Risk assessment in acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding: the AIMS65 score in comparison with the Glasgow-Blatchford score in a Scottish population.

INTRODUCTION: The early use of risk stratification scores is recommended for patients presenting with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds (ANVGIB). AIMS65 is a novel, recently derived scoring system, which has been proposed as an alternative to the more established Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS). OBJECTIVE: To validate the AIMS65 scoring system in a predominantly Caucasian population from Scotland and compare it with the GBS. DESIGN: Retrospective study of patients presenting to a district general hospital in Scotland with a suspected diagnosis of ANVGIB who underwent inpatient upper GI endoscopy between March 2008 and March 2013. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcome measures were requirement for endoscopic intervention, endoscopy refractory bleeding, blood transfusion, rebleeding and admission to high dependency unit (HDU) and intensive care unit (ICU). The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated for each score. RESULTS: 328 patients were included. Of these 65.9% (n=216) were men and 34.1% (n=112) women. The mean age was 65.2 years and 30-day mortality 5.2%. AIMS65 was superior to the GBS in predicting mortality, with an AUROC of 0.87 versus 0.70 (p<0.05). The GBS was superior for blood transfusion (AUROC 0.84 vs 0.62, p<0.05) and admission to HDU (AUROC 0.73 vs 0.62, p<0.05). There were no significant differences between the scores with respect to requirement for endoscopic intervention, endoscopy refractory bleeding, rebleeding and admission to ICU. CONCLUSIONS: AIMS65 accurately predicted mortality in a Scottish population of patients with ANVGIB. Large prospective studies are now required to establish the exact role of AIMS65 in triaging patients with ANVGIB.

A methodology to establish a database to study gene environment interactions for childhood asthma.

BACKGROUND: Gene-environment interactions are likely to explain some of the heterogeneity in childhood asthma. Here, we describe the methodology and experiences in establishing a database for childhood asthma designed to study gene-environment interactions (PAGES--Paediatric Asthma Gene Environment Study). METHODS: Children with asthma and under the care of a respiratory paediatrician are being recruited from 15 hospitals between 2008 and 2011. An asthma questionnaire is completed and returned by post. At a routine clinic visit saliva is collected for DNA extraction. Detailed phenotyping in a proportion of children includes spirometry, bronchodilator response (BDR), skin prick reactivity, exhaled nitric oxide and salivary cotinine. Dietary and quality of life questionnaires are completed. Data are entered onto a purpose-built database. RESULTS: To date 1045 children have been invited to participate and data collected in 501 (48%). The mean age (SD) of participants is 8.6 (3.9) years, 57% male. DNA has been collected in 436 children. Spirometry has been obtained in 172 children, mean % predicted (SD) FEV1 97% (15) and median (IQR) BDR is 5% (2, 9). There were differences in age, socioeconomic status, severity and %FEV1 between the different centres (p≤0.024). Reasons for non-participation included parents not having time to take part, children not attending clinics and, in a small proportion, refusal to take part. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to establish a national database to study gene-environment interactions within an asthmatic paediatric population; there are barriers to participation and some different characteristics in individuals recruited from different centres. Recruitment to our study continues and is anticipated to extend current understanding of asthma heterogeneity.

Use of benchmarking in the development of biopharmaceutical products.

As the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry enters the 21st century, the pressure on companies to maintain the level of productivity required for consistent year-on-year growth is increasing. Benchmarking has become a tool for obtaining the information needed to support continuous improvement and gain a competitive advantage. During the process of benchmarking, best practices can be identified while giving management the ability to improve on existing performance in an objective, well-informed manner. When used appropriately, benchmarking provides a new perspective on traditional methods while enabling companies to monitor their performance.