Chelsea and Westminster Hospital

Liver biopsy remains the gold standard in the assessment of severity of liver disease. Noninvasive tests have gained popularity to predict histology in view of the associated risks of biopsy. However, many models include tests not readily available, and there are limited data from patients with HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection. We aimed to develop a model using routine tests to predict liver fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection. A retrospective analysis of liver histology was performed in 832 patients. Liver fibrosis was assessed via Ishak score; patients were categorized as 0-1, 2-3, or 4-6 and were randomly assigned to training (n = 555) or validation (n = 277) sets. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that platelet count (PLT), age, AST, and INR were significantly associated with fibrosis. Additional analysis revealed PLT, age, AST, and ALT as an alternative model. Based on this, a simple index (FIB-4) was developed: age ([yr] x AST [U/L]) / ((PLT [10(9)/L]) x (ALT [U/L])(1/2)). The AUROC of the index was 0.765 for differentiation between Ishak stage 0-3 and 4-6. At a cutoff of <1.45 in the validation set, the negative predictive value to exclude advanced fibrosis (stage 4-6) was 90% with a sensitivity of 70%. A cutoff of >3.25 had a positive predictive value of 65% and a specificity of 97%. Using these cutoffs, 87% of the 198 patients with FIB-4 values outside 1.45-3.25 would be correctly classified, and liver biopsy could be avoided in 71% of the validation group. In conclusion, noninvasive tests can accurately predict hepatic fibrosis and may reduce the need for liver biopsy in the majority of HIV/HCV-coinfected patients.

Angela Joyce on the care of children undergoing BMT for genetic disorders

OBJECTIVE: To explore evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: A wide range of settings within primary and secondary care including hospitals and primary care centres. PARTICIPANTS: A wide range of demographic groups and age groups. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A broad range of patient safety and clinical effectiveness outcomes including mortality, physical symptoms, length of stay and adherence to treatment. RESULTS: This study, summarising evidence from 55 studies, indicates consistent positive associations between patient experience, patient safety and clinical effectiveness for a wide range of disease areas, settings, outcome measures and study designs. It demonstrates positive associations between patient experience and self-rated and objectively measured health outcomes; adherence to recommended clinical practice and medication; preventive care (such as health-promoting behaviour, use of screening services and immunisation); and resource use (such as hospitalisation, length of stay and primary-care visits). There is some evidence of positive associations between patient experience and measures of the technical quality of care and adverse events. Overall, it was more common to find positive associations between patient experience and patient safety and clinical effectiveness than no associations. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented display that patient experience is positively associated with clinical effectiveness and patient safety, and support the case for the inclusion of patient experience as one of the central pillars of quality in healthcare. It supports the argument that the three dimensions of quality should be looked at as a group and not in isolation. Clinicians should resist sidelining patient experience as too subjective or mood-oriented, divorced from the 'real' clinical work of measuring safety and effectiveness.

This paper is the first in a series of two publications relating to the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn's disease and concerns the methodology of the consensus process, and the classification, diagnosis and medical management of active and quiescent Crohn's disease. Surgical management as well as special situations including management of perianal Crohn's disease of this ECCO Consensus are covered in a subsequent second paper [Gionchetti et al JCC 2016].

