies in a meta-analysis increases statistical power, resulting in more precise effect estimates. This presentation draws upon a few systematic reviews relevant to ICU nursing practice, highlights their findings and demonstrates how the information can be used to inform translation of evidence into practice. Additionally, although these reviews include steps to minimize bias, nurses should be aware of some of the biases that may reduce confidence in the findings.
Conclusion: Systematic reviews can be useful tools for informing evidence based practice, although careful interpretation is necessary for understanding their relevance to local practice.

Biallelic ATM inactivation significantly reduces survival in patients treated on the United Kingdom Leukemia Research Fund Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 4 trial.

PURPOSE: The prognostic significance of ATM mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is unclear. We assessed their impact in the context of a prospective randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the ATM gene in 224 patients treated on the Leukemia Research Fund Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 4 (LRF-CLL4) trial with chlorambucil or fludarabine with and without cyclophosphamide. ATM status was analyzed by denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography and was related to treatment response, survival, and the impact of TP53 alterations for the same patient cohort. RESULTS: We identified 36 ATM mutations in 33 tumors, 16 with and 17 without 11q deletion. Mutations were associated with advanced disease stage and involvement of multiple lymphoid sites. Patients with both ATM mutation and 11q deletion showed significantly reduced progression-free survival (median, 7.4 months) compared with those with ATM wild type (28.6 months), 11q deletion alone (17.1 months), or ATM mutation alone (30.8 months), but survival was similar to that in patients with monoallelic (6.7 months) or biallelic (3.4 months) TP53 alterations. This effect was independent of treatment, immunoglobulin heavy chain variable gene (IGHV) status, age, sex, or disease stage. Overall survival for patients with biallelic ATM alterations was also significantly reduced compared with those with ATM wild type or ATM mutation alone (median, 42.2 v 85.5 v 77.6 months, respectively). CONCLUSION: The combination of 11q deletion and ATM mutation in CLL is associated with significantly shorter progression-free and overall survival following first-line treatment with alkylating agents and purine analogs. Assessment of ATM mutation status in patients with 11q deletion may influence the choice of subsequent therapy.

The Family Model - A transgenerational approach to mental health in families: personal, clinical, educational, research, systems and policy perspectives

The Family Model – A transgenerational approach to mental health in families This workshop will provide an overview on The Family Model (TFM) and its use in promoting and facilitating a trans­generational family focus in Mental Health services, over the past 10­ - 15 years. Each of the speakers will address a different perspective, including service user/consumer, clinical practice, education & training, research and policy. Adrian Falkov (chair) will provide an overview of TFM to set the scene and a ‘policy to practice’ perspective, based on use of TFM in Australia. Author: Heide Lloyd. The Family Model ­ A personal (consumer/patient) perspective | United Kingdom Heide will provide a description of her experiences as a child, adult, parent & grandparent, using TFM as the structure around which to ‘weave’ her story and demonstrate how TFM has assisted her in understanding the impact of symptoms on her & family and how she has used it in her management of symptoms and recovery (personal perspective). The Family Model ­ Education & training perspective ­ Marie Diggins | United Kingdom PhD Bente Weimand | Norway Authors: ­ Marie Diggins | United Kingdom PhD Bente Weimand | Norway This combined (UK & Norwegian) presentation will cover historical background to TFM and its use in eLearning (the Social Care Institute for Excellence)and a number of other UK initiatives, together with a description of the postgraduate masters course at the University Oslo/Akershus, using TFM. The Family Model ­ A research perspective PhD Anne Grant | Northern Ireland Author: PhD Anne Grant | Ireland Anne Grant will describe how she used TFM as the theoretical framework for her PhD looking at family focused (nursing) practice in Ireland. The Family Model ­ A service systems perspective ­ Mary Donaghy | Northern Ireland Authors: PhD Adrian Falkov | Australia ­ Mary Donaghy | N Ireland Mary Donaghy will discuss how TFM has been used to support & facilitate a cross service ‘whole of system’ change program in Belfast (NI) to achieve improved family focused practice. She will demonstrate its utility in achieving a broader approach to service design, delivery and evaluation.