Clare Clement

Infliximab versus ciclosporin for steroid-resistant acute severe ulcerative colitis (CONSTRUCT): a mixed methods, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial

Summary Background Infliximab and ciclosporin are of similar efficacy in treating acute severe ulcerative colitis, but there has been no comparative evaluation of their relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Methods In this mixed methods, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial, we recruited consenting patients aged 18 years or older at 52 district general and teaching hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales who had been admitted, unscheduled, with severe ulcerative colitis and failed to respond to intravenous hydrocortisone within about 5 days. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either infliximab (5 mg/kg intravenous infusion given over 2 h at baseline, and again at 2 weeks and 6 weeks after the first infusion) or ciclosporin (2 mg/kg per day by continuous infusion for up to 7 days, followed by twice-daily tablets delivering 5·5 mg/kg per day for 12 weeks). Randomisation used a web-based password-protected site, with a dynamic algorithm to generate allocations on request, thus protecting against investigator preference or other subversion, while ensuring that each trial group was balanced by centre, which was the only stratification used. Local investigators and participants were aware of the treatment allocated, but the chief investigator and analysts were masked. Analysis was by treatment allocated. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted survival—ie, the area under the curve (AUC) of scores from the Crohns and Ulcerative Colitis Questionnaire (CUCQ) completed by participants at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, then every 6 months from 1 year to 3 years. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN22663589. Findings Between June 17, 2010, and Feb 26, 2013, 270 patients were recruited. 135 patients were allocated to the infliximab group and 135 to the ciclosporin group. 121 (90%) patients in each group were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. There was no significant difference between groups in quality-adjusted survival (mean AUC 564·0 [SD 241·9] in the infliximab group vs 587·0 [226·2] in the ciclosporin group; mean adjusted difference 7·9 [95% CI −22·0 to 37·8]; p=0·603). Likewise, there were no significant differences between groups in the secondary outcomes of CUCQ scores, EQ-5D, or SF-6D scores; frequency of colectomy (55 [41%] of 135 patients in the infliximab group vs 65 [48%] of 135 patients in the ciclosporin group; p=0·223); or mean time to colectomy (811 [95% CI 707–912] days in the infliximab group vs 744 [638–850] days in the ciclosporin group; p=0·251). There were no differences in serious adverse reactions (16 reactions in 14 participants receiving infliximab vs ten in nine patients receiving ciclosporin); serious adverse events (21 in 16 patients vs 25 in 17 patients); or deaths (three in the infliximab group vs none in the ciclosporin group). Interpretation There was no significant difference between ciclosporin and infliximab in clinical effectiveness. Funding NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.

Randomised controlled trial. Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: Trial design and protocol (CONSTRUCT)

Introduction Many patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) present with acute exacerbations needing hospital admission. Treatment includes intravenous steroids but up to 40% of patients do not respond and require emergency colectomy. Mortality following emergency colectomy has fallen, but 10% of patients still die within 3 months of surgery. Infliximab and ciclosporin, both immunosuppressive drugs, offer hope for treating steroid-resistant UC as there is evidence of their short-term effectiveness. As there is little long-term evidence, this pragmatic randomised trial, known as Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: a Trial (CONSTRUCT), aims to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of infliximab and ciclosporin for steroid-resistant UC. Methods and analysis Between May 2010 and February 2013, 52 UK centres recruited 270 patients admitted with acute severe UC who failed to respond to intravenous steroids but did not need surgery. We allocated them at random in equal proportions between infliximab and ciclosporin.The primary clinical outcome measure is quality-adjusted survival, that is survival weighted by Crohns and Colitis Questionnaire (CCQ) participants’ scores, analysed by Cox regression. Secondary outcome measures include: the CCQ—an extension of the validated but community-focused UK Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) to include patients with acute severe colitis and stoma; two general quality of life measures—EQ-5D and SF-12; mortality; survival weighted by EQ-5D; emergency and planned colectomies; readmissions; incidence of adverse events including malignancies, serious infections and renal disorders; disease activity; National Health Service (NHS) costs and patient-borne costs. Interviews investigate participants’ views on therapies for acute severe UC and healthcare professionals’ views on the two drugs and their administration. Ethics and dissemination The Research Ethics Committee for Wales has given ethical approval (Ref. 08/MRE09/42); each participating Trust or Health Board has given NHS Reseach & Development approval. We plan to present trial findings at international and national conferences and publish in high-impact peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number ISRCTN: 22663589; EudraCT number: 2008-001968-36

