Oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a highly effective HIV prevention method; however, uptake and persistence have been low among southern African women. A dual prevention pill (DPP) that combines PrEP with oral contraception (OC) may increase PrEP use and better meet women’s sexual and reproductive health needs. We will gauge the DPP’s acceptability in two cross-over clinical trials.

PC952 (Zimbabwe) and PC953 (South Africa) will compare acceptability, adherence and preference for an over-encapsulated DPP versus PrEP and OCs taken separately. HIV-negative, non-pregnant cisgender females in Johannesburg, South Africa (n=96, 16–40 years) and Harare, Zimbabwe (n=30, 16–24 years) will be randomised 1:1 to the order of regimens—DPP or two separate tablets—each used for three 28-day cycles, followed by a 6-month choice period in South Africa. Monthly clinic visits include HIV and pregnancy testing; safety assessments and risk reduction and adherence counselling. We will assess adherence (monthly) based on tenofovir diphosphate drug levels in dried blood spots and by self-report. We will evaluate acceptability (monthly) and preference (end of cross-over) via computer-assisted self-interviewing and in-depth interviews with a subset of participants. Data collection started in September 2022 and ended in January 2024.

PC952 was approved by the Ministry of Health and Child Care, Medical Research Council, Research Council and Medicines Control Authority of Zimbabwe; the Chitungwiza City Health Ethics Committee; and the Joint Research Ethics Committee for the University of Zimbabwe Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences and Parirenyatwa Group of Hospitals. PC953 was approved by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority and the University of the Witwatersrand’s Human Research Ethics Committee. The Population Council IRB approved both studies. We will disseminate results in open-access journals, clinical trials registries, and at local and international meetings and conferences.

NCT04778514, NCT04778527.

Inflammation is a hallmark of cancer and is involved in tumour growth and dissemination. However, the hallmarks of cancer are also the hallmarks of wound healing, and modulating the wound inflammatory response and immune contexture in relation to cancer surgery may represent effective targets of therapies.

Repurposing anti-inflammatory drugs in a cancer setting has gained increasing interest in recent years. Interestingly, the known and thoroughly tested antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid reduces the risk of bleeding, but it is also suggested to play important roles in anti-inflammatory pathways, improving wound healing and affecting anti-carcinogenic mechanisms.

As a novel approach, we will conduct a randomised controlled trial using perioperative treatment with tranexamic acid, aiming to prevent early relapses by >10% for patients with melanoma.

Design: investigator-initiated parallel, two-arm, randomised, blinded, Danish multicentre superiority trial.

Patients: ≥T2 b melanoma and eligible for sentinel lymph node biopsy (n=1204).

Project drug: tranexamic acid or placebo.

Treatment: before surgery (intravenous 15 mg/kg) and daily (peroral 1000 mg x 3) through postoperative day 4.

Primary outcome: relapse within 2 years after surgery.

Primary analysis: risk difference between the treatment arms (² test).

Secondary outcomes: postoperative complications, adverse events and survival.

Inclusion period: summer 2023 to summer 2026.

The trial will be initiated during the summer of 2023 and is approved by the National Committee on Health Research Ethics, the Danish Medicine Agency, and registered under the Data Protection Act. The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Patients included in the study will adhere to normal Danish treatment protocols and standards of care, and we expect only mild and temporary side effects. Positive and negative results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, with authorships adhering to the Vancouver rules.

NCT05899465; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier.

Tuberculosis (TB) is a leading infectious cause of death globally. It is the most common opportunistic infection in people living with HIV, and the most common cause of their morbidity and mortality. Following TB treatment, surviving individuals may be at risk for post-TB lung disease. The TB Sentinel Research Network (TB-SRN) provides a platform for coordinated observational TB research within the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium.

This prospective, observational cohort study will assess treatment and post-treatment outcomes of pulmonary TB (microbiologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed) among 2600 people aged ≥15 years, with and without HIV coinfection, consecutively enrolled at 16 sites in 11 countries, across 6 of IeDEA’s global regions. Data regarding clinical and sociodemographic factors, mental health, health-related quality of life, pulmonary function, and laboratory and radiographic findings will be collected using standardised questionnaires and data collection tools, beginning from the initiation of TB treatment and through 12 months after the end of treatment. Data will be aggregated for proposed analyses.

