Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e048144, 2021 09 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443592

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of the ReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening Study is to explore the uptake of an invitation to prostate cancer screening using MRI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening Study is a prospective single-centre feasibility study. Eligible men aged 50-75 years with no prior prostate cancer diagnosis or treatment will be identified through general practitioner practices and randomly selected for invitation. Those invited will be offered an MRI scan and a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test. The screening MRI scan consists of T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted and research-specific sequences, without the use of intravenous contrast agents. Men who screen positive on either MRI or PSA density will be recommended to have standard of care (National Health Service) tests for prostate cancer assessment, which includes multiparametric MRI. The study will assess the acceptability of an MRI-based prostate screening assessment and the prevalence of cancer detected in MRI-screened men. Summary statistics will be used to explore baseline characteristics in relation to acceptance rates and prevalence of cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: ReIMAGINE Prostate Cancer Screening is a single-site screening study to assess the feasibility of MRI as a screening tool for prostate cancer. Ethical approval was granted by London-Stanmore Research Ethics Committee Heath Research Authority (reference 19/LO/1129). Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals after completion of data analysis and used to inform the design of a multicentre screening study in the UK. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04063566).


Subject(s)
Prostate-Specific Antigen , Prostatic Neoplasms , Aged , Early Detection of Cancer , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , State Medicine
2.
BJPsych Open ; 7(3): e88, 2021 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1207612

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant psychological impact on healthcare workers (HCWs). AIMS: There is an urgent need to understand the risk and protective factors associated with poor mental well-being of UK HCWs working during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Shortly after the April 2020 UK COVID-19 peak 2773 HCWs completed a survey containing measures of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and stress, as well as questions around potential predictors such as roles, COVID-19 risk perception and workplace-related factors. Respondents were classified as high or low symptomatic on each scale and logistic regression revealed factors associated with severe psychiatric symptoms. Change in well-being from pre- to during COVID-19 was also quantified. RESULTS: Nearlya third of HCWs reported moderate to severe levels of anxiety and depression, and the number reporting very high symptoms was more than quadruple that pre-COVID-19. Several controllable factors were associated with the most severe level of psychiatric symptoms: insufficient personal protective equipment availability, workplace preparation, training and communication, and higher workload. Being female, 'front line', previous psychiatric diagnoses, traumatic events, and being an allied HCW or manager were also significantly associated with severe psychiatric symptoms. Sharing stress, resilience and ethical support for treatment decisions were significantly associated with low psychiatric symptoms. Front-line workers showed greater worsening of mental health compared with non-front-line HCWs. CONCLUSIONS: Poor mental well-being was prevalent during the COVID-19 response, however, controllable factors associated with severe psychiatric symptoms are available to be targeted to reduce the detrimental impact of COVID-19 and other pandemics on HCW mental health.

3.
Front Physiol ; 11: 564387, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-979032

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between vitamin D deficiency and increased morbidity/mortality with COVID-19 respiratory dysfunction. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 24 of April 2020) and PubMed (2020 to 17 of September 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: A search using the search terms: [(cholecalciferol or ergocalciferol or vitamin D2 or vitamin D3 or vitamin D or 25OHD) and (SARS-CoV-2 or coronavirus or COVID or betacoronavirus or MERS-CoV or SARS-CoV or respiratory infection or acute respiratory distress syndrome or ARDS)]m.p. was conducted on the 24/04/2020 (Search A) and 17/09/2020 (Search B). RESULTS: 91 studies were identified as being concerned with Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI)/Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and vitamin D, and 25 publications specifically explored the role of vitamin D deficiency in the development and progression of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 related ARDS. Search "A" identified three main themes of indirect evidence supporting such an association. Consistent epidemiological evidence exists linking low vitamin D levels to increased risk and severity of respiratory tract infections. We also report on plausible biological processes supporting such an association; and present weaker evidence supporting the benefit of vitamin D supplementation in reducing the risk and severity of ARIs. Uncertainty remains about what constitutes an appropriate dosing regimen in relation to reducing risk/severity of ARI/ARDS. More recent evidence (Search B) provided new insights into some direct links between vitamin D and COVID-19; with a number of cohort and ecological studies supporting an association with PCR-positivity for SARS-CoV-2 and vitamin D deficiency. The exact efficacy of the vitamin D supplementation for prevention of, or as an adjunct treatment for COVID-19 remains to be determined; but a number of randomized control trials (RCTs) currently underway are actively investigating these potential benefits. CONCLUSION: Our rapid review of literature supports the need for observational studies with COVID-19 infected populations to measure and assess vitamin D levels in relation to risk/severity and outcomes; alongside RCTs designed to evaluate the efficacy of supplementation both in preventive and therapeutic contexts. The overlap in the vitamin D associated biological pathways with the dysregulation reported to drive COVID-19 outcomes warrants further investigation.

4.
Ecancermedicalscience ; 14: 1022, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-44724

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer and transplant patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of developing severe and even fatal respiratory diseases, especially as they may be treated with immune-suppressive or immune-stimulating drugs. This review focuses on the effects of these drugs on host immunity against COVID-19. METHODS: Using Ovid MEDLINE, we reviewed current evidence for immune-suppressing or -stimulating drugs: cytotoxic chemotherapy, low-dose steroids, tumour necrosis factorα (TNFα) blockers, interlukin-6 (IL-6) blockade, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, IL-1 blockade, mycophenolate, tacrolimus, anti-CD20 and CTLA4-Ig. RESULTS: 89 studies were included. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has been shown to be a specific inhibitor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in in vitro studies, but no specific studies exist as of yet for COVID-19. No conclusive evidence for or against the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients is available, nor is there evidence indicating that TNFα blockade is harmful to patients in the context of COVID-19. COVID-19 has been observed to induce a pro-inflammatory cytokine generation and secretion of cytokines, such as IL-6, but there is no evidence of the beneficial impact of IL-6 inhibitors on the modulation of COVID-19. Although there are potential targets in the JAK-STAT pathway that can be manipulated in treatment for coronaviruses and it is evident that IL-1 is elevated in patients with a coronavirus, there is currently no evidence for a role of these drugs in treatment of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to challenging decision-making about treatment of critically unwell patients. Low-dose prednisolone and tacrolimus may have beneficial impacts on COVID-19. The mycophenolate mofetil picture is less clear, with conflicting data from pre-clinical studies. There is no definitive evidence that specific cytotoxic drugs, low-dose methotrexate for auto-immune disease, NSAIDs, JAK kinase inhibitors or anti-TNFα agents are contraindicated. There is clear evidence that IL-6 peak levels are associated with severity of pulmonary complications.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL