Explore the vast range of titles available.

Linezolid is increasingly important for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment. However, among children with MDR-TB, there are no linezolid pharmacokinetic data, and its adverse effects have not yet been prospectively described. We characterised the pharmacokinetics, safety, and optimal dose of linezolid in children treated for MDR-TB. Children routinely treated for MDR-TB in 2 observational studies (2011-2015, 2016-2018) conducted at a single site in Cape Town, South Africa, underwent intensive pharmacokinetic sampling after either a single dose or multiple doses of linezolid (at steady state). Linezolid pharmacokinetic parameters, and their relationships with covariates of interest, were described using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling. Children receiving long-term linezolid as a component of their routine treatment had regular clinical and laboratory monitoring. Adverse events were assessed for severity and attribution to linezolid. The final population pharmacokinetic model was used to derive optimal weight-banded doses resulting in exposures in children approximating those in adults receiving once-daily linezolid 600 mg. Forty-eight children were included (mean age 5.9 years; range 0.6 to 15.3); 31 received a single dose of linezolid, and 17 received multiple doses. The final pharmacokinetic model consisted of a one-compartment model characterised by clearance (CL) and volume (V) parameters that included allometric scaling to account for weight; no other evaluated covariates contributed to the model. Linezolid exposures in this population were higher compared to exposures in adults who had received a 600 mg once-daily dose. Consequently simulated, weight-banded once-daily optimal doses for children were lower than those currently used for most weight bands. Ten of 17 children who were followed long term had a linezolid-related adverse event, including 5 with a grade 3 or 4 event, all anaemia. Adverse events resulted in linezolid dose reductions in 4, temporary interruptions in 5, and permanent discontinuation in 4 children. Limitations of the study include the lack of very young children (none below 6 months of age), the limited number who were HIV infected, and the modest number of children contributing to long-term safety data. Linezolid-related adverse effects were frequent and occasionally severe. Careful linezolid safety monitoring is required. Compared to doses currently used in children in many settings for MDR-TB treatment, lower doses may approximate current adult target exposures, might result in fewer adverse events, and should therefore be evaluated.

Tuberculosis during pregnancy and treatment outcomes are poorly defined in high prevalence tuberculosis and HIV settings. A prospective cohort study of pregnant and postpartum women identified to be routinely on antituberculosis treatment was conducted at Tygerberg Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa, from January 2011 through December 2011. Maternal tuberculosis disease spectrum and tuberculosis-exposed newborns were characterized by maternal HIV status. Maternal tuberculosis treatment outcomes were documented and a multivariable regression model identified predictors of unfavourable tuberculosis treatment outcomes. Infant outcomes were also described. Seventy-four women with tuberculosis, 53 (72%) HIV-infected, were consecutively enrolled; 35 (47%) were diagnosed at delivery or postpartum and 22 (30%) of women reported previous antituberculosis treatment. HIV-infected women were 5.67 times more likely to have extrapulmonary tuberculosis (95% CI 1.18-27.25, p = 0.03). All 5 maternal deaths were amongst HIV-infected women. Birth outcomes were available for 75 newborns (2 sets of twins, missing data for 1 stillbirth). Of the 75 newborns, 49 (65%) were premature and 44 (59%) were low birth weight (LBW; <2500 grams). All 6 infants who died and the 4 stillbirths were born to HIV-infected women. Unfavourable tuberculosis treatment outcomes were documented in 33/74 (45%) women. Unfavourable maternal tuberculosis outcome was associated with delivery of LBW infants (OR 3.83; 95% CI 1.40-10.53, p = 0.009). A large number of pregnant women with tuberculosis presented at a provincial referral hospital. All maternal and infant deaths occurred in HIV-infected women and their newborns. Maternal tuberculosis treatment outcomes were poor.

Diagnosing HIV and/or TB is not sufficient; linkage to care and treatment is conditional to reduce the burden of disease. This study aimed to determine factors associated with linkage to HIV care and TB treatment at community-based services in Cape Town, South Africa. This retrospective cohort study utilized routinely collected data from clients who utilized stand-alone (fixed site not attached to a health facility) and mobile HIV testing services in eight communities in the City of Cape Town Metropolitan district, between January 2008 and June 2012. Clients were included in the analysis if they were ≥12 years and had a known HIV status. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) logistic regression models were used to assess the association between determinants (sex, age, HIV testing service and co-infection status) and self-reported linkage to HIV care and/or TB treatment. Linkage to HIV care was 3 738/5 929 (63.1%). Linkage to HIV care was associated with the type of HIV testing service. Clients diagnosed with HIV at mobile services had a significantly reduced odds of linking to HIV care (aOR 0.7 (CI 95%: 0.6-0.8), p<0.001. Linkage to TB treatment was 210/275 (76.4%). Linkage to TB treatment was not associated with sex and service type, but was associated with age. Clients in older age groups were less likely to link to TB treatment compared to clients in the age group 12-24 years (all, p-value<0.05). A large proportion of clients diagnosed with HIV at mobile services did not link to care. Almost a quarter of clients diagnosed with TB did not link to treatment. Integrated community-based HIV and TB testing services are efficient in diagnosing HIV and TB, but strategies to improve linkage to care are required to control these epidemics.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to provide valuable evidence on the impact of disease and treatment on patients’ symptoms, function and quality of life. High-quality PRO data from trials can inform shared decision-making, regulatory and economic analyses and health policy. Recent evidence suggests the PRO content of past trial protocols was often incomplete or unclear, leading to research waste. To address this issue, international, consensus-based, PRO-specific guidelines were developed: the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT)-PRO Extension. The SPIRIT-PRO Extension is a 16-item checklist which aims to improve the content and quality of aspects of clinical trial protocols relating to PRO data collection to minimise research waste, and ultimately better inform patient-centred care. This SPIRIT-PRO explanation and elaboration (E&E) paper provides information to promote understanding and facilitate uptake of the recommended checklist items, including a comprehensive protocol template. For each SPIRIT-PRO item, we provide a detailed description, one or more examples from existing trial protocols and supporting empirical evidence of the item’s importance. We recommend this paper and protocol template be used alongside the SPIRIT 2013 and SPIRIT-PRO Extension paper to optimise the transparent development and review of trial protocols with PROs.

Background. Moxifloxacin is currently recommended at a dose of 7.5–10 mg/kg for children with multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis, but pharmacokinetic and long-term safety data of moxifloxacin in children with tuberculosis are lacking. An area under the curve (AUC) of 40–60 μg × h/mL following an oral moxifloxacin dose of 400 mg has been reported in adults. Methods. In a prospective pharmacokinetic and safety study, children 7–15 years of age routinely receiving moxifloxacin 10 mg/kg daily as part of multidrug treatment for MDR tuberculosis in Cape Town, South Africa, for at least 2 weeks, underwent intensive pharmacokinetic sampling (predose and 1, 2, 4, 8, and either 6 or 11 hours) and were followed for safety. Assays were performed using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry, and pharmacokinetic measures calculated using noncompartmental analysis. Results. Twenty-three children were included (median age, 11.1 years; interquartile range [IQR], 9.2–12.0 years); 6 of 23 (26.1%) were human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected. The median maximum serum concentration (Cmax), area under the curve from 0–8 hours (AUC0–8), time until Cmax (Tmax), and half-life for moxifloxacin were 3.08 (IQR, 2.85–3.82) μg/mL, 17.24 (IQR, 14.47–21.99) μg × h/mL, 2.0 (IQR, 1.0–8.0) h, and 4.14 (IQR, 3.45–6.11), respectively. Three children, all HIV-infected, were underweight for age. AUC0–8 was reduced by 6.85 μg × h/mL (95% confidence interval, −11.15 to −2.56) in HIV-infected children. Tmax was shorter with crushed vs whole tablets (P = .047). Except in 1 child with hepatotoxicity, all adverse effects were mild and nonpersistent. Mean corrected QT interval was 403 (standard deviation, 30) ms, and no prolongation >450 ms occurred. Conclusions. Children 7–15 years of age receiving moxifloxacin 10 mg/kg/day as part of MDR tuberculosis treatment have low serum concentrations compared with adults receiving 400 mg moxifloxacin daily. Higher moxifloxacin dosages may be required in children. Moxifloxacin was well tolerated in children treated for MDR tuberculosis.

Background As part of its response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak in west Africa, the United Kingdom (UK) government established an Ebola treatment unit in Sierra Leone, staffed by military personnel. Little is known about the ethical challenges experienced by military medical staff on humanitarian deployment. We designed a qualitative study to explore this further with those who worked in the treatment unit. Method Semi-structured, face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with 20 UK military personnel deployed between October 2014 and April 2015 in one of three roles in the Ebola treatment unit: clinician; nursing and nursing assistant; and other medical support work, including infection control and laboratory and mortuary services. Results Many participants reported feeling ethically motivated to volunteer for deployment, but for some personal interests were also a consideration. A small minority had negative feelings towards the deployment, others felt that this deployment like any other was part of military service. Almost all had initial concerns about personal safety but were reassured by their pre-deployment 'drills and skills', and personal protective equipment. Risk perceptions were related to perceptions about military service. Efforts to minimise infection risk were perceived to have made good patient care more difficult. Significantly, some thought the humanitarian nature of the mission justified tolerating greater risks to staff. Trust in the military institution and colleagues was expressed; many participants referred to the ethical obligation within the chain of command to protect those under their command. Participants expected resources to be overwhelmed and ‘empty beds’ presented a significant and pervasive ethical challenge. Most thought more patients could and should have been treated. Points of reference for participants’ ethical values were: previous deployment experience; previous UK/National Health Service experience; professional ethics; and, distinctly military values (that might not be shared with non-military workers). Conclusion We report the first systematic exploration of the ethical challenges face by a Western medical military in the international response to the first major Ebola outbreak. We offer unique insights into the military healthcare workers’ experiences of humanitarian deployment. Many participants expressed motivations that gave them common purpose with civilian volunteers.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life (HRQL) are increasingly used to evaluate treatment effectiveness in clinical trials, are valued by patients, and may inform important decisions in the clinical setting. It is of concern, therefore, that preliminary evidence, gained from group discussions at UK-wide Medical Research Council (MRC) quality of life training days, suggests there are inconsistent standards of HRQL data collection in trials and appropriate training and education is often lacking. Our objective was to investigate these reports, to determine if they represented isolated experiences, or were indicative of a potentially wider problem. We undertook a qualitative study, conducting 26 semi-structured interviews with research nurses, data managers, trial coordinators and research facilitators involved in the collection and entry of HRQL data in clinical trials, across one primary care NHS trust, two secondary care NHS trusts and two clinical trials units in the UK. We used conventional content analysis to analyze and interpret our data. Our study participants reported (1) inconsistent standards in HRQL measurement, both between, and within, trials, which appeared to risk the introduction of bias; (2), difficulties in dealing with HRQL data that raised concern for the well-being of the trial participant, which in some instances led to the delivery of non-protocol driven co-interventions, (3), a frequent lack of HRQL protocol content and appropriate training and education of trial staff, and (4) that HRQL data collection could be associated with emotional and/or ethical burden. Our findings suggest there are inconsistencies in the standards of HRQL data collection in some trials resulting from a general lack of HRQL-specific protocol content, training and education. These inconsistencies could lead to biased HRQL trial results. Future research should aim to develop HRQL guidelines and training programmes aimed at supporting researchers to carry out high quality data collection.

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provides valuable information to inform patient-centered care, but may also reveal 'PRO alerts': psychological distress or physical symptoms that may require an immediate response. Ad-hoc management of PRO alerts in clinical trials may result in suboptimal patient care or potentially bias trial results. To gain greater understanding of current practice in PRO alert management we conducted a national survey of personnel involved in clinical trials with a PRO endpoint. We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of 767 UK-based research nurses, data managers/coordinators, trial managers and chief/principal investigators involved in clinical trials using PROs. Respondents were self-selected volunteers from a non-randomised sample of eligible individuals recruited via 55 UK Clinical Research Collaboration Registered Clinical Trials Units and 19 Comprehensive Local Research Networks. Questions centred on the proportion of trial personnel encountering alerts, how staff responded to PRO alerts and whether current guidance was deemed sufficient to support research personnel. We undertook descriptive analyses of the quantitative data and directed thematic analysis of free-text comments. 20% of research nurses did not view completed PRO questionnaires and were not in a position to discover alerts, 39-50% of the remaining respondent group participants reported encountering PRO alerts. Of these, 83% of research nurses and 54% of data managers/trial coordinators reported taking action to assist the trial participant, but less than half were able to record the intervention in the trial documentation. Research personnel reported current PRO alert guidance/training was insufficient. Research personnel are intermittently exposed to PRO alerts. Some intervene to help trial participants, but are not able to record this intervention in the trial documentation, risking co-intervention bias. Other staff do not check PRO information during the trial, meaning alerts may remain undiscovered, or do not respond to alerts if they are inadvertently encountered; both of which may impact on patient safety. Guidance is needed to support PRO alert management that protects the interests of trial participants whilst avoiding potential bias.

Objective: To determine to what extent each trial met criteria specified in three research frameworks for ethical trial conduct. Design: Systematic review and narrative analysis. Data sources: MEDBASE and EMBASE databases were searched using a specific search strategy. The Cochrane database for systematic reviews, the PROSPERO database and trial registries were examined. A grey literature search and citation search were also carried out. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Studies were included where the intervention was being used to treat Ebola in human subjects regardless of study design, comparator or outcome measured. Studies were eligible if they had taken place after the 21st March 2014. Unpublished as well as published studies were included. Included studies: Sixteen studies were included in the data synthesis. Data was extracted on study characteristics as well as any information relating to ten ethical areas of interest specified in the three research frameworks for ethical trial conduct and an additional criterion of whether the study received ethics approval from a research ethics committee. Synthesis of results: Eight studies were judged to fully comply with all eleven criteria. The other eight studies all had at least one criteria where there was not enough information available to draw any conclusions. In two studies there were ethical concerns regarding the information provided in relation to at least one ethical criteria. Description of the effect: One study did not receive ethical approval as the authors argued that treating approximately one hundred patients consecutively for compassionate reasons did not constitute a clinical trial. Furthermore, after the patients were treated, physicians in Sierra Leone did not release reports of treatment results and so study conclusions had to be made based on unpublished observations. In another study the risk-benefit ratio of the trial drug does not appear to be favourable and the pre-trial evidence base for its effectiveness against Ebola is speculative. Some limited and appropriate deviation from standard research expectations in disaster situations is increasingly accepted. However, this is not an excuse for poor ethics oversight and international regulations are in place which should not be ignored. New guidelines are needed that better define the boundaries between using medicines for compassionate use and conducting a clinical trial. Greater support should be offered for local research ethics committees in affected areas so that they can provide robust ethical review. Further systematic reviews should be carried out in epidemics of any novel infectious diseases to assess if comparable findings arise.

There is increasing evidence that clinical trial participants are uninformed about the trials in which they participate, raising ethical concerns regarding informed consent. The aim of this pilot study was to explore clinical trial participants' use of consent discussions and information sheets when considering participating in clinical trials research. A qualitative, interview-based pilot study was designed in order to elicit, through dialogue, details of the reasons for participants' use of, and preferences regarding, different modes of information provision. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with two different groups of patients who were participants in the Reinforcement of Closure of Stoma Site trial. The first group comprised newly-consented trial participants, who had been recruited up to 72 hours before our interview; the second group comprised patients attending a follow-up clinic 12 months after joining the trial. Thirteen participants were recruited in total: three newly-consented patients, and ten follow-up patients. The study found that participants' use of consent discussions to gain information about clinical trials was varied, and that they only minimally used information sheets after providing initial consent for the trial. Participants demonstrated varying degrees of knowledge about the trial, with some having forgotten that they were still involved in the trial. Participants reported a high level of trust in medical staff as a reason for not seeking more information about the trial. Some participants reported dissatisfaction with the timing of information provision. Some were amenable to novel ways of receiving trial information, such as web-based methods. The pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of a larger study into the provision of information to prospective clinical trial participants. The results suggest that considering alternative ways of providing information and the appropriateness of existing information provision may be acceptable to and useful for potential trial participants.