British medical bulletin article: resourcing of palliative and end of life care in the UK during the Covid-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Covid-19 led to a sustained increase in deaths in all four United Kingdom nations, placing strain on the UK's palliative and end-of-life care sector and raising concerns about the long-term sustainability of the sector's funding and resourcing model in the face of rising demand for these services in the coming decades. SOURCES OF DATA: Published research, Marie Curie, King's College London Cicely Saunders Institute, Hull York Medical School, University of Hull, University of Cambridge, National Statistics, PubMed, DOI. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Care for people at the end of their lives is a core part of the UK's health and care system with demand set to increase significantly as the UK's population ages. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: The UK's funding model for palliative and end-of-life care, with most care delivered by charitable sector providers and reliant on charitable donations, may be unsustainable in the face of increasing demand. GROWING POINTS: The Covid-19 pandemic led to rapid service innovation in palliative and end-of-life care, and providers should assess which of and how these innovations can be retained after the pandemic. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Although there has been a rapid growth in knowledge during Covid-19, gaps still remain including: the reasons underlying shifts to deaths at home and the implications for family carers; the education needs of the wider healthcare workforce in palliative care; the impact of specialist palliative care services on the wider health system, including hospital admissions and place of death; and inequalities in the experiences of dying, death and bereavement during Covid-19 among groups such as those from lower socioeconomic groups and BAME communities.

OpenSAFELY: impact of national guidance on switching anticoagulant therapy during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Health Service (NHS) recommended that appropriate patients anticoagulated with warfarin should be switched to direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), requiring less frequent blood testing. Subsequently, a national safety alert was issued regarding patients being inappropriately coprescribed two anticoagulants following a medication change and associated monitoring. OBJECTIVE: To describe which people were switched from warfarin to DOACs; identify potentially unsafe coprescribing of anticoagulants; and assess whether abnormal clotting results have become more frequent during the pandemic. METHODS: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a cohort study using routine clinical data from 24 million NHS patients in England. RESULTS: 20 000 of 164 000 warfarin patients (12.2%) switched to DOACs between March and May 2020, most commonly to edoxaban and apixaban. Factors associated with switching included: older age, recent renal function test, higher number of recent INR tests recorded, atrial fibrillation diagnosis and care home residency. There was a sharp rise in coprescribing of warfarin and DOACs from typically 50-100 per month to 246 in April 2020, 0.06% of all people receiving a DOAC or warfarin. International normalised ratio (INR) testing fell by 14% to 506.8 patients tested per 1000 warfarin patients each month. We observed a very small increase in elevated INRs (n=470) during April compared with January (n=420). CONCLUSIONS: Increased switching of anticoagulants from warfarin to DOACs was observed at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic in England following national guidance. There was a small but substantial number of people coprescribed warfarin and DOACs during this period. Despite a national safety alert on the issue, a widespread rise in elevated INR test results was not found. Primary care has responded rapidly to changes in patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Viewpoint: digital paediatrics-so close yet so far away.

Technology is driving a revolution in healthcare, but paediatric services have not fully harnessed the potential. Digital health solutions yet to achieve their promise in paediatrics include electronic health records, decision support systems, telemedicine and remote consultations, despite the accelerated uptake during the COVID-19 pandemic. There are also significant potential benefits in digitally enabled research, including systems to identify and recruit participants online or through health records, tools to extract data points from routine data sets rather than new data collection, and remote approaches to outcome measurement. Children and their families are increasingly becoming digital health citizens, able to manage their own health and use of health services through mobile apps and wearables such as fitness trackers. Ironically, one barrier to the uptake of these technologies is that the fast pace of change in this area means the evidence base behind many of these tools remains underdeveloped. Clinicians are often sceptical of innovations which appear largely driven by enthusiasts rather than science. Rigorous studies are needed to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. Regulators need to be agile and responsive. Implementation needs adequate resource and time, and needs to minimise risks and address concerns, such as worries over losing human contact. Digital health care needs to be embedded in medical education and training so that clinicians are trained in the use of innovations and can understand how to embed within services. In this way, digital paediatrics can deliver benefits to the profession, to services and to our patients.