This is the third European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation [ECCO] consensus guideline that addresses ulcerative colitis [UC]. It has been drafted by 28 ECCO members from 14 European countries. It is derived from and updates the previous ECCO consensus advice on UC.1–3 All the authors recognise and are grateful to previous ECCO members who contributed to creating the previous consensus guidelines1–6 on which some of the text is based. Attention is also drawn to other ECCO consensus guidelines which have contributed to this endeavour, on extra-intestinal manifestations [EIMs],7 malignancy,8 imaging,9 small bowel endoscopy,10 opportunistic infections [OIs],11 surgery,12 endoscopy,13 pathology,14 anaemia,15 reproduction and pregnancy,16 and paediatric UC.17 The guideline has been condensed into two papers, the first detailing definitions, classification, diagnosis, imaging, pathology, and management of special situations [EIMs, pregnancy, cancer surveillance, surgery, and ileo-anal pouch disorders of UC]; and the second describing current therapeutic management [treatment of active disease and maintenance of medically induced remission]. The strategy to define consensus was similar to that previously described in other ECCO consensus guidelines [available at www.ecco-ibd.eu]. Briefly, an open call for participants was made, with participants selected by the Guidelines’ Committee of ECCO [known as GuiCom] on the basis of their publication record and a personal statement. Working parties were established to review the consensus statements published in 2012,1–3 after which a recommendation was issued on whether they required revision based upon advances in the published literature. There was agreement that extensive review of histopathology, endoscopy, OI, anaemia, EIMs, surgery, and pregnancy was not required, as these subjects are reviewed in other recent ECCO guidelines7,11–16; rather, abbreviated text and selected statements from these guidelines specific to UC are provided. Paediatric UC is dealt with in a separate ECCO initiative17 which is currently being updated. Provisional ECCO statements and supporting text were written following a comprehensive literature review, then refined following two voting rounds which included national representative participation by ECCO’s 35 member countries. The level of evidence was graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine [www.cebm.net]. The ECCO statements were finalised by the authors at a meeting in Barcelona in October 2015 and represent consensus with agreement of at least 80% of participants. Consensus statements are intended to be read in context with their qualifying comments and not in isolation. The supporting text was then finalised under the direction of each working group leader [FM, FC, AD, PG, FR], including an updated literature search to October 2016 of the most relevant [eight] journals, before being integrated by a consensus leader [MH]. This consensus guideline is pictorially represented within the freely available ECCO e-Guide [http://www.e-guide.ecco-ibd.eu/]. UC is a lifelong disease arising from an interaction between genetic and environmental factors, observed predominantly in developed countries. Its precise aetiology is unknown, and therefore curative medical therapy is not yet available. Within Europe there is an east-west and north-south gradient, but the incidence appears to have increased in southern and eastern countries during recent years.18–20 Patients may live with a considerable symptom burden and high risk of disability21 despite medical treatment.22 Clinicians must advise and treat patients on the basis of currently available information. Despite robust evidence from rigorously conducted randomised trials, the strict and somewhat necessarily restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria in trial design may limit translation of such evidence to ‘real-world’ patients. Ulcerative colitis [UC] is a chronic inflammatory condition that causes continuous mucosal inflammation of the colon, usually without granulomas on biopsy. It affects the rectum and to a variable extent the colon in a continuous fashion, and is characterised by a relapsing and remitting course.23 Inflammatory bowel disease unclassified [IBDU] is the term best suited for a minority of cases in which a definitive distinction between UC, Crohn’s disease, or other causes of colitis cannot be made after taking into account the history, endoscopic appearance, histopathology of multiple mucosal biopsies, and appropriate radiology.23,24 Indeterminate colitis is a term reserved for pathologists to describe a colectomy specimen with overlapping features of UC and Crohn’s disease.24,25 Detailed information on definitions can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC online.1,23,24,26–39 Distribution of UC [adapted from Silverberg et al.23]. Disease activity in UC [adapted from Truelove & Witts32]. Montréal classification of disease activity in UC [adapted from Silverberg et and et Disease extent whether therapy and and of It is by the extent at as and extensive colitis of inflammation the management and the of for a therapy in the of or is usually the for and therapy with is appropriate for extensive of colitis the risk of of or cancer and the and the of Patients with extensive colitis have the risk of with have a risk similar to the Patients with colitis an their risk that of patients with extensive colitis as disease patients with and extensive colitis are to have patients with not such It be that the extent at may the extent of disease as with and are to the extent of information and risk for of or colitis may in of patients with Disease and of of disease have not been imaging, and endoscopic including histopathology, on management is as and at of a inflammatory of disease It be to the of active colitis by and before which may causes of that active disease such as mucosal Crohn’s disease, or bowel and patients with active disease including to Patients with an appropriate also have to a from of patients are in at during a a of a relapsing after of Disease activity in the first after to an increased of of active a an was between the to first and the of a the the was patients a for the maintenance of in patients with at patients from to at and from to at in the of described the in patients in the first following of UC between and the most recent the of patients an during the first after was a or within the first but and an activity at least during the first is also UC, a chronic inflammatory was in and were in of patients with an