Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
41
result(s) for
"Corrigan, Neil"
Sort by:
Class election
Self-proclaimed middle school expert and campaign manager Max Corrigan offers advice and practical tips on how to run for class president and win votes, including the essential skills needed to make a viral video, trade your lunch in the school cafeteria, and put a positive spin on any situation.
Book
Exploring and adjusting for potential learning effects in ROLARR: a randomised controlled trial comparing robotic-assisted vs. standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection
Background
Commonly in surgical randomised controlled trials (RCT) the experimental treatment is a relatively new technique which the surgeons may still be learning, while the control is a well-established standard. This can lead to biased comparisons between treatments. In this paper we discuss the implementation of approaches for addressing this issue in the ROLARR trial, and points of consideration for future surgical trials.
Methods
ROLARR was an international, randomised, parallel-group trial comparing robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. The primary endpoint was conversion to open surgery (binary). A surgeon inclusion criterion mandating a minimum level of experience in each technique was incorporated. Additionally, surgeon self-reported data were collected periodically throughout the trial to capture the level of experience of every participating surgeon.
Multi-level logistic regression adjusting for operating surgeon as a random effect is used to estimate the odds ratio for conversion to open surgery between the treatment groups. We present and contrast the results from the primary analysis, which did not account for learning effects, and a sensitivity analysis which did.
Results
The primary analysis yields an estimated odds ratio (robotic/laparoscopic) of 0.614 (95% CI 0.311, 1.211;
p
= 0.16), providing insufficient evidence to conclude superiority of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic in terms of the risk of conversion to open.
The sensitivity analysis reveals that while participating surgeons in ROLARR were expert at laparoscopic surgery, some, if not all, were still learning robotic surgery. The treatment-effect odds ratio decreases by a factor of 0.341 (95% CI 0.121, 0.960;
p
= 0.042) per unit increase in log-number of previous robotic operations performed by the operating surgeon. The odds ratio for a patient whose operating surgeon has the mean experience level in ROLARR – 152.46 previous laparoscopic, 67.93 previous robotic operations – is 0.40 (95% CI 0.168, 0.953;
p
= 0.039).
Conclusions
In this paper we have demonstrated the implementation of approaches for accounting for learning in a practical example of a surgery RCT analysis. The results demonstrate the value of implementing such approaches, since we have shown that without them the ROLARR analysis would indeed have been confounded by the learning effects.
Trial registration
International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry, ID: ISRCTN80500123. Registered on 27 May 2010.
Journal Article
High hospital research participation and improved colorectal cancer survival outcomes: a population-based study
ObjectiveIn 2001, the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network (NCRN) was established, leading to a rapid increase in clinical research activity across the English NHS. Using colorectal cancer (CRC) as an example, we test the hypothesis that high, sustained hospital-level participation in interventional clinical trials improves outcomes for all patients with CRC managed in those research-intensive hospitals.DesignData for patients diagnosed with CRC in England in 2001–2008 (n=209 968) were linked with data on accrual to NCRN CRC studies (n=30 998). Hospital Trusts were categorised by the proportion of patients accrued to interventional studies annually. Multivariable models investigated the relationship between 30-day postoperative mortality and 5-year survival and the level and duration of study participation.ResultsMost of the Trusts achieving high participation were district general hospitals and the effects were not limited to cancer ‘centres of excellence’, although such centres do make substantial contributions. Patients treated in Trusts with high research participation (≥16%) in their year of diagnosis had lower postoperative mortality (p<0.001) and improved survival (p<0.001) after adjustment for casemix and hospital-level variables. The effects increased with sustained research participation, with a reduction in postoperative mortality of 1.5% (6.5%–5%, p<2.2×10−6) and an improvement in survival (p<10−19; 5-year difference: 3.8% (41.0%–44.8%)) comparing high participation for ≥4 years with 0 years.ConclusionsThere is a strong independent association between survival and participation in interventional clinical studies for all patients with CRC treated in the hospital study participants. Improvement precedes and increases with the level and years of sustained participation.
