Embedding Supervised Exercise Training for Men on Androgen Deprivation Therapy Into Standard Prostate Cancer Care: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study (preprint)

Lifestyle interventions involving exercise training offset the adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer (PCa). Yet provision of integrated exercise pathways in cancer care is sparse. This study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of an embedded supervised exercise training intervention into standard PCa care in a single-arm, multicentre prospective cohort study. Feasibility included recruitment, retention, adherence, fidelity and safety. Acceptability of behaviourally informed healthcare and exercise professional training was assessed qualitatively. Despite the imposition of lockdown for the COVID-19 pandemic, referral rates into and adherence to, the intervention was high. Of the 45 men eligible for participation, 79% received the intervention. Patients completed a mean of 27 minutes of aerobic exercise per session (SD=3.48), at 77% heart rate maximum (92% of target dose), and 3 sets of 10 reps of 3 resistance exercises twice weekly for 12 weeks, without serious adverse event. The intervention was delivered by healthcare and exercise professionals with moderate to high fidelity and the intervention was deemed highly acceptable to patients. The impact of societal changes due to the pandemic on the delivery of this face-to-face intervention remain uncertain but positive impacts of embedding exercise provision into PCa care warrant long-term investigation.

Clinical evaluation of BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 point-of-care test performance compared to PCR-based testing and versus the Sofia SARS Antigen point-of-care test. (preprint)

ObjectivesThe clinical performance of the BD Veritor System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Veritor), a chromatographic immunoassay that detects the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen as a point-of-care test, was evaluated on nasal specimens from individuals with COVID-19 symptoms. Methods and MaterialsTwo studies were completed to determine clinical performance. In the first study, nasal specimens and either nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal specimens from 251 participants with COVID-19 symptoms ([≤]7 days from symptom onset [DSO]), [≥]18 years of age, were utilized to compare Veritor with the Lyra(R) SARS-CoV-2 PCR Assay (Lyra). In the second study, nasal specimens from 361 participants with COVID-19 symptoms ([≤]5 DSO), [≥]18 years of age, were utilized to compare performance of Veritor to that of the Sofia(R) 2 SARS Antigen FIA test (Sofia 2). Positive, negative, and overall percent agreement (PPA, NPA, and OPA, respectively) were the primary outcomes. ResultsIn study 1, PPA for Veritor, compared to Lyra, ranged from 81.8%-87.5% for 0-1 through 0-6 DSO ranges. In study 2, Veritor had a PPA, NPA, and OPA of 97.4%, 98.1%, and 98.1%, respectively, with Sofia 2. Discordant analysis showed one Lyra positive missed by Veritor and five Lyra positives missed by Sofia 2; one Veritor positive result was negative by Lyra. ConclusionsVeritor met FDA-EUA acceptance criteria for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing ([≥]80% PPA point estimate) for the 0-5 and 0-6 DSO ranges. Veritor and Sofia 2 showed a high degree of agreement for SARS-CoV-2 detection. The Veritor test should facilitate rapid and reliable results for COVID-19 diagnosis utilizing easy-to-collect nasal swabs. SummaryThe BD Veritor SARS-CoV-2 antigen test met FDA-EUA acceptance criteria for SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing for subjects with COVID-19 symptoms (0-5 days post-onset). BD Veritor and Quidel Sofia 2 antigen tests had good agreement for SARS-CoV-2 detection; discordant analysis favored Veritor.