Suchergebnisse

AbstractIntroductionHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) continues to rise in young people among low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMIC). The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports the largest public investment in HIV research globally. Despite advancements in the last decade, adolescents and young adults (AYA) remain underrepresented in research to improve HIV prevention and care. We undertook a programme analysis of NIH grants and conducted a targeted review of linked publications on international AYA research across the HIV prevention and care continuum (HPCC) to inform new initiatives to address the needs of AYA in these settings.MethodsNIH‐funded grants from 2012 to 2017, pertaining to AYA in LMIC, and evaluating areas of HIV prevention, care and/or treatment were identified. A systematic review of publications limited to funded grants was performed in two waves: 2012–2017 and 2018–2021. The review included a landscape assessment and an evaluation of NIH‐defined clinical trials, respectively. Data on outcomes across the HPCC were abstracted and analysed.ResultsAmong grant applications, 14% were funded and linked to 103 publications for the analytic database, 76 and 27 from the first and second waves, respectively. Fifteen (15%) wave 1 and 27 (26%) wave 2 publications included an NIH‐defined clinical trial. Among these, 36 (86%) did not target a key population (men who have sex with men, drug users and sex workers) and 37 (88%) were exclusively focused on sub‐Saharan Africa. Thirty (71%) publications addressed at least one HPCC milestone. Specific focus was on milestones in HIV prevention, care or both, for 12 (29%), 13 (31%) and five (12%) of publications, respectively. However, few addressed access to and retention in HIV care (4 [14%]) and none included microbicides or treatment as prevention. More focus is needed in crucial early steps of the HIV care continuum and on biomedical HIV prevention interventions.Discussion and ConclusionsResearch gaps remain in this portfolio across the AYA HPCC. To address these, NIH launched an initiative entitled Prevention and Treatment through a Comprehensive Care Continuum for HIV‐affected Adolescents in Resource Constrained Settings (PATC3H) to generate needed scientific innovation for effective public health interventions for AYA affected by HIV in LMIC.

Abstract
Introduction
Racial and ethnic disparities in patient outcomes following COVID-19 exist, in part, due to factors involving healthcare delivery. The aim of the study was to characterize disparities in the administration of evidence-based COVID-19 treatments among patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Methods
Using a large, US hospital database, initiation of COVID-19 treatments was compared among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between May 2020 and April 2022 according to patient race and ethnicity. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine the effect of race and ethnicity on the likelihood of receiving COVID-19 treatments, stratified by baseline supplemental oxygen requirement.

Results
The identified population comprised 317,918 White, 76,715 Black, 9297 Asian, and 50,821 patients of other or unknown race. There were 329,940 non-Hispanic, 74,199 Hispanic, and 50,622 patients of unknown ethnicity. White patients were more likely to receive COVID-19 treatments, and specifically corticosteroids, compared to Black, Asian, and other patients (COVID-19 treatment: 87% vs. 81% vs. 85% vs. 84%, corticosteroids: 85% vs. 79% vs. 82% vs. 82%). After covariate adjustment, White patients were significantly more likely to receive COVID-19 treatments than Black patients across all levels of supplemental oxygen requirement. No clear trend in COVID-19 treatments according to ethnicity (Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic) was observed.

Conclusion
There were important racial disparities in inpatient COVID-19 treatment initiation, including the undertreatment of Black patients and overtreatment of White patients. Our new findings reveal the actual magnitude of this issue in routine clinical practice to clinicians, policymakers, and guideline developers. This is crucial to ensuring equitable and appropriate access to evidence-based therapies.

Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use. ; Development of this roadmap received support from Cancer Research UK and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (grant references A/15267, A/16463, A/16464, A/16465, A/16466 and A/18097), the EORTC Cancer Research Fund, and the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (grant agreement number 115151), resources of which are composed of financial contribution from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) and European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) companies' in kind contribution.