Journal Article
Developing a surgical trial intervention protocol: using qualitative methods in the operating theatre
Introduction
Surgery is a complex intervention, so it is important to establish standards for both the standard and ‘novel’ procedures in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that demonstrate that interventions are delivered as intended to fully understand and explain trial results. This study set out to identify and agree the key steps of a surgical intervention to be tested in the ‘near infrared fluorescent imaging in thyroid surgery’ (NIFTy) RCT to inform development of the surgical protocol, and trial materials.
Method
Qualitative case studies of surgeries were undertaken prior to undertaking an RCT to evaluate the potential of a device to reduce post-surgical hypoparathyroidism. Each case study involved non-participant observation, video capture of total and completion thyroidectomies, and interviews with surgeons. A typology of operative steps was constructed. Two surveys were undertaken (1) to identify current practice around parathyroid identification; and (2) to determine surgeon views on the surgical steps. An international expert panel of six clinicians met to review findings and agree on the surgical steps (mandatory/optional) for operations in the RCT, including timing for use of fluorescence and the data items to be collected.
Results
Ten case studies were undertaken. Video, observation and interview data found differences in surgical approach were driven only by pathology. A typology detailing the surgical steps and points where imaging could be used was developed. Sixty-four surgeons responded to survey 1; three-quarters always looked for parathyroid glands when operating. Forty surgeons responded to survey 2; capsular dissection of the thyroid lobe, preservation of parathyroid pedicle, and clinical assessment were important for parathyroid preservation. The expert panel agreed the key surgical components. These informed key data collection in NIFTy. Two specific surgical steps were strongly recommended and three mandated.
Conclusion
Qualitative research in the operating theatre, prior to RCT allowed the identification of key components of the surgical intervention. The surveys and expert panel provided certainty about the acceptability of the surgical protocol and identified the core data to collect to evidence surgical decision making prior to embarking on the RCT. This qualitative process achieved clinical buy-in, improved trial conduct and allowed full explanation of the subsequent trial results.
Trial registration
ISRCTN59074092. Registration date: 07/03/2022.
Journal Article
NIFTy: near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging to prevent postsurgical hypoparathyroidism (PoSH) after thyroid surgery—a phase II/III pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial protocol in patients undergoing a total or completion thyroidectomy
IntroductionPostsurgical hypoparathyroidism (PoSH) is an iatrogenic condition that occurs as a complication of several different procedures with thyroid surgery being the most common. PoSH has significant short- and long-term morbidities. The volume of thyroid surgery is increasing, and PoSH is therefore likely to increase. Some studies have shown promising results using near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging in reducing the risk of PoSH which has the potential to significantly reduce morbidity and costs associated with monitoring and treatment.Methods and analysisNIFTy is an unblinded, parallel group, multicentre, seamless phase II/III randomised controlled trial in patients undergoing total or completion thyroidectomy. The trial incorporates a process evaluation (IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment and Long-term follow-up framework) 2a) to inform the trial protocol, a phase II (IDEAL 2b) analysis using a surrogate primary outcome of 1 day transient hypocalcaemia to determine early futility and phase III (IDEAL 3) assessment of the primary outcome of PoSH at 6 months after surgery. 454 participants will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to evaluate thyroid surgery with NIRF and indocyanine green against standard thyroid surgery in reducing PoSH at 6 months after surgery, with the phase II analysis occurring once data are available for 200 participants. Analysis in both phases will be using multilevel logistic regression incorporating random effects with respect to surgeon and adjusting for minimisation factors. Phase III secondary outcomes include protracted hypoparathyroidism, hypercalcaemia, complications, length of stay, readmissions and patient reported quality of life using the Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire and Hypoparathyroid Patient Questionnaire instruments.Ethics and disseminationNIFTy is funded by National Institute for Health and Care Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (Grant Ref: 17/11/27) and approved by a Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/WA/0375) and Health Research Authority (HRA). Trial results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed publication and through relevant patient groups.Trial registration numberISRCTN59074092.
Journal Article
Surgical trial design for incorporating the effects of learning: what is the current methodological guidance, and is it sufficient?
Background
Surgical interventions are complex. Key elements of this complexity are the surgeon and their learning curve. They pose methodological challenges in the design, analysis and interpretation of surgical RCTs.
