Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
2.
Trials ; 21(1): 535, 2020 Jun 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32546192

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data collection consumes a large proportion of clinical trial resources. Each data item requires time and effort for collection, processing and quality control procedures. In general, more data equals a heavier burden for trial staff and participants. It is also likely to increase costs. Knowing the types of data being collected, and in what proportion, will be helpful to ensure that limited trial resources and participant goodwill are used wisely. AIM: The aim of this study is to categorise the types of data collected across a broad range of trials and assess what proportion of collected data each category represents. METHODS: We developed a standard operating procedure to categorise data into primary outcome, secondary outcome and 15 other categories. We categorised all variables collected on trial data collection forms from 18, mainly publicly funded, randomised superiority trials, including trials of an investigational medicinal product and complex interventions. Categorisation was done independently in pairs: one person having in-depth knowledge of the trial, the other independent of the trial. Disagreement was resolved through reference to the trial protocol and discussion, with the project team being consulted if necessary. KEY RESULTS: Primary outcome data accounted for 5.0% (median)/11.2% (mean) of all data items collected. Secondary outcomes accounted for 39.9% (median)/42.5% (mean) of all data items. Non-outcome data such as participant identifiers and demographic data represented 32.4% (median)/36.5% (mean) of all data items collected. CONCLUSION: A small proportion of the data collected in our sample of 18 trials was related to the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes accounted for eight times the volume of data as the primary outcome. A substantial amount of data collection is not related to trial outcomes. Trialists should work to make sure that the data they collect are only those essential to support the health and treatment decisions of those whom the trial is designed to inform.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Data Collection/classification , Data Collection/standards , Data Interpretation, Statistical , Humans
3.
BMJ Open ; 8(10): e026080, 2018 10 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30373785

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects up to 16% of adults in the UK. Patient quality of life is particularly reduced in end-stage renal disease and is strongly associated with increased hospitalisation and mortality. Thus, accurate and responsive healthcare is a key priority. Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) are online questionnaires which ask patients to self-rate their health status. Evidence in oncology suggests that the use of ePROM data within routine care, alongside clinical information, may enhance symptom management and improve patient outcomes. However, National Health Service (NHS)-based ePROM research in CKD is lacking. This pilot trial will assess the feasibility of undertaking a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) in patients with CKD within the NHS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The renal ePROM pilot trial is an investigator-led single-centre, open-label, two-arm randomised controlled pilot trial of 66 participants ≥18 years with advanced CKD. Participants will be randomised to receive either usual care or usual care supplemented with an ePROM intervention. Participants within the intervention arm will be asked to submit monthly self-reports of their health status using the ePROM system. The system will provide tailored information to patients in response to each report and notify the clinical team of patient deterioration. The renal clinical team will monitor for ePROM notifications and will respond with appropriate action, in line with standard clinical practice. Measures of study feasibility, participant quality of life and CKD severity will be completed at 3 monthly intervals. Health economic outcomes will be assessed. Clinicians will record treatment decision-making. Acceptability and feasibility of the protocol will be assessed alongside outcome measure and intervention compliance rates. Qualitative process evaluation will be conducted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings will inform the design of a full-scale RCT and the results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. The study has ethical approval. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN12669006; Pre-results.


Subject(s)
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/methods , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Pilot Projects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
5.
Nephrol Dial Transplant ; 31(2): 255-61, 2016 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26429974

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) control and reduction of urinary protein excretion using agents that block the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system are the mainstay of therapy for chronic kidney disease (CKD). Research has confirmed the benefits in mild CKD, but data on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use in advanced CKD are lacking. In the STOP-ACEi trial, we aim to confirm preliminary findings which suggest that withdrawal of ACEi/ARB treatment can stabilize or even improve renal function in patients with advanced progressive CKD. METHODS: The STOP-ACEi trial (trial registration: current controlled trials, ISRCTN62869767) is an investigator-led multicentre open-label, randomized controlled clinical trial of 410 participants with advanced (Stage 4 or 5) progressive CKD receiving ACEi, ARBs or both. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either discontinue ACEi, ARB or combination of both (experimental arm) or continue ACEi, ARB or combination of both (control arm). Patients will be followed up at 3 monthly intervals for 3 years. The primary outcome measure is eGFR at 3 years. Secondary outcome measures include the number of renal events, participant quality of life and physical functioning, hospitalization rates, BP and laboratory measures, including serum cystatin-C. Safety will be assessed to ensure that withdrawal of these treatments does not cause excess harm or increase mortality or cardiovascular events such as heart failure, myocardial infarction or stroke. RESULTS: The rationale and trial design are presented here. The results of this trial will show whether discontinuation of ACEi/ARBs can improve or stabilize renal function in patients with advanced progressive CKD. It will show whether this simple intervention can improve laboratory and clinical outcomes, including progression to end-stage renal disease, without causing an increase in cardiovascular events.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Glomerular Filtration Rate/drug effects , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/drug therapy , Withholding Treatment , Aged , Blood Pressure/drug effects , Disease Progression , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/physiopathology
6.
J Neurochem ; 109(4): 1042-52, 2009 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19519776

ABSTRACT

At the majority of mutants in the region Glu181-Val200 incorporating a conserved AsnPheThrPhiPhixLys motif cysteine substitution had no effect on sensitivity to ATP, partial agonists, or methanethiosulfonate (MTS) compounds. For the F185C mutant the efficacy of partial agonists was reduced by approximately 90% but there was no effect on ATP potency or the actions of MTS reagents. At T186C, F188C and K190C mutants ATP potency and partial agonists responses were reduced. The ATP sensitivity of the K190C mutant was rescued towards WT levels by positively charged (2-aminoethyl)methanethiosulfonate hydrobromide and reduced by negatively charged sodium (2-sulfonatoethyl) methanethiosulfonate. Both MTS reagents decreased ATP potency at the T186C mutant, and abolished responses at the F195C mutant. (32)P-2-azido ATP binding to the mutants T186C and K190C was sensitive to MTS reagents consistent with an effect on binding, however binding at F195C was unaffected indicating an effect on gating. The accessibility of the introduced cysteines was probed with (2-aminoethyl)methanethiosulfonate hydrobromide-biotin, this showed that the region Thr186-Ser192 is likely to form a beta sheet and that accessibility is blocked by ATP. Taken together these results suggest that Thr186, Phe188 and Lys190 are involved in ATP binding to the receptor and Phe185 and Phe195 contribute to agonist evoked conformational changes.


Subject(s)
Cysteine/genetics , Purinergic P2 Receptor Agonists , Adenosine Triphosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Triphosphate/physiology , Affinity Labels , Animals , Azides , Biotinylation , Blotting, Western , Electrophysiology , Ethyl Methanesulfonate/analogs & derivatives , Humans , Indicators and Reagents , Mutagenesis, Site-Directed , Oocytes/metabolism , Patch-Clamp Techniques , Protein Conformation , Receptors, Purinergic P2/chemistry , Receptors, Purinergic P2X , Xenopus laevis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...