Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Puvan Tharmanathan is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Puvan Tharmanathan.


British Journal of Cancer | 2015

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

Richard D Neal; Puvan Tharmanathan; Nafees Ud Din; Symon Oyly D. Cotton; Julia Fallon-Ferguson; William Hamilton; A Hendry; Maggie Hendry; Ruth Lewis; Una Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; Tekendra Rai; K Shaw; Nicholas S. A. Stuart; Marie Louise Tørring; Clare Wilkinson; Briony Williams; Nefyn Williams; Jon Emery

Background:It is unclear whether more timely cancer diagnosis brings favourable outcomes, with much of the previous evidence, in some cancers, being equivocal. We set out to determine whether there is an association between time to diagnosis, treatment and clinical outcomes, across all cancers for symptomatic presentations.Methods:Systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis.Results:We included 177 articles reporting 209 studies. These studies varied in study design, the time intervals assessed and the outcomes reported. Study quality was variable, with a small number of higher-quality studies. Heterogeneity precluded definitive findings. The cancers with more reports of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes were breast, colorectal, head and neck, testicular and melanoma.Conclusions:This is the first review encompassing many cancer types, and we have demonstrated those cancers in which more evidence of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes exists, and where it is lacking. We believe that it is reasonable to assume that efforts to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are likely to have benefits for patients in terms of improved survival, earlier-stage diagnosis and improved quality of life, although these benefits vary between cancers.


European Journal of Heart Failure | 2006

Cardiac resynchronisation for patients with heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction — a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nick Freemantle; Puvan Tharmanathan; M.J. Calvert; William T. Abraham; Justin Ghosh; John G.F. Cleland

Randomised controlled trials generally suggest that cardiac resynchronisation improves outcomes in patients with heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction and cardiac dyssynchrony. Our objective was to provide a valid synthesis of the effects of CRT on mortality, major morbidity, quality of life and implantation success rates.


BMJ | 2015

Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (cCBT) as treatment for depression in primary care (REEACT trial): large scale pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Simon Gilbody; Elizabeth Littlewood; Catherine Hewitt; Gwen Brierley; Puvan Tharmanathan; Ricardo Araya; Michael Barkham; Peter Bower; Cindy Cooper; Linda Gask; David Kessler; Helen Lester; Karina Lovell; Glenys Parry; David Richards; Phil Andersen; Sally Brabyn; Sarah Knowles; Charles Shepherd; Debbie Tallon; David White

Study question How effective is supported computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (cCBT) as an adjunct to usual primary care for adults with depression? Methods This was a pragmatic, multicentre, three arm, parallel randomised controlled trial with simple randomisation. Treatment allocation was not blinded. Participants were adults with symptoms of depression (score ≥10 on nine item patient health questionnaire, PHQ-9) who were randomised to receive a commercially produced cCBT programme (“Beating the Blues”) or a free to use cCBT programme (MoodGYM) in addition to usual GP care. Participants were supported and encouraged to complete the programme via weekly telephone calls. Control participants were offered usual GP care, with no constraints on the range of treatments that could be accessed. The primary outcome was severity of depression assessed with the PHQ-9 at four months. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life (measured by SF-36) and psychological wellbeing (measured by CORE-OM) at four, 12, and 24 months and depression at 12 and 24 months. Study answer and limitations Participants offered commercial or free to use cCBT experienced no additional improvement in depression compared with usual GP care at four months (odds ratio 1.19 (95% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.88) for Beating the Blues v usual GP care; 0.98 (0.62 to 1.56) for MoodGYM v usual GP care). There was no evidence of an overall difference between either programme compared with usual GP care (0.99 (0.57 to 1.70) and 0.68 (0.42 to 1.10), respectively) at any time point. Commercially provided cCBT conferred no additional benefit over free to use cCBT or usual GP care at any follow-up point. Uptake and use of cCBT was low, despite regular telephone support. Nearly a quarter of participants (24%) had dropped out by four months. The study did not have enough power to detect small differences so these cannot be ruled out. Findings cannot be generalised to cCBT offered with a much higher level of guidance and support. What this study adds Supported cCBT does not substantially improve depression outcomes compared with usual GP care alone. In this study, neither a commercially available nor free to use computerised CBT intervention was superior to usual GP care. Funding, competing interests, data sharing Commissioned and funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (project No 06/43/05). The authors have no competing interests. Requests for patient level data will be considered by the REEACT trial management group Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91947481.


Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy | 2011

Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison of randomized evidence for empirical, pre-emptive and directed treatment strategies for invasive mould disease

Nick Freemantle; Puvan Tharmanathan; Raoul Herbrecht

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the most reliable estimates of the effects of treatments. However, not all treatments are compared in available RCTs, making comparison of treatments problematic. Mixed treatment comparisons (MTCs) can provide estimates of the comparative effects of treatments across a range of available therapeutic options. MTCs use networks of available direct comparisons to estimate differences in treatments that have not been estimated in trials via a common comparator. We conducted a systematic review and MTCs of comparative RCTs in haematological patients of anti-mould active agents used for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia (Analysis 1), and pre-emptive therapy (Analysis 2) of invasive mould diseases. In addition, we summarized the evidence available associated with the use of directed treatment strategies (Analysis 3). For empirical therapy, caspofungin proved superior to amphotericin B, liposomal amphotericin B, amphotericin B lipid complex and voriconazole in the outcome of survival, but no agents showed superiority for treatment response. There was no evidence of a difference between pre-emptive and empirical strategies on mortality outcomes. For directed therapy, voriconazole was superior to amphotericin B for overall survival, and both voriconazole and liposomal amphotericin B were superior to amphotericin B and amphotericin B colloidal dispersion on the outcome of response. While limited to some degree by the availability of RCTs, the MTCs reported here provide the best available evidence of relative therapeutic success for different available treatment strategies.


Health Technology Assessment | 2015

A randomised controlled trial of computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for the treatment of depression in primary care: the Randomised Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Acceptability of Computerised Therapy (REEACT) trial

Elizabeth Littlewood; Ana Duarte; Catherine Hewitt; Sarah Knowles; Stephen Palmer; Simon Walker; Phil Andersen; Ricardo Araya; Michael Barkham; Peter Bower; Sally Brabyn; Gwen Brierley; Cindy Cooper; Linda Gask; David Kessler; Helen Lester; Karina Lovell; Usman Muhammad; Glenys Parry; David Richards; Rachel Richardson; Debbie Tallon; Puvan Tharmanathan; David White; Simon Gilbody

BACKGROUND Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (cCBT) has been developed as an efficient form of therapy delivery with the potential to enhance access to psychological care. Independent research is needed which examines both the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cCBT over the short and longer term. OBJECTIVES To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cCBT as an adjunct to usual general practitioner (GP) care against usual GP care alone, for a free-to-use cCBT program (MoodGYM; National Institute for Mental Health Research, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia) and a commercial pay-to-use cCBT program (Beating the Blues(®); Ultrasis, London, UK) for adults with depression, and to determine the acceptability of cCBT and the experiences of users. DESIGN A pragmatic, multicentre, three-armed, parallel, randomised controlled trial (RCT) with concurrent economic and qualitative evaluations. Simple randomisation was used. Participants and researchers were not blind to treatment allocation. SETTING Primary care in England. PARTICIPANTS Adults with depression who scored ≥ 10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). INTERVENTIONS Participants who were randomised to either of the two intervention groups received cCBT (Beating the Blues or MoodGYM) in addition to usual GP care. Participants who were randomised to the control group were offered usual GP care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was depression at 4 months (PHQ-9). Secondary outcomes were depression at 12 and 24 months; measures of mental health and health-related quality of life at 4, 12 and 24 months; treatment preference; and the acceptability of cCBT and experiences of users. RESULTS Clinical effectiveness: 210 patients were randomised to Beating the Blues, 242 patients were randomised to MoodGYM and 239 patients were randomised to usual GP care (total 691). There was no difference in the primary outcome (depression measured at 4 months) either between Beating the Blues and usual GP care [odds ratio (OR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 1.88] or between MoodGYM and usual GP care (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.56). There was no overall difference across all time points for either intervention compared with usual GP care in a mixed model (Beating the Blues versus usual GP care, p = 0.96; and MoodGYM versus usual GP care, p = 0.11). However, a small but statistically significant difference between MoodGYM and usual GP care at 12 months was found (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.93). Free-to-use cCBT (MoodGYM) was not inferior to pay-to-use cCBT (Beating the Blues) (OR 0.91, 90% CI 0.62 to 1.34; p = 0.69). There were no consistent benefits of either intervention when secondary outcomes were examined. There were no serious adverse events thought likely to be related to the trial intervention. Despite the provision of regular technical telephone support, there was low uptake of the cCBT programs. Cost-effectiveness: cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that neither Beating the Blues nor MoodGYM appeared cost-effective compared with usual GP care alone. Qualitative evaluation: participants were often demotivated to access the computer programs, by reason of depression. Some expressed the view that a greater level of therapeutic input would be needed to promote engagement. CONCLUSIONS The benefits that have previously been observed in developer-led trials were not found in this large pragmatic RCT. The benefits of cCBT when added to routine primary care were minimal, and uptake of this mode of therapy was relatively low. There remains a clinical and economic need for effective low-intensity psychological treatments for depression with improved patient engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial is registered as ISRCTN91947481. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.


BMC Medical Research Methodology | 2008

The use of interim data and Data Monitoring Committee recommendations in randomized controlled trial reports: frequency, implications and potential sources of bias

Puvan Tharmanathan; Melanie Calvert; John R. Hampton; Nick Freemantle

BackgroundInterim analysis of accumulating trial data is important to protect participant safety during randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) often undertake such analyses, but their widening role may lead to extended use of interim analysis or recommendations that could potentially bias trial results.MethodsSystematic search of eight major publications: Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, Circulation, CID, JAMA, JCO, Lancet and NEJM, including all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) between June 2000 and May 2005 to identify RCTs that reported use of interim analysis, with or without DMC involvement. Recommendations made by the DMC or based on interim analysis were identified and potential sources of bias assessed. Independent double data extraction was performed on all included trials.ResultsWe identified 1772 RCTs, of which 470 (27%; 470/1772) reported the use of a DMC and a further 116 (7%; 116/1772) trials reported some form of interim analysis without explicit mention of a DMC. There were 28 trials (24 with a formal DMC), randomizing a total of 79396 participants, identified as recommending changes to the trial that may have lead to biased results. In most of these, some form of sample size re-estimation was recommended with four trials also reporting changes to trial endpoints. The review relied on information reported in the primary publications and methods papers relating to the trials, higher rates of use may have occurred but not been reported.ConclusionThe reported use of interim analysis and DMCs in clinical trials has been increasing in recent years. It is reassuring that in most cases recommendations were made in the interest of participant safety. However, in practice, recommendations that may lead to potentially biased trial results are being made.


PharmacoEconomics | 2008

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nebivolol Compared with Standard Care in Elderly Patients with Heart Failure An Individual Patient-Based Simulation Model

Guiqing Yao; Nick Freemantle; Marcus Flather; Puvan Tharmanathan; Andrew J.S. Coats; Philip A. Poole-Wilson

AbstractBackground and objective: The SENIORS trial demonstrated that nebivolol is effective in the treatment of heart failure in elderly patients (e.g. ≥70 years). This analysis evaluates the cost effectiveness of nebivolol compared with standard treatment. Methods: An individual patient-simulation model based on a Markov modelling framework was developed to compare costs and outcomes for nebivolol and standard care in patients with heart failure starting treatment at the age of 70 years. Health states were defined by New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and death. At a given NYHA class and a given cycle, patients could die, be hospitalized for cardiovascular disease or remain stable. Risks for these events were derived from individual patient data from the SENIORS trial. The risk of each event in a given cycle was based on the subject’s baseline characteristics and time in the current health state.The economic analysis was conducted from the UK NHS perspective with a lifetime horizon. The costs (€; year 2006 values) considered were drug costs for nebivolol and other cardiac drugs, costs of GP visits, outpatient specialist visits and cardiovascular-related hospitalizations. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted. Results: In the baseline analysis, the total cost per patient was €6740 and €9288, and QALYs were 5.194 and 5.843 for patients aged 70 years at the start of treatment for the standard treatment and nebivolol groups, respectively. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis provided an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €3926 (95% CI 3731, 4159) per QALY. Conclusions: This analysis indicates that nebivolol appears to be a cost-effective treatment for elderly patients with heart failure compared with standard care.