We identify, summarise, and critically examine current guidance about how to incorporate learning curves in the design and analysis of RCTs in surgery.
Examining current guidance
Current guidance presumes that randomisation must be between levels of just one treatment component, and that the evaluation of comparative effectiveness will be made via the average treatment effect (ATE). It considers how learning effects affect the ATE, and suggests solutions which seek to define the target population such that the ATE is a meaningful quantity to guide practice. We argue that these are solutions to a flawed formulation of the problem, and are inadequate for policymaking in this setting.
Reformulating the problem
The premise that surgical RCTs are limited to single-component comparisons, evaluated via the ATE, has skewed the methodological discussion. Forcing a multi-component intervention, such as surgery, into the framework of the conventional RCT design ignores its factorial nature.
We briefly discuss the multiphase optimisation strategy (MOST), which for a Stage 3 trial would endorse a factorial design. This would provide a wealth of information to inform nuanced policy but would likely be infeasible in this setting.
We discuss in more depth the benefits of targeting the ATE
conditional on operating surgeon experience
(CATE). The value of estimating the CATE for exploring learning effects has been previously recognised, but with discussion limited to analysis methods only. The robustness and precision of such analyses can be ensured via the trial design, and we argue that trial
designs
targeting CATE represent a clear gap in current guidance.
Conclusion
Trial designs that facilitate robust, precise estimation of the CATE would allow for more nuanced policymaking, leading to patient benefit. No such designs are currently forthcoming. Further research in trial design to facilitate the estimation of the CATE is needed.
Journal Article
Development of a core data set for describing, measuring and reporting the learning curve in studies of novel invasive procedures: study protocol
IntroductionThe introduction of novel surgical techniques and procedures remains poorly regulated and standardised. Although the learning curve associated with invasive procedures is a critical part of innovation, it is currently inconsistently defined, measured and reported. This study aims to develop a core data set that can be applied in all studies describing or measuring the learning curve in novel invasive procedures.MethodsA core data set will be developed using methods adapted from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative. The study will involve three phases: (1) Identification of a comprehensive list of data items through (a) an umbrella review of existing systematic reviews on the learning curve in surgery and (b) qualitative interviews with key stakeholders. (2) Key stakeholders (eg, clinical innovators, clinicians, patients, methodologists, statisticians, journal editors and governance representatives) will complete a Delphi survey to score the importance of each data item, generating a shortened list. (3) Consensus meeting(s) with stakeholders to discuss and agree on the final core data set.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by an Institutional Ethics Committee at the University of Bristol (ref: 111362). Participants will complete written informed consent to participate. Dissemination strategies include scientific meeting presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications, patient engagement events, use of social media platforms, workshops and other events.
Journal Article
Pathway Of Low Anterior Resection syndrome (LARS) relief after Surgery (POLARiS): protocol for an international, open-label, multi-arm, phase 3 randomised superiority trial within a cohort, with economic evaluation, process evaluation and qualitative sub-study, to explore the natural history of LARS and compare transanal irrigation and sacral neuromodulation to optimised conservative management for people with major LARS following a high or low anterior resection for colorectal cancer
IntroductionAs a result of improving survival rates, the adverse consequences of rectal cancer surgery are becoming increasingly recognised. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is one such consequence and describes a constellation of bowel symptoms after rectal cancer surgery which includes urgency, faecal incontinence, stool clustering and incomplete evacuation. LARS has a significant adverse impact on quality of life (QoL) and symptoms are present in up to 75% of patients in the first year after surgery. Despite this, little is known about the natural history and there is poor evidence to support current treatment options.Methods and analysisThe objectives of POLARiS are to explore the natural history of LARS and to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of transanal irrigation (TAI) or sacral neuromodulation (SNM) compared with optimised conservative management (OCM) for people with major LARS.POLARiS is a prospective, international, open-label, multi-arm, phase 3 randomised superiority trial within a cohort design, with internal pilot phase, qualitative sub-study, process evaluation and economic evaluation. Approximately 1500 adult participants from UK hospitals and 500 from Australian hospitals who have undergone a high or low anterior resection for colorectal cancer in the last 10 years will be recruited into the cohort. Six-hundred participants from the UK and 200 participants from Australia, with major LARS symptoms, defined as a LARS score of ≥30, will be recruited to the randomised controlled trial (RCT) element. Participants entering the RCT will be randomised between OCM, TAI or SNM, all with equal allocation ratios.Cohort and RCT participants will be followed up for a 24-month period, completing a series of questionnaires measuring LARS symptoms and QoL, as well as clinical review for those in the RCT. A process evaluation, qualitative sub-study and economic evaluation will also be conducted.The primary outcome measure of the POLARiS cohort and RCT is the LARS score up to 24 months post-registration/randomisation. Analyses of the RCT will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Comparative effectiveness analyses for each endpoint will consist of two pairwise treatment comparisons: TAI versus OCM and SNM versus OCM. Secondary outcomes include health-related QoL, adverse events, treatment compliance and cost-effectiveness (up to 24 months post-registration/randomisation).Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by Wales REC 4 (reference: 23/WA/0171) in the UK and Sydney Local Health District HREC (reference: 2023/ETH00749) in Australia. The results of this trial will be disseminated to participants on request and published on completion of the trial in a peer-reviewed journal and at international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN12834598; ACTRN12623001166662.
Journal Article
Pathway Of Low Anterior Resection syndrome relief after Surgery (POLARiS) feasibility trial protocol: a multicentre, feasibility cohort study with embedded randomised control trial to compare sacral neuromodulation and transanal irrigation to optimised conservative management in the management of major low anterior resection syndrome following rectal cancer treatment
Rectal cancer is common with a 60% 5-year survival rate. Treatment usually involves surgery with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy. Sphincter saving curative treatment can result in debilitating changes to bowel function known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). There are currently no clear guidelines on the management of LARS with only limited evidence for different treatment modalities.
Patients who have undergone an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the last 10 years will be approached for the study. The feasibility trial will take place in four centres with a 9-month recruitment window and 12 months follow-up period. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of recruitment to the POLARiS trial which will be achieved through assessment of recruitment, retainment and follow-up rates as well as the prevalence of major LARS.Feasibility outcomes will be analysed descriptively through the estimation of proportions with confidence intervals. Longitudinal patient reported outcome measures will be analysed according to scoring manuals and presented descriptively with reporting graphically over time.
Ethical approval has been granted by Wales REC1; Reference 22/WA/0025. The feasibility study is in the process of set up. The results of the feasibility trial will feed into the design of an expanded, international trial.
CT05319054.
Journal Article
Liver resection surgery versus thermal ablation for colorectal LiVer MetAstases (LAVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Background
Although surgical resection has been considered the only curative option for colorectal liver metastases (CLM), thermal ablation has recently been suggested as an alternative curative treatment. A prospective randomised trial is required to define the efficacy of resection vs ablation for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases.
Methods
Design and setting:
This is a multicentre, open, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial design with internal pilot and will be performed in tertiary liver centres in UK and The Netherlands.
Participants:
Eligible patients will be those with colorectal liver metastases at high surgical risk because of their age, co-morbidities or tumour burden and who would be suitable for liver resection or thermal ablation.
Intervention:
Thermal ablation as per local policy.
Control:
Surgical liver resection performed as per centre protocol.
Co-interventions:
Further chemotherapy will be offered to patients as per current practice.
Outcomes
Pilot study: Same as main study and in addition patients and clinicians’ acceptability of the trial to assist in optimisation of recruitment.
Primary outcome: Disease-free survival (DFS) at two years post randomisation.
Secondary outcomes: Overall survival, timing and site of recurrence, additional therapy after treatment failure, quality of life, complications, length of hospital stay, costs, trial acceptability, DFS measured from end of intervention.
Follow-up:
24 months from randomisation; five-year follow-up for overall survival.
Sample size:
330 patients to demonstrate non-inferiority of thermal ablation.
Discussion
This trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of thermal ablation vs surgical resection for high-risk people with colorectal liver metastases, and guide the optimal treatment for these patients.
Trial registration
ISRCTN Registry,
ISRCTN52040363
. Registered on 9 March 2016.
Journal Article