Ethics approval was obtained at all implementing study sites, including the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Human Research Protections Programme. Participants will provide informed consent; for minors, this includes both adolescent assent and the consent of their parent or primary caregiver. Protections for vulnerable groups are included, in alignment with local standards and considerations at sites. Procedures for requesting use and analysis of TB-SRN data are publicly available. Findings from TB-SRN analyses will be shared with national TB programmes to inform TB programming and policy, and disseminated at regional and global conferences and other venues.

South Africa has a high prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM; 15%) and many of these women (48%) progress to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) within 5 years post partum. A significant proportion (47%) of the women are not aware of their diabetes status after the index pregnancy, which may be in part to low postnatal diabetes screening rates. Therefore, we aim to evaluate a intervention that reduces the subsequent risk of developing T2DM among women with recent GDM. Our objectives are fourfold: (1) compare the completion of the nationally recommended 6-week postpartum oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) between intervention and control groups; (2) compare the diabetes risk reduction between control and intervention groups at 12 months’ post partum; (3) assess the process of implementation; and (4) assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed intervention package.

Convergent parallel mixed-methods study with the main component being a pragmatic, 2-arm individually randomised controlled trial, which will be carried out at five major referral centres and up to 26 well-baby clinics in the Western Cape and Gauteng provinces of South Africa. Participants (n=370) with GDM (with no prior history of either type 1 or type 2 diabetes) will be recruited into the study at 24–36 weeks’ gestational age, at which stage first data collection will take place. Subsequent data collection will take place at 6–8 weeks after delivery and again at 12 months. The primary outcome for the trial is twofold: first, the completion of the recommended 2-hour OGTT at the well-baby clinics 6–8 weeks post partum, and second, a composite diabetes risk reduction indicator at 12 months. Process evaluation will assess fidelity, acceptability, and dose of the intervention.

Ethics approval has been granted from University of Cape Town (829/2016), University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg (M170228), University of Stellenbosch (N17/04/032) and the University of Montreal (2019-794). The results of the trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations to key South African Government stakeholders and health service providers.

1 December 2022 (version #2). Any protocol amendments will be communicated to investigators, Human Ethics Research Committees, trial participants, and trial registries.

PAN African Clinical Trials Registry (https://pactr.samrc.ac.za) on 11 June 2018 (identifier PACTR201805003336174).

Implementation of enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) has resulted in improved patient-centred outcomes and decreased costs. However, there is a lack of high-level evidence for many ERP elements. We have designed a randomised, embedded, multifactorial, adaptive platform perioperative medicine (REMAP Periop) trial to evaluate the effectiveness of several perioperative therapies for patients undergoing complex abdominal surgery as part of an ERP. This trial will begin with two domains: postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis and regional/neuraxial analgesia. Patients enrolled in the trial will be randomised to arms within both domains, with the possibility of adding additional domains in the future.

In the PONV domain, patients are randomised to optimal versus supraoptimal prophylactic regimens. In the regional/neuraxial domain, patients are randomised to one of five different single-injection techniques/combination of techniques. The primary study endpoint is hospital-free days at 30 days, with additional domain-specific secondary endpoints of PONV incidence and postoperative opioid consumption. The efficacy of an intervention arm within a given domain will be evaluated at regular interim analyses using Bayesian statistical analysis. At the beginning of the trial, participants will have an equal probability of being allocated to any given intervention within a domain (ie, simple 1:1 randomisation), with response adaptive randomisation guiding changes to allocation ratios after interim analyses when applicable based on prespecified statistical triggers. Triggers met at interim analysis may also result in intervention dropping.

The core protocol and domain-specific appendices were approved by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board. A waiver of informed consent was obtained for this trial. Trial results will be announced to the public and healthcare providers once prespecified statistical triggers of interest are reached as described in the core protocol, and the most favourable interventions will then be implemented as a standardised institutional protocol.

NCT04606264.

The study aim was to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Zambia. We sought to answer the question, ‘What is the vaccine effectiveness of a complete schedule of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs in Zambia?’

We conducted a test-negative case–control study among HCWs across different levels of health facilities in Zambia offering point of care testing for COVID-19 from May 2021 to March 2022.

1767 participants entered the study and completed it. Cases were HCWs with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and controls were HCWs who tested SARS-CoV-2 negative. Consented HCWs with documented history of vaccination for COVID-19 (vaccinated HCWs only) were included in the study. HCWs with unknown test results and unknown vaccination status, were excluded.

The primary outcome was VE among symptomatic HCWs. Secondary outcomes were VE by: SARS-CoV-2 variant strains based on the predominant variant circulating in Zambia (Delta during May 2021 to November 2021 and Omicron during December 2021 to March 2022), duration since vaccination and vaccine product.

We recruited 1145 symptomatic HCWs. The median age was 30 years (IQR: 26–38) and 789 (68.9%) were women. Two hundred and eighty-two (24.6%) were fully vaccinated. The median time to full vaccination was 102 days (IQR: 56–144). VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was 72.7% (95% CI: 61.9% to 80.7%) for fully vaccinated participants. VE was 79.4% (95% CI: 58.2% to 90.7%) during the Delta period and 37.5% (95% CI: –7.0% to 63.3%) during the Omicron period.

COVID-19 vaccines were effective in reducing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 among Zambian HCWs when the Delta variant was circulating but not when Omicron was circulating. This could be related to immune evasive characteristics and/or waning immunity. These findings support accelerating COVID-19 booster dosing with bivalent vaccines as part of the vaccination programme to reduce COVID-19 in Zambia.

Lyme disease (LD) is the most frequent tick-borne disease in the moderate climates of Europe. This study will inform the phase III efficacy study for Pfizer and Valneva’s investigational Lyme disease vaccine, VLA15. VLA15 phase III will be conducted in the USA and Europe due to the vaccine’s serotype coverage and public health burden of LD. In Europe, the existence and location of sites that have access to populations with high LD annual incidence is uncertain. This active, prospective surveillance study assesses annual LD incidence at general practice (GP)/primary care sites, allowing for phase III site vetting and better characterisation of LD burden in selected regions for study size calculations.

This burden of Lyme disease (BOLD) study will assess LD incidence overall and by site at 15 GP/primary care practices in endemic areas of 6 European countries from Spring 2021 to December 2022 and will be summarised with counts (n), percentages (%) and associated 95% CIs. Suspected LD cases identified from site’s practice panels are documented on screening logs, where clinical LD manifestations, diagnoses and standard of care diagnostic results are recorded. In the initial 12-month enrolment phase, suspected LD cases are offered enrolment. Participants undergo interview and clinical assessments to establish medical history, final clinical diagnosis, clinical manifestations and quality of life impact. Study-specific procedures include LD serology, skin punch biopsies and Lyme manifestation photographs. For every enrolled participant diagnosed with LD, 6–10 age-matched controls are randomly selected and offered enrolment for an embedded LD risk factor analysis. Persistent symptoms or post-treatment LD will be assessed at follow-up visits up to 2 years after initial diagnosis, while patients remain symptomatic.

This study has been approved by all sites’ local ethics committees. The results will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

The aim of this multicentre COVID-PREDICT study (a nationwide observational cohort study that aims to better understand clinical course of COVID-19 and to predict which COVID-19 patients should receive which treatment and which type of care) was to determine the association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, complications and discharge destination in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

Data from a historical cohort study in eight hospitals (both academic and non-academic) in the Netherlands between January 2020 and July 2021 were used in this study.

3064 hospitalised COVID-19 patients >18 years old.

The primary outcome was the incidence of new-onset AF during hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes were the association between new-onset AF (vs prevalent or non-AF) and mortality, ICU admissions, complications and discharge destination, performed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

Of the 3064 included patients (60.6% men, median age: 65 years, IQR 55–75 years), 72 (2.3%) patients had prevalent AF and 164 (5.4%) patients developed new-onset AF during hospitalisation. Compared with patients without AF, patients with new-onset AF had a higher incidence of death (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.71, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.59) an ICU admission (aOR 5.45, 95% CI 3.90 to 7.61). Mortality was non-significantly different between patients with prevalent AF and those with new-onset AF (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.76). However, new-onset AF was associated with a higher incidence of ICU admission and complications compared with prevalent AF (OR 6.34, 95% CI 2.95 to 13.63, OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.67 to 5.55, respectively).

New-onset AF was associated with an increased incidence of death, ICU admission, complications and a lower chance to be discharged home. These effects were far less pronounced in patients with prevalent AF. Therefore, new-onset AF seems to represent a marker of disease severity, rather than a cause of adverse outcomes.