Qualitative research within trials: developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit

BackgroundQualitative research methods are increasingly used within clinical trials to address broader research questions than can be addressed by quantitative methods alone. These methods enable health professionals, service users, and other stakeholders to contribute their views and experiences to evaluation of healthcare treatments, interventions, or policies, and influence the design of trials. Qualitative data often contribute information that is better able to reform policy or influence design.MethodsHealth services researchers, including trialists, clinicians, and qualitative researchers, worked collaboratively to develop a comprehensive portfolio of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the West Wales Organisation for Rigorous Trials in Health (WWORTH), a clinical trials unit (CTU) at Swansea University, which has recently achieved registration with the UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC). Although the UKCRC requires a total of 25 SOPs from registered CTUs, WWORTH chose to add an additional qualitative-methods SOP (QM-SOP).ResultsThe qualitative methods SOP (QM-SOP) defines good practice in designing and implementing qualitative components of trials, while allowing flexibility of approach and method. Its basic principles are that: qualitative researchers should be contributors from the start of trials with qualitative potential; the qualitative component should have clear aims; and the main study publication should report on the qualitative component.ConclusionsWe recommend that CTUs consider developing a QM-SOP to enhance the conduct of quantitative trials by adding qualitative data and analysis. We judge that this improves the value of quantitative trials, and contributes to the future development of multi-method trials.

Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: pragmatic randomised Trial and economic evaluation (CONSTRUCT)

BACKGROUND The efficacy of infliximab and ciclosporin in treating severe ulcerative colitis (UC) is proven, but there has been no comparative evaluation of effectiveness. OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of infliximab and ciclosporin in treating steroid-resistant acute severe UC. METHOD Between May 2010 and February 2013 we recruited 270 participants from 52 hospitals in England, Scotland and Wales to an open-label parallel-group, pragmatic randomised trial. Consented patients admitted with severe colitis completed baseline quality-of-life questionnaires before receiving intravenous hydrocortisone. If they failed to respond within about 5 days, and met other inclusion criteria, we invited them to participate and used a web-based adaptive randomisation algorithm to allocate them in equal proportions between 5 mg/kg of intravenous infliximab at 0, 2 and 6 weeks or 2 mg/kg/day of intravenous ciclosporin for 7 days followed by 5.5 mg/kg/day of oral ciclosporin until 12 weeks from randomisation. Further treatment was at the discretion of physicians responsible for clinical management. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted survival (QAS): the area under the curve (AUC) of scores derived from Crohns and Ulcerative Colitis Questionnaires completed by participants at 3 and 6 months, and then 6-monthly over 1-3 years, more frequently after surgery. Secondary outcomes collected simultaneously included European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores and NHS resource use to estimate cost-effectiveness. Blinding was possible only for data analysts. We interviewed 20 trial participants and 23 participating professionals. Funded data collection finished in March 2014. Most participants consented to complete annual questionnaires and for us to analyse their routinely collected health data over 10 years. RESULTS The 135 participants in each group were well matched at baseline. In 121 participants analysed in each group, we found no significant difference between infliximab and ciclosporin in QAS [mean difference in AUC/day 0.0297 favouring ciclosporin, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.0088 to 0.0682; p = 0.129]; EQ-5D scores (quality-adjusted life-year mean difference 0.021 favouring ciclosporin, 95% CI -0.032 to 0.096; p = 0.350); Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions scores (mean difference 0.0051 favouring ciclosporin, 95% CI -0.0250 to 0.0353; p = 0.737). There was no statistically significant difference in colectomy rates [odds ratio (OR) 1.350 favouring infliximab, 95% CI 0.832 to 2.188; p = 0.223]; numbers of serious adverse reactions (event ratio = 0.938 favouring ciclosporin, 95% CI 0.590 to 1.493; p = 0.788); participants with serious adverse reactions (OR 0.660 favouring ciclosporin, 95% CI 0.282 to 1.546; p = 0.338); numbers of serious adverse events (event ratio 1.075 favouring infliximab, 95% CI 0.603 to 1.917; p = 0.807); participants with serious adverse events (OR 0.999 favouring infliximab, 95% CI 0.473 to 2.114; p = 0.998); deaths (all three who died received infliximab; p = 0.247) or concomitant use of immunosuppressants. The lower cost of ciclosporin led to lower total NHS costs (mean difference -£5632, 95% CI -£8305 to -£2773; p < 0.001). Interviews highlighted the debilitating effect of UC; participants were more positive about infliximab than ciclosporin. Professionals reported advantages and disadvantages with both drugs, but nurses disliked the intravenous ciclosporin. CONCLUSIONS Total cost to the NHS was considerably higher for infliximab than ciclosporin. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference between the two drugs in clinical effectiveness, colectomy rates, incidence of SAEs or reactions, or mortality, when measured 1-3 years post treatment. To assess long-term outcome participants will be followed up for 10 years post randomisation, using questionnaires and routinely collected data. Further studies will be needed to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of new anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs and formulations of ciclosporin. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22663589. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 44. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The Rationale and Design of the Reducing Pathology in Alzheimer's Disease through Angiotensin TaRgeting (RADAR) Trial

BACKGROUND Anti-hypertensives that modify the renin angiotensin system may reduce Alzheimers disease (AD) pathology and reduce the rate of disease progression. OBJECTIVE To conduct a phase II, two arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of losartan to test the efficacy of Reducing pathology in Alzheimers Disease through Angiotensin TaRgeting (RADAR). METHODS Men and women aged at least 55 years with mild-to-moderate AD will be randomly allocated 100 mg encapsulated generic losartan or placebo once daily for 12 months after successful completion of a 2-week open-label phase and 2-week placebo washout to establish drug tolerability. 228 participants will provide at least 182 subjects with final assessments to provide 84% power to detect a 25% difference in atrophy rate (therapeutic benefit) change over 12 months at an alpha level of 0.05. We will use intention-to-treat analysis, estimating between-group differences in outcomes derived from appropriate (linear or logistic) multivariable regression models adjusting for minimization variables. RESULTS The primary outcome will be rate of whole brain atrophy as a surrogate measure of disease progression. Secondary outcomes will include changes to 1) white matter hyperintensity volume and cerebral blood flow; 2) performance on a standard series of assessments of memory, cognitive function, activities of daily living, and quality of life. Major assessments (for all outcomes) and relevant safety monitoring of blood pressure and bloods will be at baseline and 12 months. Additional cognitive assessment will also be conducted at 6 months along with safety blood pressure and blood monitoring. Monitoring of blood pressure, bloods, and self-reported side effects will occur during the open-label phase and during the majority of the post-randomization dispensing visits. CONCLUSION This study will identify whether losartan is efficacious in the treatment of AD and whether definitive Phase III trials are warranted.

Women’s Perceptions of Journeying Toward an Unknown Future With Breast Cancer: The “Lives at Risk Study”:

Breast cancer risk classifications are useful for prognosis, yet little is known of their effect on patients. This study clarified women’s understandings of risk as they “journeyed” through the health care system. Breast cancer patients and women undergoing genetic investigation were recruited (N = 25) from a large UK Health Board, 2014–2015, completing a “Book of Experience,” and Bio-photographic elicitation interviews. Stakeholder and Participant Feedback Forums were undertaken with key stakeholders, including patients, oncologists, funders, and policy developers, to inform team understanding. Thematic and visual frameworks from multidisciplinary analysis workshops uncovered two themes: “Subjective Understandings of Risk” and “Journeying Toward an Unknown Future.” Breast cancer patients and women undergoing investigation experienced risk intuitively. Statistical formulations were often perplexing, diverting attention away from concrete life-and-death facts. Following risk classification, care must be co-defined to reduce patients’ foreboding about an unknown future, taking into consideration personal risk management strategies and aspirations for a cancer-free future.

‘Recruitment, recruitment, recruitment’ – the need for more focus on retention: a qualitative study of five trials

BackgroundLoss to follow-up (attrition) is a frequent problem in clinical trials and can introduce bias or reduce power. So, understanding retention issues and strategies to address these are important. As part of a multi-method project, this qualitative study aimed to explore retention strategies used by trial teams and factors which may influence strategy adoption.MethodA purposive sample of active trials was selected from the UK NIHR HTA portfolio of ongoing trials in 2014/2015. Semi-structured interviews with several trial team members from each trial and supplementary interviews with experienced trial managers explored strategies in collecting clinical outcome data and retaining participants. Interview data were analysed thematically using techniques of constant comparison.ResultsTwenty-two semi-structured interviews with trial team members including chief investigators, trial managers, nurses and research administrators revealed strategies used to enhance retention. Some were recognised methods and planned from trial outset whilst others were implemented more responsively. Interviewees placed great value on fostering positive relationships with trial participants to enhance retention. However, these strategies took time which was not always appreciated by the wider trial team or funding bodies. The national focus on recruitment targets in networks posed a challenge to staff and was deemed detrimental to retention. The ‘moral compass’ of individual researchers relied on their own beliefs and values and research experience and the factors affected their confidence to pursue participant data during follow-up.ConclusionThe role of trial staff and their underlying behaviours influence retention practices and, combined with emphasis on recruitment targets, can be detrimental to motivation and retention activities. There is a need to consider how to train and support trial staff involved in retention practices and recognition of retention from funding bodies and oversight organisations.

