All physicians will experience challenging history taking encounters, where communication is impaired and negatively impacts the diagnostic process. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) undertake a meta-analysis of the frequency of challenging encounters; (2) collate adverse outcomes of challenging encounters; (3) identify underlying causes of challenging encounters; (4) identify strategies to deal with different challenges; and (5) align these strategies with our published phenomenological framework of history taking challenges.

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence data adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines.

A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed on 12 July 2020, and updated on 4 August 2025, focusing on challenging history taking encounters in any clinical setting.

Articles reporting on the frequency, adverse outcomes, causative factors or strategies used to address challenges in the history taking process in any clinical area of medicine.

Factors associated with challenging history encounters (causative or consequential) were categorised using inductive coding and referenced to a phenomenological framework. Meta-analysis was used to estimate the prevalence of history taking encounters using a restricted maximum likelihood model with ² and I² as tests for heterogeneity and funnel plot with Egger’s test for publication bias.

73 articles were included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of challenging history taking encounters was 19.5% (95% CI 14.2% to 24.7%). Adverse outcomes of patient dissatisfaction (level 1 evidence) and diagnostic uncertainty (level 3 evidence) were identified. Factors associated with (n=22) and strategies to mitigate challenging encounters (n=13) were categorised. Correlation of factors and strategies with a phenomenological approach created a framework to assist novice history takers in approaching such circumstances.

Challenging history taking encounters are common. Little is known of the relative importance of factors associated with challenging history taking encounters or the impact of suggested strategies. Many of the suggested strategies to facilitate meaningful communication in these situations involve a departure from standard history taking. More research is required to better define the nature of challenges encountered in history taking with a view to develop better educational models for trainee physicians.

The Needs Assessment Tool-Cancer (NAT-C) is a consultation guide to identify, triage and reduce unmet patient needs.

We aimed to assess NAT-C fidelity, mechanisms of action and implementation issues in UK primary care as part of a clinical and cost-effectiveness cluster randomised controlled trial of the NAT-C for people with cancer compared with usual care (registration: ISRCTN15497400).

Design: a mixed-methods process evaluation informed by normalisation process theory (NPT). Setting: 21 participating general practices in England were randomised to be trained to conduct an NAT-C guided consultation with people with cancer (excluding those in remission). General practitioner fidelity of intervention and clinical action resulting from the NAT-C consultation was noted. Two Normalisation MeAsure Development Questionnaire surveys were distributed to trained clinicians before (Survey 1) and after delivery of ≥2 NAT-C consultations (Survey 2). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (post delivery ≥2 NAT-C consultations) and key stakeholders in primary and cancer care. Fidelity, action and paired before/after survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were analysed using a deductive thematic framework approach (NPT-informed). Data were narratively synthesised with cross-tabulated key findings.

Of the 360/376 (96%) NAT-C consultations delivered, 258/360 (72%) resulted in clinical action, including 50 (13%) external referrals. 14 paired before (Survey 1, n=53) and after (Survey 2, n=29) responses. Survey 1 showed positive responses across all NPT domains, but while continuing to see relevance, usefulness and legitimacy, Survey 2 highlighted concerns about insufficient resources and management support. 16 clinician participants (eight GPs, eight key stakeholders; 50% male) completed interviews. Following synthesis, we identified five themes: (1) the perceived value of the NAT-C; (2) ‘champions’ are important at all levels (practice, regionally and nationally); (3) research evidence is seen as important, but influences implementation indirectly through policy, clinical guidelines and resourced initiatives; (4) adequate resources are fundamental for implementation beyond practice level and (5) NAT-C practicalities; training is adequate, but robust functional information technology systems are needed.

Implementation requires champions and clinicians ‘buy-in’ to the patient value to legitimise use. In the context of current primary care pressures, resources were seen as essential to embed the NAT-C, but financial incentives were viewed with mixed feelings.

ISRCTN15497400.

Quality collaboratives improve quality of care at the hospital and collaborative levels, but less is understood about how such efforts affect patient-level disparities. This study evaluated how a quality improvement (QI) effort (increasing multiarterial grafting during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)) translated into populations which historically receive lower-quality care (females and patients of low socioeconomic status).

Retrospective cohort study.

All non-federal hospitals in the state of Michigan that perform cardiac surgery and participate in a statewide collaborative database (n=33).

Patients undergoing first-time, isolated CABG receiving at least two bypass grafts from 2011 to 2022 were identified.

Association of sex and socioeconomic status with multiarterial grafting was evaluated across the study period. The distressed community index (DCI), a socioeconomic ranking (0—not distressed, 100—severely distressed), was matched to the patient’s zip code. Hierarchical regression modelling was performed to associate DCI and sex with multiarterial grafting, incorporating patient factors and hospital and surgeon effects. A sex-surgery year and DCI-surgery year interaction term was performed to assess the change in the rate of multiarterial grafting.

A total of 40 322 patients underwent CABG at 33 centres with a median age of 66 years and 24% were female. The rate of multiarterial grafting was 15%, although lower among females (10% vs 17%) and the highest (vs lowest) DCI quartile (14% vs 18%). After risk adjustment, females were less likely to receive multiarterial grafting (OR_adj 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.58), padj 0.35 per 10-point increase (95% CI 0.24 to 0.51), p0.05).

Despite a large overall increase in multiarterial grafting due to QI efforts, females and patients with low socioeconomic status had lower rates of multiarterial grafting. QI efforts should be evaluated both overall and among patients who historically receive lower quality care to improve quality and equity.

To determine the prevalence of presbyopia and associated risk factors among Bangladeshi recipients of elderly social safety net payments who were not currently using mobile financial services (MFS) and demonstrated numeracy, dexterity and cognitive prerequisites for smartphone use during eligibility screening for the Transforming Households with Refraction and Innovative Financial Technology (THRIFT) trial. Accessing these payments requires use of online banking, as with a smartphone.

Cross-sectional analysis of trial eligibility screening data.

Community-based screening conducted in two rural subdistricts in Kurigram District, Bangladesh.

Among 13 944 Old Age Allowance and Widows’ Allowance (WA) beneficiaries screened, 953 met trial eligibility criteria, including passing a smartphone readiness assessment and completing near vision examinations.

Presbyopia, defined as binocular presenting near visual acuity of N6.3 or worse, correctable to at least N5 with near vision glasses and with distance vision of ≥6/12 in both eyes.

Among 953 participants (mean age 61.4±7.2 years, 62.6% women), presbyopia prevalence was 62.6% (95% CI 59.5 to 65.7). Presbyopia was significantly positively associated with female gender (adjusted prevalence ratio (APR)=1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.41) and receiving WA (APR=1.20, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.38) in multivariable analyses.

This study highlights a substantial burden of uncorrected presbyopia among a prescreened, randomised control trial-eligible subgroup of social safety net beneficiaries in rural Bangladesh, who were not currently using MFS but demonstrated cognitive and functional capacity to use mobile phones, potentially hampering their ability to carry out online banking. Delivery of reading glasses may improve digital financial access and facilitate broader financial inclusion, a hypothesis currently being tested in the parent THRIFT trial.

NCT05510687.

To determine whether a novel urine collection device (the ‘Pee-in-Pot (PiP)’) produces the same rates of reportable urine culture results as standard of care (SOC) urine collection. To determine whether the PiP produces comparable microscopy results to SOC urine collection. To estimate the carbon footprint of the PiP compared to SOC urine collection.

A prospectively designed, single-centre, paired comparison study.

A district general hospital in Southwest England, including antenatal clinical, accident and emergency, medical and surgical ward environments.

Adults aged 18 or over.

Urine passed through the PiP device before being decanted into a 10 mL boric acid tube for microscopy and culture, compared with the same urine contained only in a sterile plastic vessel before being decanted into a boric acid tube for microscopy and culture.

The proportion of positive urine culture results.

The proportion of heavy mixed growth culture results. Comparison of particle counts: all small particles, bacteria, red blood cells and white blood cells.

