An empirical model for probabilistic decadal prediction: global attribution and regional hindcasts

Empirical models, designed to predict surface variables over seasons to decades ahead, provide useful benchmarks for comparison against the performance of dynamical forecast systems; they may also be employable as predictive tools for use by climate services in their own right. A new global empirical decadal prediction system is presented, based on a multiple linear regression approach designed to produce probabilistic output for comparison against dynamical models. A global attribution is performed initially to identify the important forcing and predictor components of the model . Ensemble hindcasts of surface air temperature anomaly fields are then generated, based on the forcings and predictors identified as important, under a series of different prediction ‘modes’ and their performance is evaluated. The modes include a real-time setting, a scenario in which future volcanic forcings are prescribed during the hindcasts, and an approach which exploits knowledge of the forced trend. A two-tier prediction system, which uses knowledge of future sea surface temperatures in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, is also tested, but within a perfect knowledge framework. Each mode is designed to identify sources of predictability and uncertainty, as well as investigate different approaches to the design of decadal prediction systems for operational use. It is found that the empirical model shows skill above that of persistence hindcasts for annual means at lead times of up to 10 years ahead in all of the prediction modes investigated. It is suggested that hindcasts which exploit full knowledge of the forced trend due to increasing greenhouse gases throughout the hindcast period can provide more robust estimates of model bias for the calibration of the empirical model in an operational setting. The two-tier system shows potential for improved real-time prediction, given the assumption that skilful predictions of large-scale modes of variability are available. The empirical model framework has been designed with enough flexibility to facilitate further developments, including the prediction of other surface variables and the ability to incorporate additional predictors within the model that are shown to contribute significantly to variability at the local scale. It is also semi-operational in the sense that forecasts have been produced for the coming decade and can be updated when additional data becomes available

Geographic variation in the aetiology, epidemiology and microbiology of bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis is a disease associated with chronic progressive and irreversible dilatation of the bronchi and is characterised by chronic infection and associated inflammation. The prevalence of bronchiectasis is age-related and there is some geographical variation in incidence, prevalence and clinical features. Most bronchiectasis is reported to be idiopathic however post-infectious aetiologies dominate across Asia especially secondary to tuberculosis. Most focus to date has been on the study of airway bacteria, both as colonisers and causes of exacerbations. Modern molecular technologies including next generation sequencing (NGS) have become invaluable tools to identify microorganisms directly from sputum and which are difficult to culture using traditional agar based methods. These have provided important insight into our understanding of emerging pathogens in the airways of people with bronchiectasis and the geographical differences that occur. The contribution of the lung microbiome, its ethnic variation, and subsequent roles in disease progression and response to therapy across geographic regions warrant further investigation. This review summarises the known geographical differences in the aetiology, epidemiology and microbiology of bronchiectasis. Further, we highlight the opportunities offered by emerging molecular technologies such as -omics to further dissect out important ethnic differences in the prognosis and management of bronchiectasis.NMRC (Natl Medical Research Council, S’pore)MOH (Min. of Health, S’pore)Published versio

Searches for neutral Higgs bosons in e+e−e^{+}e^{-} collisions at centre-of-mass energies from 192 to 202 GeV

Searches for neutral Higgs bosons are performed with the 237 pb^-1 of data collected in 1999 by the ALEPH detector at LEP, for centre-of-mass energies between 191.6 and 201.6 GeV. These searches apply to Higgs bosons within the context of the Standard Model and its minimal supersymmetric extension (MSSM) as well as to invisibly decaying Higgs bosons. No evidence of a signal is seen. A lower limit on the mass of the Standard Model Higgs boson of 107.7 GeV/c^2 at 95% confidence level is set. In the MSSM, lower limits of 91.2 and 91.6 GeV/c^2 are derived for the masses of the neutral Higgs bosons h and A, respectively. For a Higgs boson decaying invisibly and produced with the Standard Model cross section, masses below 106.4 GeV/c^2 are excluded

Cost-effectiveness of ultra-low-dose quadruple combination therapy for high blood pressure

Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a quadpill containing irbesartan 37.5 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, indapamide 0.625 mg and bisoprolol 2.5 mg in comparison with irbesartan 150 mg for people with hypertension who are either untreated or receiving monotherapy. Methods: We conducted a within-trial and modelled economic evaluation of the Quadruple UltrA-low-dose tReaTment for hypErTension trial. The analysis was preplanned, and medications and health service use captured during the trial. The main outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for cost per mm Hg systolic blood pressure (BP) reduction at 3 months, and modelled cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over a lifetime. Results: The within-trial analysis showed no clear difference in cost per mm Hg BP lowering between randomised treatments at 3 months ($A10 (95$A -18 to $A37) per mm Hg per person) for quadpill versus monotherapy. The modelled cost-utility over a lifetime projected a mean incremental cost of$A265 (95% UI $A166 to$A357) and a mean 0.02 QALYs gained (95% UI 0.01 to 0.03) per person with quadpill therapy compared with monotherapy. Quadpill therapy was cost-effective in the base case (ICER of $A14 006 per QALY), and the result was sensitive to the quadpill cost in one-way sensitivity analysis. Conclusion(s): Quadpill in comparison with monotherapy is comparably cost-effective for short-term BP lowering. In the long-term, quadpill therapy is likely to be cost-effective. Trial registration number: ANZCTRN12616001144404

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective.

Immunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events

Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Registration of clinical trials has been introduced largely to reduce bias toward statistically significant results in the trial literature. Doubts remain about whether advance registration alone is an adequate measure to reduce selective publication, selective outcome reporting, and biased design. One of the first areas of medicine in which registration was widely adopted was oncology, although the bulk of registered oncology trials remain unpublished. The net influence of registration on the literature remains untested. This study compares the prevalence of favorable results and conclusions among published reports of registered and unregistered randomized controlled trials of new oncology drugs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional study of published original research articles reporting clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of drugs newly approved for antimalignancy indications by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2000 through 2005. Drugs receiving first-time approval for indications in oncology were identified using the FDA web site and Thomson Centerwatch. Relevant trial reports were identified using PubMed and the Cochrane Library. Evidence of advance trial registration was obtained by a search of clinicaltrials.gov, WHO, ISRCTN, NCI-PDQ trial databases and corporate trial registries, as well as articles themselves. Data on blinding, results for primary outcomes, and author conclusions were extracted independently by two coders. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified associations between favorable results and conclusions and independent variables including advance registration, study design characteristics, and industry sponsorship.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 137 original research reports from 115 distinct randomized trials assessing 25 newly approved drugs for treating cancer, the 54 publications describing data from trials registered prior to publication were as likely to report statistically significant efficacy results and reach conclusions favoring the test drug (for results, OR = 1.77; 95% CI = 0.87 to 3.61) as reports of trials not registered in advance. In multivariate analysis, reports of prior registered trials were again as likely to favor the test drug (OR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.54 to 3.08); large sample sizes and surrogate outcome measures were statistically significant predictors of favorable efficacy results at p < 0.05. Subgroup analysis of the main reports from each trial (n = 115) similarly indicated that registered trials were as likely to report results favoring the test drug as trials not registered in advance (OR = 1.11; 95% CI = 0.44 to 2.80), and also that large trials and trials with nonstringent blinding were significantly more likely to report results favoring the test drug.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Trial registration alone, without a requirement for full reporting of research results, does not appear to reduce a bias toward results and conclusions favoring new drugs in the clinical trials literature. Our findings support the inclusion of full results reporting in trial registers, as well as protocols to allow assessment of whether results have been completely reported.</p

Methodological considerations for a randomised controlled trial of podiatry care in rheumatoid arthritis: lessons from an exploratory trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Whilst evidence exists to support the use of single treatments such as orthoses and footwear, the effectiveness of podiatry-led care as a complex intervention for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) related foot problems is unknown. The aim of this study was to undertake an exploratory randomised controlled parallel arm clinical trial (RheumAFooT) to inform the design and implementation of a definitive trial and to understand the potential benefits of this care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with a definite diagnosis of RA, stable drug management 3 months prior to entry, and a current history of foot problems (pain, deformity, stiffness, skin or nail lesions, or footwear problems) were recruited from a hospital outpatient rheumatology clinic and randomised to receive 12 months of podiatry treatment or no care. The primary outcome was change in foot health status using the impairment/footwear (LFIS_IF) and activity limitation/participation restriction (LFIS_AP) subscales of the Leeds Foot Impact Scale. Disease Activity Score (DAS), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score and walking speed (m/s) were also recorded.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 80 patients identified, 64 patients were eligible to participate in the pilot and 34 were recruited. 16 patients were randomised to receive podiatry led foot care and 18 received no care. Against a backdrop of stable disease (DAS and HAQ scores), there was a statistically significant between group difference in the change in foot health status for foot impairment (LFIS_IF) but not activity/participation (LFIS_AP) or function (walking speed) over 12 months. In the podiatry arm, 1 patient declined treatment following randomisation (did not want additional hospital visits) and 3 self-withdrew (lost to follow-up). Patients received an average of 3 consultations for assessment and treatment comprising routine care for skin and nail lesions (n = 3), foot orthoses (n = 9), footwear referral to the orthotist (n = 5), and ultrasound guided intra-articular steroid injection (n = 1).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In this exploratory trial patients were difficult to recruit (stable drug management and co-morbid disease) and retain (lack of benefit/additional treatment burden) but overall the intervention was safe (no adverse reactions). Twelve months of podiatry care maintained but did not improve foot health status. These observations are important for the design and implementation of a definitive randomised controlled trial.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ISRCTN: 01982076</p

Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cerebral ischaemia in thrombolysed patients: insights from the ENCHANTED trial

Background: Intensive blood pressure lowering may adversely affect evolving cerebral ischaemia. We aimed to determine whether intensive blood pressure lowering altered the size of cerebral infarction in the 2196 patients who participated in the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study, an international randomised controlled trial of intensive (systolic target 130–140 mm Hg within 1 h; maintained for 72 h) or guideline-recommended (systolic target 150 mm Hg) after thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke between March 3, 2012 and April 30, 2018. Methods: All available brain imaging were analysed centrally by expert readers. Log-linear regression was used to determine the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on the size of cerebral infarction, with adjustment for potential confounders. The primary analysis pertained to follow-up computerised tomography (CT) scans done between 24 and 36 h. Sensitivity analysis were undertaken in patients with only a follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and either MRI or CT at 24–36 h, and in patients with any brain imaging done at any time during follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01422616. Findings: There were 1477 (67.3%) patients (mean age 67.7 [12.1] y; male 60%, Asian 65%) with available follow-up brain imaging for analysis, including 635 patients with a CT done at 24–36 h. Mean achieved systolic blood pressures over 1–24 h were 141 mm Hg and 149 mm Hg in the intensive group and guideline group, respectively. There was no effect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the median size (ml) of cerebral infarction on follow-up CT at 24–36 h (0.3 [IQR 0.0–16.6] in the intensive group and 0.9 [0.0–12.5] in the guideline group; log Δmean −0.17, 95% CI −0.78 to 0.43). The results were consistent in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Interpretation: Intensive blood pressure lowering treatment to a systolic target <140 mm Hg within several hours after the onset of symptoms may not increase the size of cerebral infarction in patients who receive thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke of mild to moderate neurological severity. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; UK Stroke Association; UK Dementia Research Institute; Ministry of Health and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil; Ministry for Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs of South Korea; Takeda

Methodological quality of a systematic review on physical therapy for temporomandibular disorders: influence of hand search and quality scales

The validity of a systematic review depends on completeness of identifying randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and the quality of the included RCTs. The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of hand search on the number of identified RCTs and of four quality lists on the outcome of quality assessment of RCTs evaluating the effect of physical therapy on temporomandibular disorders. In addition, we investigated the association between publication year and the methodological quality of these RCTs. Cochrane, Medline and Embase databases were searched electronically. The references of the included studies were checked for additional trials. Studies not electronically identified were labelled as “obtained by means of hand search”. The included RCTs (69) concerning physical therapy for temporomandibular disorders were assessed using four different quality lists: the Delphi list, the Jadad list, the Megens & Harris list and the Risk of Bias list. The association between the quality scores and the year of publication were calculated. After electronic database search, hand search resulted in an additional 17 RCTs (25%). The mean quality score of the RCTs, expressed as a percentage of the maximum score, was low to moderate and varied from 35.1% for the Delphi list to 54.3% for the Risk of Bias list. The agreement among the four quality assessment lists, calculated by the Interclass Correlation Coefficient, was 0.603 (95% CI, 0.389; 0.749). The Delphi list scored significantly lower than the other lists. The Risk of Bias list scored significantly higher than the Jadad list. A moderate association was found between year of publication and scores on the Delphi list (r = 0.50), the Jadad list (r = 0.33) and the Megens & Harris list (r = 0.43)

Choosing a control intervention for a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled clinical trials are performed to resolve uncertainty concerning comparator interventions. Appropriate acknowledgment of uncertainty enables the concurrent achievement of two goals : the acquisition of valuable scientific knowledge and an optimum treatment choice for the patient-participant. The ethical recruitment of patients requires the presence of clinical equipoise. This involves the appropriate choice of a control intervention, particularly when unapproved drugs or innovative interventions are being evaluated. DISCUSSION: We argue that the choice of a control intervention should be supported by a systematic review of the relevant literature and, where necessary, solicitation of the informed beliefs of clinical experts through formal surveys and publication of the proposed trial's protocol. SUMMARY: When clinical equipoise is present, physicians may confidently propose trial enrollment to their eligible patients as an act of therapeutic beneficence