NICE rapid guidelines: exploring political influence on guidelines.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has been presented as politically independent, asserting it is free from industry influence and conflicts of interest so that its decisions may be led by evidence and science. We consider the ways in which soft political factors operate in guideline development processes at NICE such that guidelines are not truly led by science. We suggest that while NICE procedures explicitly incorporate scientific principles and mechanisms, including independent committees and quality assurance, these fail to operate as scientific practices because, for example, decisions may only be challenged through the courts, which regard NICE as a scientific authority. We then examine what the NICE rapid guideline procedure for COVID-19 reveals about the practical reality of claims about the scientific integrity of NICE guidelines. Changes to guideline development processes during the COVID-19 emergency demonstrated how easy it is to undermine the scientific integrity of NICE's decision-making. The cancellation of the guideline programme and the publication of a rapid guideline process specifically to address the COVID-19 pandemic removed scientific checks and balances, including independent committees, stakeholder consultation and quality assurance, demonstrating that the relationship between NICE and the UK government is more complex than a scientific principle truism. We suggest that NICE is not (and indeed cannot be) truly independent of government in practice, nor can it be truly led by science, in part because of its relationship to the state, which it is simultaneously constituted by and constitutive of.

Medicine in motion: Opportunities, challenges and data analytics-based solutions for traditional medicine integration into western medical practice.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Traditional pharmacopeias have been developed by multiple cultures and evaluated for efficacy and safety through both historical/empirical iteration and more recently through controlled studies using Western scientific paradigms and an increasing emphasis on data science methodologies for network pharmacology. Traditional medicines represent likely sources of relatively inexpensive drugs for symptomatic management as well as potential libraries of new therapeutic approaches. Leveraging this potential requires hard evidence for efficacy that separates science from pseudoscience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a review of non-Western medical systems and developed case studies that illustrate the epistemological and practical translative barriers that hamper their transition to integration with Western approaches. We developed a new data analytics approach, in silico convergence analysis, to deconvolve modes of action, and potentially predict desirable components of TM-derived formulations based on computational consensus analysis across cultures and medical systems. RESULTS: Abstraction, simplification and altered dose and delivery modalities were identified as factors that influence actual and perceived efficacy once a medicine is moved from a non-Western to Western setting. Case studies on these factors highlighted issues with translation between non-Western and Western epistemologies, including those where epistemological and medicinal systems drive markets that can be epicenters for zoonoses such as the novel Coronavirus. The proposed novel data science approach demonstrated the ability to identify and predict desirable medicinal components for a test indication, pain. CONCLUSIONS: Relegation of traditional therapies to the relatively unregulated nutraceutical industry may lead healthcare providers and patients to underestimate the therapeutic potential of these medicines. We suggest three areas of emphasis for this field: First, vertical integration and embedding of traditional medicines into healthcare systems would subject them to appropriate regulation and evidence-based practice, as viable integrative implementation mode. Second, we offer a new Bradford-Hill-like framework for setting research priorities and evaluating efficacy, with the goal of rescuing potentially valuable therapies from the nutraceutical market and discrediting those that are pseudoscience. Third, data analytics pipelines offer new capacity to generate new types of TMS-inspired medicines that are rationally-designed based on integrated knowledge across cultures, and also provide an evaluative framework against which to test claims of fidelity and efficacy to TMS made for nutraceuticals.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on cancer immunotherapy in Italy: a survey of young oncologists.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed the health systems worldwide. Data regarding the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients (CPs) undergoing or candidate for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are lacking. We depicted the practice and adaptations in the management of patients with solid tumors eligible or receiving ICIs during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a special focus on Campania region. METHODS: This survey (25 questions), promoted by the young section of SCITO (Società Campana di ImmunoTerapia Oncologica) Group, was circulated among Italian young oncologists practicing in regions variously affected by the pandemic: high (group 1), medium (group 2) and low (group 3) prevalence of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. For Campania region, the physician responders were split into those working in cancer centers (CC), university hospitals (UH) and general hospitals (GH). Percentages of agreement, among High (H) versus Medium (M) and versus Low (L) group for Italy and among CC, UH and GH for Campania region, were compared by using Fisher's exact tests for dichotomous answers and χ2 test for trends relative to the questions with 3 or more options. RESULTS: This is the first Italian study to investigate the COVID-19 impact on cancer immunotherapy, unique in its type and very clear in the results. The COVID-19 pandemic seemed not to affect the standard practice in the prescription and delivery of ICIs in Italy. Telemedicine was widely used. There was high consensus to interrupt immunotherapy in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and to adopt ICIs with longer schedule interval. The majority of the responders tended not to delay the start of ICIs; there were no changes in supportive treatments, but some of the physicians opted for delaying surgeries (if part of patients' planned treatment approach). The results from responders in Campania did not differ significantly from the national ones. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the efforts of Italian oncologists to maintain high standards of care for CPs treated with ICIs, regardless the regional prevalence of COVID-19, suggesting the adoption of similar solutions. Research on patients treated with ICIs and experiencing COVID-19 will clarify the safety profile to continue the treatments, thus informing on the most appropriate clinical conducts.