Trials | 2013

Hydroxychloroquine effectiveness in reducing symptoms of hand osteoarthritis (HERO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Sarah R. Kingsbury; Puvan Tharmanathan; Joy Adamson; N K Arden; Fraser Birrell; Sarah Cockayne; John Dickson; Michael Doherty; Krysia Dziedzic; Andrew T. Grainger; Catherine Hewitt; Terence W. O’Neill; David Scott; Tonia L. Vincent; Richard J. Wakefield; F E Watt; David Torgerson; Philip G. Conaghan

BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis, causing significant joint pain and disability. It is already a major cause of healthcare expenditure and its incidence will further increase with the ageing population. Current treatments for OA have major limitations and new analgesic treatments are needed. Synovitis is prevalent in OA and is associated with pain. Hydroxychloroquine is used in routine practice for treating synovitis in inflammatory arthritides, such as rheumatoid arthritis. We propose that treating patients with symptomatic hand OA with hydroxychloroquine will be a practical and safe treatment to reduce synovitis and pain.Methods/designHERO is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 252 subjects with symptomatic hand OA will be recruited across primary and secondary care sites in the UK and randomized on a 1:1 basis to active treatment or placebo for 12 months. Daily medication dose will range from 200 to 400 mg according to ideal body weight. The primary endpoint is change in average hand pain during the previous two weeks (measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS)) between baseline and six months. Secondary endpoints include other self-reported pain, function and quality-of-life measures and radiographic structural change at 12 months. A health economics analysis will also be performed. An ultrasound substudy will be conducted to examine baseline levels of synovitis. Linear and logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups using univariable and multivariable modelling analyses. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis.DiscussionThe HERO trial is designed to examine whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective analgesic treatment for OA and whether it provides any long-term structural benefit. The ultrasound substudy will address whether baseline synovitis is a predictor of therapeutic response. This will potentially provide a new treatment for OA, which could be of particular use in the primary care setting.Trial registrationISRCTN91859104.


British journal of pain | 2012

Diagnosis and treatment of failed back surgery syndrome in the UK: mapping of practice using a cross-sectional survey.

Puvan Tharmanathan; Joy Adamson; Rebecca L Ashby; Sam Eldabe

Background: Chronic back pain is a serious public health issue, associated with poor quality of life and disability. There is a specific group of chronic back pain sufferers whose pain persists despite their having undergone anatomically successful lumbosacral spine surgery. These patients are known as having failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and are frequently seen in pain clinics. It is currently unclear what constitutes routine practice in terms of diagnosis and treatment of FBSS in the UK. Aim: To map the diagnosis of and provision of care for patients with FBSS. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of specialist pain clinics in the UK. Results: This first attempt to survey 241 pain clinics in the UK achieved a response rate of 52%. The results of this survey suggest that patients at UK pain clinics were often diagnosed with FBSS between 6 and 12 months after surgery. Treatment is often initiated when patients report a level of pain between 3 and 5 cm (on a 10-cm visual analogue scale) and a range of therapeutic options are pursued in the hope of addressing the range of presenting symptoms. Conclusions: It is evident from the findings of this survey that, though there is some variation, pain specialists in the UK identify and handle patients with FBSS as a separate clinical entity. Direct, randomised comparisons of interventions should be the focus of research into appropriate treatment regimens going forward. Also, evidence of clinical effectiveness will need to incorporate elements of patient acceptance of interventions.


Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice | 2013

Poor reporting quality of key Randomization and Allocation Concealment details is still prevalent among published RCTs in 2011: a review

Laura Clark; Ulrike Schmidt; Puvan Tharmanathan; Joy Adamson; Catherine Hewitt; David Torgerson

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are powerful tools; it is essential that these trials are not only conducted rigorously, but reported accurately. The aim of this paper was to describe the reporting quality among a set of RCTs published in 2011 on methodological details essential to judging the adequacy of allocation concealment methods employed. METHODS Medline was searched using the Ovid platform to identify all those RCTs published in January 2011 in core clinical journals. Methodological details in relation to allocation concealment were extracted from the identified RCTs to allow the reporting quality to be assessed. If the information was not available in the paper the corresponding author was contacted. RESULTS Eighty-five papers were identified, 74% (n = 63) endorsed the CONSORT statement. 73% (n = 62) required the author to be contacted for further information. Sequence generation methods were ascertained in 74% of trials, allocation concealment method in 41%, details of who recruited participants and who generated the randomization sequence in 38%. CONCLUSIONS There is evidence to suggest that in 2011 key methodological information relating to allocation concealment is still not reported well in RCTs. Authors and journal editors need to ensure explicit and clear methods are reported in RCTs published.

Collaboration


Dive into the Puvan Tharmanathan's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Helen Lester

University of Birmingham

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Karina Lovell

University of Manchester

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge