Explore the vast range of titles available.

IntroductionType 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a disorder that arises following the selective autoimmune destruction of the insulin-producing beta cells. Beta-cell protective or beta-cell regenerative approaches have gained wider attention, and pharmacological approaches to protect the patient’s own insulin-producing beta-cell mass have been proposed. Verapamil is an L-type calcium channel blocker that has been reported to effectively lowers beta-cell thioredoxin-interacting protein expression in rodent beta cells and islets, as well as in human islets, and thus promotes functional beta-cell mass.Methods and analysisThe trial is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in participants with T1DM, investigating the effect of verapamil on preservation of beta-cell function (Ver-A-T1D). A total of 120 participants will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio between 360 mg verapamil and placebo, administered orally once daily. T1DM patients aged ≥18 and <45 years will be eligible for recruitment within 6 weeks of diagnosis (defined as day of starting insulin therapy). The primary objective will be to determine the changes in stimulated C-peptide response during the first 2 hours of a mixed meal tolerance test at baseline and after 12 months for 360 mg verapamil administered orally once daily versus placebo. Secondary objectives include the effects of 360 mg verapamil on (1) fasting C-peptide, (2) dried blood spot C-peptide, (3) glycated haemoglobin, (4) daily total insulin dose, (5) time in range by intermittent continuous glucose monitoring measures, (6) other biomarkers related to immunological changes and beta-cell death and (6) safety (vital signs, ECG).Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was sought from the research ethics committee of all participating countries. All participants provided written informed consent before joining the study. Ver-A-T1D received first regulatory and ethical approvals in Austria. The publication policy is set in the innovative approach towards understanding and arresting type 1 diabetes grant agreement (www.innodia.eu).Trial registration numberEudraCT, 2020-000435-45; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04545151. Protocol version: Version 8.0 (08 November 2021).

IntroductionMost individuals newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have 10%–20% of beta-cell function remaining at the time of diagnosis. Preservation of residual beta-cell function at diagnosis may improve glycaemic control and reduce longer-term complications.Immunotherapy has the potential to preserve endogenous beta-cell function and thereby improve metabolic control even in poorly compliant individuals. We propose to test ustekinumab (STELARA), a targeted and well-tolerated therapy that may halt T-cell and cytokine-mediated destruction of beta-cells in the pancreas at the time of diagnosis.Methods and analysisThis is a double-blind phase II study to assess the safety and efficacy of ustekinumab in 72 children and adolescents aged 12–18 with new-onset T1D.Participants should have evidence of residual functioning beta-cells (serum C-peptide level >0.2nmol/L in the mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) and be positive for at least one islet autoantibody (GAD, IA-2, ZnT8) to be eligible.Participants will be given ustekinumab/placebo subcutaneously at weeks 0, 4 and 12, 20, 28, 36 and 44 in a dose depending on the body weight and will be followed for 12 months after dose 1.MMTTs will be used to measure the efficacy of ustekinumab for preserving C-peptide area under the curve at week 52 compared with placebo. Secondary objectives include further investigations into the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, patient and parent questionnaires, alternative methods for measuring insulin production and exploratory mechanistic work.Ethics and disseminationThis trial received research ethics approval from the Wales Research Ethics Committee 3 in September 2018 and began recruiting in December 2018.The results will be disseminated using highly accessed, peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN14274380.

Immunotherapy targeting the autoimmune process in type 1 diabetes (T1D) can delay the loss of β-cells but needs to have minimal adverse effects to be an adjunct to insulin in the management of T1D. Ustekinumab binds to the shared p40 subunit of interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23, targeting development of T helper 1 cells and T helper 17 cells (T H 1 and T H 17 cells) implicated in the pathogenesis of T1D. We conducted a double-blind, randomized controlled trial of ustekinumab in 72 adolescents aged 12–18 years with recent-onset T1D. Treatment was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events. At 12 months, β-cell function, measured by stimulated C-peptide, was 49% higher in the intervention group ( P  = 0.02), meeting the prespecified primary outcome. Preservation of C-peptide correlated with the reduction of T helper cells co-secreting IL-17A and interferon-γ (T H 17.1 cells, P  = 0.04) and, in particular, with the reduction in a subset of T H 17.1 cells co-expressing IL-2 and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (IL-2 + GM-CSF + T H 17.1 cells, P  = 0.04). A significant fall in β-cell-targeted (proinsulin-specific) IL-17A-secreting T cells was also seen ( P  = 0.0003). Although exploratory, our data suggest a role for an activated subset of T H 17.1 cells in T1D that can be targeted with minimal adverse effects to reduce C-peptide loss, which requires confirmation in a larger study. (International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry: ISRCTN 14274380). A phase 2 randomized controlled trial of ustekinumab in 72 adolescents with recent-onset type 1 diabetes showed that treatment was well tolerated and β-cell function was 49% higher in the intervention group compared to the placebo arm after 12 months.

Adherence to medication is an issue of great importance for patients with ulcerative colitis. Once daily mesalazine seems to be no worse than divided doses in preventing relapse in remitting patients. Although this has been attributed to improved adherence, detailed measures of adherence have been lacking from previous studies.MethodsA 1-year substudy was conducted alongside a trial that compared 2 different dosing regimens (once daily versus three times daily) of mesalazine for patients in remission with ulcerative colitis. Participants in the substudy had their adherence monitored electronically using the medication event monitoring system, self-report, and tablet counts. We compared measures, determined factors associated with adherence and associations between adherence and relapse, modeled adherence over time, and explored behavioral aspects.ResultsWe included 58 participants. Adherence was high across all measures (89.3% self-report, 96.7% tablet counts, and 89.2% medication event monitoring system). Agreement between the measures was poor at times. Adherence according to the medication event monitoring system best distinguished between the participants who relapsed (71.4%) and those who remained in remission (93.4%), although this difference was not statistically discernible at the 5% level. Adherence deteriorated over the study period, with three times daily participants generally less adherent than once-daily participants (odds ratio, 0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.01–0.08). Adherence was higher on weekdays (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.31–1.65) and around clinic visit dates (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.18–1.72).ConclusionsSimple dosing regimens are preferable to multiple daily dosing regimens. Electronic monitoring of adherence should be used more often in clinical studies. Self-reported adherence and tablet counts may underestimate adherence. Adherence declined over time, and adherence was generally lower and more varied for those allocated to the three times daily regimen.

Background In a non-inferiority (NI) trial, analysis based on the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle is anti-conservative, so current guidelines recommend analysing on a per-protocol (PP) population in addition. However, PP analysis relies on the often implausible assumption of no confounders. Randomisation-based efficacy estimators (RBEEs) allow for treatment non-adherence while maintaining a comparison of randomised groups. Fischer et al. have developed an approach for estimating RBEEs in randomised trials with two active treatments, a common feature of NI trials. The aim of this paper was to demonstrate the use of RBEEs in NI trials using this approach, and to appraise the feasibility of these estimators as the primary analysis in NI trials. Methods Two NI trials were used. One comparing two different dosing regimens for the maintenance of remission in people with ulcerative colitis (CODA), and the other comparing an orally administered treatment to an intravenously administered treatment in preventing skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer (ZICE). Variables that predicted adherence in each of the trial arms, and were also independent of outcome, were sought in each of the studies. Structural mean models (SMMs) were fitted that conditioned on these variables, and the point estimates and confidence intervals compared to that found in the corresponding ITT and PP analyses. Results In the CODA study, no variables were found that differentially predicted treatment adherence while remaining independent of outcome. The SMM, using standard methodology, moved the point estimate closer to 0 (no difference between arms) compared to the ITT and PP analyses, but the confidence interval was still within the NI margin, indicating that the conclusions drawn would remain the same. In the ZICE study, cognitive functioning as measured by the corresponding domain of the QLQ-C30, and use of chemotherapy at baseline were both differentially associated with adherence while remaining independent of outcome. However, while the SMM again moved the point estimate closer to 0, the confidence interval was wide, overlapping with any NI margin that could be justified. Conclusion Deriving RBEEs in NI trials with two active treatments can provide a randomisation-respecting estimate of treatment efficacy that accounts for treatment adherence, is straightforward to implement, but requires thorough planning during the design stage of the study to ensure that strong baseline predictors of treatment are captured. Extension of the approach to handle nonlinear outcome variables is also required. Trial registration The CODA study: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT00708656 . Registered on 8 April 2008. The ZICE study trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT00326820 . Registered on 16 May 2006.

Mesalazine (Asacol) is still widely prescribed in divided doses for ulcerative colitis (UC), despite evidence that adherence is improved by once-daily (OD) prescribing. We aimed to investigate whether OD Asacol was as effective as three times (TDS) daily dosing, and to evaluate the role of treatment adherence.MethodsAn investigator-blind randomized trial was undertaken comparing OD Asacol (three 800 mg tablets) versus one 800 mg TDS in maintenance of remission of UC over 1 year. The primary endpoint was relapse rate, and noninferiority would be concluded if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference in proportions relapsing (TDS-OD) exceeded −10%. Adherence was measured by tablet counts and self-reported adherence. A subgroup of patients used a bottle cap that recorded all bottle opening events.ResultsIn all, 213 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, relapse rates were 31% (95% CI 22%–40%) in the OD and 45% (95% CI 35%–54%) in the TDS group. Primary analysis confirmed the noninferiority of OD dosing. Two of the study populations, ITT and per-protocol (PP), showed potential superiority of OD dosing. All measures of adherence showed that it was significantly better in the OD group. Multivariate analysis, however, showed OD dosing was associated with lower relapse risk independently of adherence.ConclusionsOD dosing with Asacol 2.4 g is as safe and effective as TDS dosing, and secondary analysis confirmed significantly reduced relapse rates. The benefit, however, was clinically borderline and may relate in part to ease of adherence.

Background Whole exome sequencing studies identify hundreds to thousands of rare protein coding variants of ambiguous significance for human health. Computational tools are needed to accelerate the identification of specific variants and genes that contribute to human disease. Results We have developed the Variant Effect Scoring Tool (VEST), a supervised machine learning-based classifier, to prioritize rare missense variants with likely involvement in human disease. The VEST classifier training set comprised ~ 45,000 disease mutations from the latest Human Gene Mutation Database release and another ~45,000 high frequency (allele frequency > 1%) putatively neutral missense variants from the Exome Sequencing Project. VEST outperforms some of the most popular methods for prioritizing missense variants in carefully designed holdout benchmarking experiments (VEST ROC AUC = 0.91, PolyPhen2 ROC AUC = 0.86, SIFT4.0 ROC AUC = 0.84). VEST estimates variant score p-values against a null distribution of VEST scores for neutral variants not included in the VEST training set. These p-values can be aggregated at the gene level across multiple disease exomes to rank genes for probable disease involvement. We tested the ability of an aggregate VEST gene score to identify candidate Mendelian disease genes, based on whole-exome sequencing of a small number of disease cases. We used whole-exome data for two Mendelian disorders for which the causal gene is known. Considering only genes that contained variants in all cases, the VEST gene score ranked dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) number 2 of 2253 genes in four cases of Miller syndrome, and myosin-3 (MYH3) number 2 of 2313 genes in three cases of Freeman Sheldon syndrome. Conclusions Our results demonstrate the potential power gain of aggregating bioinformatics variant scores into gene-level scores and the general utility of bioinformatics in assisting the search for disease genes in large-scale exome sequencing studies. VEST is available as a stand-alone software package at http://wiki.chasmsoftware.org and is hosted by the CRAVAT web server at http://www.cravat.us

Motor neuron disease (MND) is a rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disorder with limited treatment options. Historically, neurological trials have been plagued by suboptimal recruitment and high rates of attrition. The Motor Neuron Disease–Systematic Multi-Arm Randomised Adaptive Trial (MND–SMART) seeks to identify effective disease modifying drugs. This study investigates person-specific factors affecting recruitment and retention. Improved understanding of these factors may improve trial protocol design, optimise recruitment and retention. Participants with MND completed questionnaires and this was supplemented with clinical data. 12 months after completing the questionnaires we used MND–SMART recruitment data to establish if members of our cohort engaged with the trial. 120 people with MND completed questionnaires for this study. Mean age at participation was 66 (SD = 9), 14% ( n =  17) were categorised as long survivors, with 68% ( n =  81) of participants male and 60% ( n =  73) had the ALS sub-type. Of the 120 study participants, 50% ( n =  60) were randomised into MND–SMART and 78% ( n =  94) expressed interest an in participating. After the 1-year follow-up period 65% ( n =  39) of the 60 randomised participants remained in MND–SMART. Older age was significantly associated with reduced likelihood of participation (OR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.88–0.96, p =  0.000488). The findings show that people with MND are highly motivated to engage in research, but older individuals remain significantly less likely to participate. We recommend the inclusion of studies to explore characteristics of prospective and current participants alongside trials.