Suchergebnisse

Parasites found in the human gastrointestinal tract can be largely categorized into two groups, protozoa and helminths. The soil-transmitted helminths (Ascaris lumbricoides, hookworm and Trichuris trichiura) are the most prevalent, infecting an estimated one-sixth of the global population. Infection rates are highest in children living in sub-Saharan Africa, followed by Asia and then Latin America and the Caribbean. The current momentum towards global drug delivery for their control is at a historical high through the efforts of numerous initiatives increasingly acting in coordination with donors, governments and local communities. Together, they have delivered enormous quantities of drugs, especially anthelmintics to children through nationwide annual or biannual mass drug administration largely coordinated through schools. However, a much larger and rapidly growing childhood population in these regions remains untreated and suffering from more than one parasite. Mass drug administration has profound potential for control but is not without considerable challenges and concerns. A principal barrier is funding. Stimulating a research and development pipeline, supporting the necessary clinical trials to refine treatment, in addition to procuring and deploying drugs (and sustaining these supply chains), requires substantial funding and resources that do not presently exist. Limited options for chemotherapy raise concerns about drug resistance developing through overuse, however, satisfactory pharmacoepidemiology and monitoring for drug resistance requires more developed health infrastructures than are generally available. Further, the limited pharmacopeia does not include any effective second-line options if resistance emerges, and the research and development pipeline is severely depressed. Herein, we discuss the major gastrointestinal protozoa and helminths reviewing their impact on child health, changing epidemiology and how this relates to their control.

BACKGROUND: Conducting research in critically-ill patient populations is challenging, and most randomized trials of critically-ill patients have not achieved pre-specified statistical thresholds to conclude that the intervention being investigated was beneficial. METHODS: In 2019, a diverse group of patient representatives, regulators from the USA and European Union, federal grant managers, industry representatives, clinical trialists, epidemiologists, and clinicians convened the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists (3CT) Workshop to discuss challenges and opportunities in conducting and assessing critical care trials. Herein, we present the advantages and disadvantages of available methodologies for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis, and a series of recommendations to potentially improve future trials in critical care. CONCLUSION: The 3CT Workshop participants identified opportunities to improve critical care trials using strategies to optimize sample size calculations, account for patient and disease heterogeneity, increase the efficiency of trial conduct, maximize the use of trial data, and to refine and standardize the collection of patient-centered and patient-informed outcome measures beyond mortality.

BACKGROUND: Conducting research in critically-ill patient populations is challenging, and most randomized trials of critically-ill patients have not achieved pre-specified statistical thresholds to conclude that the intervention being investigated was beneficial. METHODS: In 2019, a diverse group of patient representatives, regulators from the USA and European Union, federal grant managers, industry representatives, clinical trialists, epidemiologists, and clinicians convened the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists (3CT) Workshop to discuss challenges and opportunities in conducting and assessing critical care trials. Herein, we present the advantages and disadvantages of available methodologies for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis, and a series of recommendations to potentially improve future trials in critical care. CONCLUSION: The 3CT Workshop participants identified opportunities to improve critical care trials using strategies to optimize sample size calculations, account for patient and disease heterogeneity, increase the efficiency of trial conduct, maximize the use of trial data, and to refine and standardize the collection of patient-centered and patient-informed outcome measures beyond mortality.

Readers' note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 3 of the original article published on 7 April 2020 (BMJ 2020;369:m1328). Previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1328/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity. Funding: LW, BVC, LH, and MDV acknowledge specific funding for this work from Internal Funds KU Leuven, KOOR, and the COVID-19 Fund. LW is a postdoctoral fellow of Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) and receives support from ZonMw (grant 10430012010001). BVC received support from FWO (grant G0B4716N) and Internal Funds KU Leuven (grant C24/15/037). TPAD acknowledges financial support from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (grant 91617050). VMTdJ was supported by the European Union Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ReCoDID grant agreement 825746. KGMM and JAAD acknowledge financial support from Cochrane Collaboration (SMF 2018). KIES is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. GSC was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, and Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). JM was supported by the Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). PD was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. MOH is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the United States National Institutes of Health (grant R00 HL141678). ICCvDH and BCTvB received funding from Euregio Meuse-Rhine (grant Covid Data Platform (coDaP) interref EMR187). The funders played no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or reporting. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF