Conectar
The study aims to investigate the perceptions of patients with thyroid cancer on the potential impact of diagnosis and treatment delays during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This study involved qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, analysed using the thematic framework analysis method and reported using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research.
Participants in the study were treated and/or managed at hospital sites across New South Wales and Victoria, Australia.
17 patients with thyroid cancer were interviewed and included in the analysis (14 females and 3 males).
The delays experienced by patients ranged from 12 months. The patients reported about delays to diagnostic tests, delays to surgery and radioactive iodine treatment, perceived disease progression and, for some, the financial burden of choosing to go through private treatment to minimise the delay. Most patients also reported not wanting to experience delays any longer than they did, due to unease and anxiety.
This study highlights an increased psychological burden in patients with thyroid cancer who experienced delayed diagnosis and/or treatment during COVID-19. The impacts experienced by patients during this time may be similar in the case of other unexpected delays and highlight the need for regular clinical review during delays to diagnosis or treatment.
Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is increasingly used as treatment for patients with active multiple sclerosis (MS), typically after failure of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). A recent phase III trial, ‘Multiple Sclerosis International Stem Cell Transplant, MIST’, showed that aHSCT resulted in prolonged time to disability progression compared with DMTs in patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS). However, the MIST trial did not include many of the current high-efficacy DMTs (alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab or cladribine) in use in the UK within the control arm, which are now offered to patients with rapidly evolving severe MS (RES-MS) who are treatment naïve. There remain, therefore, unanswered questions about the relative efficacy and safety of aHSCT over these high-efficacy DMTs in these patient groups. The StarMS trial (Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation versus Alemtuzumab, Ocrelizumab, Ofatumumab or Cladribine in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis) will assess the efficacy, safety and long-term impact of aHSCT compared with high-efficacy DMTs in patients with highly active RRMS despite the use of standard DMTs or in patients with treatment naïve RES-MS.
StarMS is a multicentre parallel-group rater-blinded randomised controlled trial with two arms. A total of 198 participants will be recruited from 19 regional neurology secondary care centres in the UK. Participants will be randomly allocated to the aHSCT arm or DMT arm in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will remain in the study for 2 years with follow-up visits at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months postrandomisation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who achieve ‘no evidence of disease activity’ during the 2-year postrandomisation follow-up period in an intention to treat analysis. Secondary outcomes include efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and immune reconstitution of aHSCT and the four high-efficacy DMTs.
The study was approved by the Yorkshire and Humber—Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (20/YH/0061). Participants will provide written informed consent prior to any study specific procedures. The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international conferences.
by Amy Huang, Ellen Wang, Stephanie Sanger, Alexandra Papaioannou, Isabel B. Rodrigues
Most older adults 65 years and older accumulate over 8.5 hours/day of sedentary time, which is associated with increased risk of metabolic syndromes and falls. The impact of increased sedentary time in older adults has prompted development of sedentary behaviour guidelines. The purpose of our review was to compare national and international sedentary behaviour and physical activity guidelines for older adults and appraise the quality of guidelines using AGREE II. We conducted our search in Medline, Embase, Global Health, Web of Science, CINAHL, and relevant grey literature. We included the most recent guidelines for older adults written in English. We identified 18 national and international guidelines; ten of the 18 guidelines included sedentary behaviour recommendations while all 18 included physical activity recommendations for older adults. The ten sedentary behaviour guidelines were developed using cohort studies, knowledge users’ opinions, systematic reviews, or other guidelines while the physical activity guidelines were developed using randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and overview of reviews. The definition of sedentary behaviour and the recommendations were inconsistent between the guidelines and were based on very low to low quality and certainty of evidence. All guidelines provided consistent recommendations for aerobic and resistance training; the recommendations were developed using moderate to high quality and certainty of evidence. Only eight physical activity guidelines provided recommendations for balance training and six on flexibility training; the balance training recommendations were consistent between guidelines and based on moderate quality evidence. Further work is needed to develop evidenced-based sedentary behaviour recommendations and flexibility training recommendations for older adults.
FreshRSS 