Microscopy was performed for 1353 paired samples, of which 808 paired samples both underwent culture. Overall, urine cultures were positive in 9.3% (75/808) and 10.0% (81/808) of PiP and control cases, respectively. Overall matching between PiP and control arms for reportable positive culture results was 98.5% (796/808), with a Cohen’s Kappa test coefficient () of 0.9149 (almost perfect agreement). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive urine culture results between testing arms for any organisms (margin of non-inferiority prospectively defined as ±2.5% for Escherichia coli positive cultures). For microscopy, there was agreement in meeting culture thresholds for 1308 of 1353 paired samples with a difference in culturing rates of 0.00517 (95% CI –0.0045 to 0.015, ie, high level of agreement). The estimated base case carbon footprint of PiP testing was 95g CO2e compared to 270g CO2e for SOC testing.

This study found the PiP to be non-inferior for routine urine microscopy and culture testing and to have a lower carbon footprint compared with SOC urine testing.

Bipolar disorder affects around 2% of the population and is linked with reduced life expectancy and socioeconomic burden. Depressive episodes are difficult to treat and typically more prevalent, enduring and burdensome than manic episodes. The use of antidepressants alone has limited effect and is associated with significant clinical risk through polarity switch. Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend quetiapine, olanzapine (with or without fluoxetine) and lamotrigine; however, these medications have limited efficacy, tolerability and acceptability. The ASCEnD study aims to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of aripiprazole plus sertraline compared with quetiapine, offering potential improvements for outcomes in bipolar depression. The study is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR132773).

ASCEnD is a prospective, two-arm, superiority, individually 1:1 randomised, controlled, pragmatic, parallel group, type A open-label clinical trial of aripiprazole/sertraline medication combination compared with quetiapine for bipolar depression. The study is conducted in the UK National Health Service setting with the aim of recruiting and randomising 270 participants followed-up for 24 weeks. Adults with bipolar disorder self-refer or are recruited through primary and secondary care services. The primary outcome is change in depressive symptoms 12–16 weeks after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include measures of symptom change, treatment satisfaction, tolerability, medication adherence, concomitant medication use, psychosocial functioning, quality of life and cost-effectiveness and informal carer measures of quality of life and costs of caring. The exploratory outcome is change in participant reward and punishment responsiveness. Analysis will follow a prespecified statistical analysis plan. A nested qualitative study is included to examine feasibility and acceptability of the trial design.

A Clinical Trial Authorisation from Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and approval from the Health Research Authority (IRAS 1007468) and North East – Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee (23/NE/0132) were obtained. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and lay summaries for participants and patient and public groups.

ISRCTN63917405.

While almost half of older adults admitted to hospital are prescribed potentially inappropriate medicines, less than 1% have a medicine proactively deprescribed during admission in the UK. The CompreHensive geriAtRician-led MEdication Review (CHARMER) intervention is designed to address geriatricians’ and pharmacists’ barriers and enablers to deprescribing. The CHARMER definitive trial will evaluate effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety.

A stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted in 20 hospitals in England, with four hospitals in reserve. All hospitals will collect baseline data. Every 3 months, five hospitals will be randomised to receive the intervention. The intervention, implemented by a local project manager, comprises a hospital action plan to set deprescribing as an organisational goal; workshops for pharmacists and geriatricians to change beliefs about deprescribing; weekly briefings between geriatricians and pharmacists to discuss opportunities for deprescribing; benchmarking reports to compare deprescribing performance across participating hospitals. With an average of 200 patients admitted and discharged during each step, the study will have 89.5% power at 5% significance level and intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.05 to detect a 3% difference in 90-day re-admission rate from 16.7% versus 13.7%. Anonymised routinely collected data, including readmissions, will be obtained for all patients admitted during the study period. Enhanced data collection periods of 1 month during control and intervention periods will be used to recruit patients and data for secondary outcomes and process evaluation.

A stepped-wedge design enabled a smaller number of hospitals and patients to be included than a traditional cluster-randomised design. The complexity of intervention implementation necessitated a project manager in addition to the principal investigator responsible for trial conduct. Using routinely collected data for the primary outcome measure should ensure that the trial has sufficient power on completion. Planned enhanced data collection for short periods of time improves trial efficiency.

ISRCTN13248281.

To identify and prioritise research uncertainties regarding the assessment, management and rehabilitation of patients with problematic hip replacements through a national Priority Setting Partnership (PSP).

A national PSP using the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology.

UK.

Patients, carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the care of patients with problematic hip replacements.

A steering group was established. The James Lind Alliance methodology was followed throughout. A nationwide survey was conducted to collect unanswered questions. These were refined, prioritised through an interim survey and ranked at a final consensus workshop.

The initial survey yielded 201 questions, refined to 32. The interim survey had 191 respondents, leading to 19 questions at the final workshop. The top 10 research priorities were agreed on.

This PSP identified key research priorities for problematic hip replacements, focusing on diagnosis, pain management, perioperative optimisation and infection. These priorities can inform researchers and funders to improve outcomes for affected patients.

There are approximately 700 000 autistic people in the UK, and autism is increasingly being diagnosed in adulthood. Diagnosis on its own does not provide adequate information to plan post-diagnostic support for autistic people, and clinicians often plan support without the use of validated standardised tools which may exacerbate inequities in care. This study will evaluate a novel strengths and needs assessment, based on the WHO’s International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health CoreSet for Autism, for use in adult diagnostic services immediately on receipt of an autism diagnosis. Potential issues, including the length of the assessment, timing of delivery and selection bias, will be explored as part of the trial process evaluation.

A two-arm, multisite, randomised pilot trial design will be used to evaluate the ICF CoreSets for Autism Strengths and Needs Assessment in three diagnostic services in England. A total of 72 newly diagnosed autistic adults will be recruited across the three sites over a 6-month period and randomised into an assessment group (strengths and needs assessment plus standard care) and a treatment as usual group (standard care only). The assessment group will receive a summary report of their strengths and needs on completion of the assessment. Both groups will complete measures of mental health and quality of life at baseline and 3 months follow-up (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire-7, Recovering Quality of Life questionnaire-10, EuroQoL-5D). Acceptability and feasibility will be measured for the strengths and needs assessment and for trial procedures using standardised measures, progression criteria and qualitative data from clinician focus groups and interviews with a subsample of autistic participants. The study design and procedures are being co-produced with an autistic advisor/patient and public involvement lead and with a steering group of autistic adults.

This study was reviewed by the East Midlands—Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee and was given Health Research Authority approval on 18 March 2025 (REC reference:25/EM/0041). The results will be disseminated via reports to the funder (NIHR), a peer-reviewed journal paper and academic conferences. We will email a summary report of findings to study participants and will invite participants to an information dissemination event at the end of the study. Links to reports and a lay summary will be provided on the research group’s website: https://sharl.sites.sheffield.ac.uk/home

ISRCTN10283350.

Forced migrants (i.e., asylum seekers and refugees) experience greater mental health disparities and inequities in care. Mental health services and systems lack clear policy on integrated mental healthcare. Understanding the causal mechanisms of integrated mental health for migrants can promote a resilient and adaptive health and social care system. However, to achieve a functional mental health service integration, there is a need to understand how and why mental health system integration works and under what health systems conditions. The purpose of this realist review protocol will be to outline a process for refining an initial programme theory (IPT), developed through deliberative dialogues with key interest groups in British Columbia, Canada, and to test the IPT against the global evidence base.

A realist review is an interpretive methodological approach to synthesising the literature based on the realist philosophy of science. Realist reviews are pragmatic approaches to theory development because they involve the participation of real-world actors or people who work within complex systems. Realist reviews are particularly useful for synthesising complex knowledge. We plan to conduct a seven-step review process, with iteration between each step. Steps 1–3 have already been completed in our previous work and included the development of an IPT, which will be refined systematically by exploring the global literature and consulting with an international advisory group. These will be used iteratively to identify, test and refine the programme theory. The quality of included literature will be appraised using the relevance, richness and rigour criteria and the realist quality appraisal tool, TAPUPASM (transparency, accessibility, propriety, utility, purposiveness, accuracy, specificity and modified objectivity). Steps 4–7 will include data extraction and realist analysis through retroductive theorising using the ICAMO (intervention, context, actor, mechanism and outcome) heuristic to help distinguish actors and resources from contexts, mechanisms and outcomes.

Ethics approval for the deliberative dialogue interviews that inform this realist review and IPT were obtained by the University of British Columbia (ref: REB Number: H22-03195). Study recruitment occurred between 21 November 2023 and 16 January 2024. All participants provided informed consent to take part in deliberative dialogues and to have their interviews audio recorded and transcribed for the purpose of this research. We will disseminate results of the review through academic papers, conference presentations and through iterative interest group workshops and discussions.

CRD42024580083.

Active self-management by patients following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) can reduce recurrent events. Patient education for transitioning from hospital to home promotes effective self-management but can be limited in the acute setting due to time and resource pressures. Patients from ethnic minority and immigrant backgrounds face additional language, cultural and health literacy barriers to receiving patient education. Self-administered virtual patient education presents an innovative solution to these challenges. This study aims to evaluate a co-adapted, virtual avatar nurse-guided, discharge education application (app) for Chinese-speaking patients following ACS.

This multicentre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial will recruit 98 Chinese-speaking inpatients following ACS with evaluation at 1 and 3 months postdischarge. Control participants in the control group will receive the usual ward-based patient discharge education. Intervention participants will additionally receive the education app installed on their devices before hospital discharge with unlimited access during the study period. Cultural relevance and linguistic accuracy for this Chinese version of an existing app were ensured through co-adaptation with Chinese-speaking consumers; the primary outcome will be coronary heart disease (CHD) knowledge, and secondary outcomes will include knowledge, attitudes and beliefs regarding heart attack symptoms and responses, CHD self-management behaviours, utilisation of healthcare services and quality of life. A process evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the app. Between-group comparisons will be made using 95% CIs, accounting for baseline differences using linear mixed effects or mixed effects logistic regression models.

The Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee has approved this study protocol (26 February 2024, amendment number 2) (2024/STE00147), with site-specific authorisations obtained from each participating hospital. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations at scientific conferences.

ACTRN12624000408583.

We conducted a feasibility study to evaluate the feasibility of recruiting patients to examine the effect of near vision glasses in young infants at risk of cerebral visual impairment.

A three-arm, parallel-group, open-label randomised feasibility trial.

Tertiary neonatal intensive care in London, UK.

We included babies born before 29 weeks of gestation or at full term with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Babies who needed ongoing inpatient care, with established eye anomalies or with very high refractive errors at baseline (±8.00D) were not included. Infants with retinopathy of prematurity were not excluded.

At 8 weeks corrected age, we allocated 18 infants to wear glasses (+3.00D over full cycloplegic refraction) immediately (intervention 1), 18 to wear the same glasses at 16 weeks (intervention 2) and 19 infants were allocated to standard treatment (no glasses).

Recruitment and retention of study participants (primary), compliance wearing glasses, preferential-looking visual acuity (with glasses) and visual function as determined using A Test Battery of Child Development for Examining Functional Vision at 3-month and 6-month age post-term.

Of 70 eligible families, 55 consented and 34 attended baseline assessments, and 28 completed the study. Non-attendance was due mainly to prolonged inpatient stay, infant health and scheduling conflicts. Glasses were worn for similar periods in each group (Intervention 1: median 2 hours/day (95% CI 1 hour to 4 hours); Intervention 2: median 2 hours/day (95% CI 1.5 hours to 3 hours)). Visual acuity improved from baseline to 6 months. Mean (SE) LogMAR (Minimum Angle of Resolution) improvements were standard care: 0.47 (0.45); intervention 1: 0.66 (0.44); intervention 2: 0.37 (0.36). Among the 29 very preterm infants, there were similar findings: standard care: 0.35 (0.35); Intervention 1: 0.67 (0.47); Intervention 2: 0.34 (0.40). As a functional measure, object permanence was present at the following rates by randomised arm: standard care: 29%; whereas intervention 1: 56%; and intervention 2: 44% (OR intervention 1 vs standard care: 3.13 (95% CI 0.38 to 25.57), ie, not statistically significant).

We demonstrate feasibility for a definitive RCT (randomized controlled trial) with good recruitment and retention and observed potential benefits for vision and development following the dispensing of glasses at 8 weeks post-term age compared with untreated controls. We identified methodological modifications to further improve recruitment processes for a future larger study.

ISRCTN14646770; NCT05048550.

A significant proportion of adults in England and Wales report experiencing childhood trauma, which is often associated with poor health and negative social outcomes including a significant increase in the risk of poor mental health outcomes in adulthood. This proposed scoping review adopts a broad definition of childhood trauma and applies both a salutogenic framework and ecological systems theory to explore how protective factors at five ecological levels can support mental well-being. The review will also examine how protective factors vary across different population groups and contexts.

The scoping review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) protocol for scoping reviews. The databases that will be searched are Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Medline. Studies will be included if they include protective factors and involve adults aged 18 and over who have experienced childhood trauma, whether self-identified, retrospectively self-reported or measured using a validated instrument. Studies will be excluded if they focus on participants under the age of 18.

All search results will be uploaded to Covidence, duplicates removed, and titles/abstracts screened by at least two reviewers based on inclusion criteria. Full texts of potentially relevant sources will be imported into EndNote 21. Reasons for exclusions will be documented and disagreements resolved through discussion or a third reviewer. The full process will be reported using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Data will be extracted by at least two reviewers using a tool developed by the team based on the JBI guidance. A best-fit framework analysis will be used, using a matrix developed by the researchers including the four salutogenic domains and the five levels of the ecological framework.

Formal ethical approval is not necessary for this scoping review as it does not involve the collection of primary data. The outcomes of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal articles, conference/seminar presentations, and developed into resources for stakeholders and collaborators.

Open Science Framework (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/CJRUY).

To evaluate the incremental diagnostic value and sub-phenotyping capability of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) compared with Transthoracic Echocardiography (TTE) in patients with elevated left ventricular filling pressure (LVFP).

Prospective registry study. [Results from ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05114785]

A single NHS hospital in the UK.

The primary outcome was the rate of diagnostic discordance between TTE and CMR. Secondary outcomes included the characterisation of specific pathologies identified by CMR where TTE was normal, non-diagnostic or provided a non-specific diagnosis.

CMR demonstrated diagnostic discordance with TTE in 74% (n=194) of cases. In patients with a normal TTE (n=54), CMR identified heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in 46% (n=25) and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) in 19% (n=10). For non-diagnostic TTE cases (n=15), CMR detected HFpEF in 53.3% (n=8) and IHD in 26.7% (n=4). Among those with non-specific left ventricular hypertrophy on TTE (n=47), CMR revealed HFpEF in 45% (n=21) and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in 34% (n=16).

CMR markedly improves diagnostic precision and sub-phenotyping in patients with elevated LVFP, identifying key conditions like HFpEF, IHD and specific cardiomyopathies that TTE frequently misses. These findings highlight CMR’s critical role as a complementary imaging tool for refining diagnoses and informing management strategies in cardiovascular conditions.

Immunotherapy with anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) inhibitors has revolutionised the treatment of many solid tumours, however, only 30–40% of patients will have a lasting clinical response. Tumour-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been implicated in the spread of solid tumours and resistance to these agents. A lectin-affinity plasmapheresis device called the Hemopurifier (HP) has been developed and shown to remove EVs in vitro and in patients. We hypothesise that the treatment of patients who are not improving on a regimen that includes an anti-PD-1 agent will be safe, decrease EV concentrations and improve antitumour T cell activity.

This safety, feasibility and dose-finding study is designed in a 3+3 safety study design with three treatment cohorts. Participants who are determined not to be responding to a regimen that includes an anti-PD-1 agent will be assigned to receive either one, two or three (HP) treatments over a 1-week period prior to their next scheduled dose of anti-PD-1 antibody. Advancement from one cohort to the next will be determined by a Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Data collection will include adverse events, safety labs, EV concentrations and T cell measurements, repeat imaging and survival status.

The primary outcome of the study will be the safety of the HP in this population, with additional endpoints to include the kinetics of EV removal and rebound following HP treatment, in addition to the effects on T cell numbers and activity.

The clinical protocol and amendment to the study protocol have been approved by the Central Adelaide Local Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee for Royal Adelaide Hospital (reference number 2024/HRE00031) and the Bellberry Human Research Ethics Committee for Pindara Private Hospital and Genesis Care/Royal North Shore Hospital (reference number 2024-06-724-A-6). The Therapeutic Goods Administration has been notified. The clinical trial is listed on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Informed Consent is obtained from all participants prior to any protocol procedures being performed. Results of the main trial and each of the secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Australia New Zealand registration number ACTRN12624000732583.