FORWARDS-1: an adaptive, single-blind, placebo-controlled ascending dose study of acute baclofen on safety parameters in opioid dependence during methadone-maintenance treatment-a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of opiate addiction with opiate substitution treatment (e.g. methadone) is beneficial. However, some individuals desire or would benefit from abstinence but there are limited options to attenuate problems with opiate withdrawal. Preclinical and preliminary clinical evidence suggests that the GABA-B agonist, baclofen, has the desired properties to facilitate opiate detoxification and prevent relapse. This study aims to understand whether there are any safety issues in administering baclofen to opioid-dependent individuals receiving methadone. METHODS: Opiate-dependent individuals (DSM-5 severe opioid use disorder) maintained on methadone will be recruited from addiction services in northwest London (NHS and third sector providers). Participants will be medically healthy with no severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or type 2 respiratory failure, no current dependence on other substances (excluding nicotine), no current severe DSM-5 psychiatric disorders, and no contraindications for baclofen or 4800 IU vitamin D (placebo). Eligible participants will be randomised in a 3:1 ratio to receive baclofen or placebo in an adaptive, single-blind, ascending dose design. A Bayesian dose-escalation model will inform the baclofen dose (10, 30, 60, or 90 mg) based on the incidence of 'dose-limiting toxicity' (DLT) events and participant-specific methadone dose. A range of respiratory, cardiovascular, and sedative measures including the National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) and Glasgow Coma Scale will determine DLT. On the experimental day, participants will consume their usual daily dose of methadone followed by an acute dose of baclofen or placebo (vitamin D3) ~ 1 h later. Measures including oxygen saturation, transcutaneous CO2, respiratory rate, QTc interval, subjective effects (sedation, drug liking, craving), plasma levels (baclofen, methadone), and adverse events will be obtained using validated questionnaires and examinations periodically for 5 h after dosing. DISCUSSION: Study outcomes will determine what dose of baclofen is safe to prescribe to those receiving methadone, to inform a subsequent proof-of-concept trial of the efficacy baclofen to facilitate opiate detoxification. To proceed, the minimum acceptable dose is 30 mg of baclofen in patients receiving ≤ 60 mg/day methadone based on the clinical experience of baclofen's use in alcoholism and guidelines for the management of opiate dependence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05161351. Registered on 16 December 2021.

Response to: 'Anakinra for palmoplantar pustulosis: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, two-staged, adaptive placebo-controlled trial (APRICOT)': reply from the authors.

We believe that there is significant interest in the role of IL-1 in the pathomechanism of palmoplantar pustulosis. However, the APRICOT study failed to demonstrate a therapeutic effect of the IL-1 receptor antagonist. So, we recommend that the authors perform an additional subgroup analysis based on the presence or absence of plaque psoriasis.

Anakinra for palmoplantar pustulosis: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, two-staged, adaptive placebo-controlled trial (APRICOT).

BACKGROUND: Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) is a rare, debilitating, chronic inflammatory skin disease that affects the hands and feet. Clinical, immunological and genetic findings suggest a pathogenic role for interleukin (IL)-1. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether anakinra (an IL-1 receptor antagonist) delivers therapeutic benefit in PPP. METHODS: This was a randomized (1 : 1), double-blind, two-staged, adaptive, UK multicentre, placebo-controlled trial [ISCRTN13127147 (registered 1 August 2016); EudraCT number: 2015-003600-23 (registered 1 April 2016)]. Participants had a diagnosis of PPP (> 6 months) requiring systemic therapy. Treatment was 8 weeks of anakinra or placebo via daily, self-administered subcutaneous injections. Primary outcome was the Palmoplantar Pustulosis Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) at 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 374 patients were screened; 64 were enrolled (31 in the anakinra arm and 33 in the placebo arm) with a mean (SD) baseline PPPASI of 17·8 (10·5) and a PPP investigator's global assessment of severe (50%) or moderate (50%). The baseline adjusted mean difference in PPPASI favoured anakinra but did not demonstrate superiority in the intention-to-treat analysis [-1·65, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4·77 to 1·47; P = 0·30]. Similarly, secondary objective measures, including fresh pustule count (2·94, 95% CI -26·44 to 32·33; favouring anakinra), total pustule count (-30·08, 95% CI -83·20 to 23·05; favouring placebo) and patient-reported outcomes, did not show superiority of anakinra. When modelling the impact of adherence, the PPPASI complier average causal effect for an individual who received ≥ 90% of the total treatment (48% in the anakinra group) was -3·80 (95% CI -10·76 to 3·16; P = 0·285). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence for the superiority of anakinra was found. IL-1 blockade is not a useful intervention for the treatment of PPP.

The effect of vitamin D supplementation on knee osteoarthritis, the VIDEO study: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological data suggest low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25-OH-D3) levels are associated with radiological progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to assess whether vitamin D supplementation can slow the rate of progression. METHOD: A 3-year, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of 474 patients aged over 50 with radiographically evident knee OA comparing 800 IU cholecalciferol daily with placebo. Primary outcome was difference in rate of medial joint space narrowing (JSN). Secondary outcomes included lateral JSN, Kellgren & Lawrence grade, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, function, stiffness and the Get up and Go test. RESULTS: Vitamin D supplementation increased 25-OH-D3 from an average of 20.7 (standard deviation (SD) 8.9) µg/L to 30.4 (SD 7.7) µg/L, compared to 20.7 (SD 8.1) µg/L and 20.3 (SD 8.1) µg/L in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in the rate of JSN over 3 years in the medial compartment of the index knee between the treatment group (average -0.01 mm/year) and placebo group (-0.08 mm/year), average difference 0.08 mm/year (95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.14-0.29], P = 0.49). No significant interaction was found between baseline vitamin D levels and treatment effect. There were no significant differences for any of the secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Vitamin D supplementation did not slow the rate of JSN or lead to reduced pain, stiffness or functional loss over a 3-year period. On the basis of these findings we consider that vitamin D supplementation has no role in the management of knee OA.

Knee surgery and its evidence base.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence driven orthopaedics is gaining prominence. It enables better management decisions and therefore better patient care. The aim of our study was to review a selection of the leading publications pertaining to knee surgery to assess changes in levels of evidence over a decade. METHODS: Articles from the years 2000 and 2010 in The Knee, the Journal of Arthroplasty, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume) and the Bone and Joint Journal were analysed and ranked according to guidelines from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The intervening years (2003, 2005 and 2007) were also analysed to further define the trend. RESULTS: The percentage of high level evidence (level I and II) studies increased albeit without reaching statistical significance. Following a significant downward trend, the latter part of the decade saw a major rise in levels of published evidence. The most frequent type of study was therapeutic. CONCLUSIONS: Although the rise in levels of evidence across the decade was not statistically significant, there was a significant drop and then rise in these levels in the interim. It is therefore important that a further study is performed to assess longer-term trends. Recent developments have made clear that high quality evidence will be having an ever increasing influence on future orthopaedic practice. We suggest that journals implement compulsory declaration of a published study's level of evidence and that authors consider their study designs carefully to enhance the quality of available evidence.

The outcome of total ankle replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of modern total ankle replacements (TARs) to determine the survivorship, outcome, complications, radiological findings and range of movement, in patients with end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) of the ankle who undergo this procedure. We used the methodology of the Cochrane Collaboration, which uses risk of bias profiling to assess the quality of papers in favour of a domain-based approach. Continuous outcome scores were pooled across studies using the generic inverse variance method and the random-effects model was used to incorporate clinical and methodological heterogeneity. We included 58 papers (7942 TARs) with an interobserver reliability (Kappa) for selection, performance, attrition, detection and reporting bias of between 0.83 and 0.98. The overall survivorship was 89% at ten years with an annual failure rate of 1.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7 to 1.6). The mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score changed from 40 (95% CI 36 to 43) pre-operatively to 80 (95% CI 76 to 84) at a mean follow-up of 8.2 years (7 to 10) (p < 0.01). Radiolucencies were identified in up to 23% of TARs after a mean of 4.4 years (2.3 to 9.6). The mean total range of movement improved from 23° (95% CI 19 to 26) to 34° (95% CI 26 to 41) (p = 0.01). Our study demonstrates that TAR has a positive impact on patients' lives, with benefits lasting ten years, as judged by improvement in pain and function, as well as improved gait and increased range of movement. However, the quality of evidence is weak and fraught with biases and high quality randomised controlled trials are required to compare TAR with other forms of treatment such as fusion.