Healthcare professionals' views of the use and administration of two salvage therapy drugs for acute ulcerative colitis: a nested qualitative study within the CONSTRUCT trial

Objectives Insight into healthcare professionals’ views and experiences of the use of ciclosporin and infliximab as salvage therapies for acute ulcerative colitis (UC) and how this may affect participation in a comparison trial is lacking. The study aimed to capture views and opinions of healthcare professionals about the two drugs within the CONSTRUCT trial. Design An interview-based qualitative study using Framework Analysis embedded within an open-label, pragmatic randomised trial. Setting National Health Service Health Boards and Trusts, including large teaching and district hospitals in England, Scotland and Wales. Participants Principal Investigators (PIs) for trial sites (who were all consultant gastroenterologists) and nurses responsible for administering and monitoring the salvage therapy drugs across trial sites. 15 PIs and 8 nurses recruited from a range of sites stratified by site recruitment rates were interviewed. Results Interviews revealed that professionals made judgements regarding the salvage therapies largely based on experience of giving the two drugs and perceptions of effectiveness and adverse side effects. A clear preference for infliximab among nurses was revealed, largely based on experiences of administration and drug handling, with some doctors strongly favouring infliximab based on experience of prescribing the drug as well as patient views and the existing evidence base. Most doctors were more equivocal, and all were prepared to suspend preferences and wait for evidence of effectiveness and safety from the CONSTRUCT trial. PIs also questioned guidelines around drug use and restrictions placed on personal autonomy in delivering best patient care. Conclusions Findings highlight healthcare professionals’ preference for the salvage treatment, infliximab in treating steroid-resistant UC, largely based on resource intensive nursing requirements of intravenous administration of ciclosporin. Not all doctors expressed this preference, being more equivocal, and all professionals were content to suspend preferences within the CONSTRUCT trial and recognised the importance of establishing relative effectiveness and safety. Trial registration number ISRCTN 22663589.

Vulnerable young people and alcohol use: a qualitative exploration

Background: Evidence suggests vulnerable young people are at a greater risk of alcohol engagement and have higher levels of substance misuse. However, research exploring alcohol use within populations of vulnerable young people is limited. Aims: The aim of the study was to explore young people’s attitudes to alcohol, seeking to gain insights into drinking practices within a group of educationally marginalised, and therefore vulnerable young people and their support staff. Methods: The views on alcohol use of 13 young people were explored through focus groups whilst the views of seven support staff were explored using semi-structured interviews. Findings: From an analysis based on grounded theory, a central theme of difficult lives appeared to mediate alcohol use in young people who are educationally marginalised. Young people appeared disengaged from parental/guardian support and placed an importance on social networks in facilitating social and peer support with the aim of gaining protection and a sense of escape. Conclusion: Educationally marginalised young people appear predisposed to an increased risk of engagement with alcohol. In their need for protection and support from daily hardships and isolation, they place greater importance of social membership, which in turn can increase the likelihood of engagement with alcohol.

Nominal Group Technique consultation of a Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programme

Objective: The purpose of the study was to determine what patients, professionals and significant others regarded as the most important positive- and challenging aspects of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programmes for patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and to gain insight into how such programmes could be developed and improved. Method: A modified Nominal Group Technique method was used in three consultation workshops (one with COPD patients who had recently undertaken a Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programme; one with ‘significant others’ of the same patients; one with secondary care professionals who deliver the Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programme). Results: Each of three workshops resulted in the production of approximately ten positive- and ten challenging aspects related to Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programmes. These were further developed by a process of thematisation into seven broad themes. The most important was ‘ the patient’, followed by ‘ physical health’; jointly ranked as third were: ‘ mental health’ and ‘ knowledge and education’. ‘ The programme’ and ‘ professional characteristics’ were jointly ranked as fifth, with ‘ the future’ being ranked as the least important theme. Conclusions: The modified Nominal Group Technique method allowed the development of a ranked thematic list that illustrated the important positive- and challenging aspects of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programmes for patients with COPD. These themes should be core to planning future Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programmes, particularly if patients and carer views are to be considered.