inflammatory after of with who without such an were in with and mucosal The of bowel inflammation is also a risk for in patients with extensive Detailed information on the of can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC and and are of have been with of The is not as in UC as is in Crohn’s disease for the of disease in colitis have been established for and patients a to following for colitis with to a is for and have been but has been to be to The most are and other such as and have also at has for and of disease a with endoscopic and to can be as a for in patients with inflammatory bowel disease of was with an increased risk of It must be that of these is specific for UC, they represent active with disease there is of The consensus group that the best to define is a of with and mucosal at classification of ulcerative colitis according to at is of as disease has a according to the of is as the for and of patients with UC to have disease and and with All current available for UC have an in with The risk of in patients with UC the of is an in patients with UC, as the risk for The of genetic or is not for the classification of ulcerative colitis Detailed information on can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC of ulcerative colitis are upon extent and of disease and and and are bowel and colitis UC in and the may be made at small in incidence has been in some after the of UC appears to The inflammation in the rectum and in a and to a variable extent of the colon, or mucosal The extent of inflammation may or but after disease the of inflammation to the extent of previous in the of The that UC continuous inflammation been by of a in and of patients with active UC the of mucosal disease, and may according to disease in for extensive UC from most cases of Patients with active disease also of and patients with usually with and may in UC, or the of Crohn’s The of UC is usually are for or before medical advice is with a in with including and EIMs, in or and may the in of cases and can in of of ulcerative colitis or Crohn’s disease the risk for ulcerative colitis for before and the risk and of UC may to ulcerative colitis of patients with UC have an increased risk of the The risk of UC is in but is also in and of UC as as in of patients with Crohn’s disease in a and the of but may not the of the have a risk of the disease, which is extensive and to with who have or but the data are and during or are to a risk of UC in The of is to that of but not to the of is after the of UC, the on the of disease is and is to may the evidence from and a trial that with is medical the of and and extra-intestinal with and of inflammatory bowel disease or and previous be The of UC is in the context of or of colitis be and be and and for and and may be may be in patients with or disease on on the extent and of of patients with or activity is usually from on Patients with a may and bowel for of ulcerative colitis not It is established by imaging, and endoscopic including be with review after an may be The of UC is characterised by of and of continuous in of the as a by The that of patients a in The of of is usually during the first and may be characterised as continuous UC without or the recent the of patients with UC in from at the of to after of It is to the diagnosis, and of disease, as these and disease It is to the to to a diagnosis, but mucosal active UC as the of of the may to Crohn’s disease or be during the first and and The be including be and be diagnosis, have a inflammatory and and a for is an of of chronic inflammation may be in or The may as a of the chronic inflammatory or chronic active disease, and which the of an UC, and with the of with patients with an is with an and have been as to the for colectomy in after a of extensive colitis an increased risk of is specific to UC from or other causes of be to and for may be according to the medical history, for the of for or other or with are required at and may be required to disease is in patients with colitis This for and is a and has been with and ECCO guidelines with disease be in the of or of can in UC, not in patients with may not disease can or It be in patients who The for relevant in patients with colitis has not been but most of in the inclusion with on histopathology not necessarily but multiple are usually including information on can be reviewed in the ECCO Consensus on and in a recent The most are and are in to of patients with UC and in of patients with Crohn’s the current of these their for the of UC and for therapeutic is not such as and have been as of inflammation in appears to be the most the of in patients for in the of disease with endoscopic and in the of and to with the to between of a in the of UC a to inflammation and to be a to a of patients by and has been described in with a or inflammation in the rectum is to to inflammation in the is to as a and may be observed in patients with the of and or a in of the small bowel in to an is The of patients with inflammation to be similar to with of the as a is in to of patients with inflammation has been with a and a risk of after pouch a recent a similar in patients with an of inflammation with with a in of disease and of or inflammation from the into is and is observed in to of patients with extensive may in patients without which the that that from a of into the Patients with to be to a of which may an increased risk of colon in not to be with pouch of the small bowel be in cases of to UC from Crohn’s bowel by or or endoscopy, as reviewed in the ECCO consensus on in Crohn’s and small bowel in is not is the of an to Crohn’s disease in to an is for endoscopic disease activity in ulcerative colitis are available. The of a endoscopic is to of ulcerative colitis patients and to a for inflammatory bowel disease to is for patients criteria for to which may to increased and The classification of UC was by Truelove and in This classification is to be the for of in of to and the of patients with colitis have inflammatory or and with a for and of be to and to the extent of disease and for features that to The extent of disease with the of in a of the extent of disease was in and in The of mucosal by or two of small bowel is with a to the of colitis and may be required is as a on with high in which histopathology be with a within before is in patients with colitis is not in in patients on criteria for colitis with mucosal on the of these and of which can be by is of is appropriate at for or ulcerative colitis or colectomy Despite the of disease in risk of and of the of after has been a mucosal after of was with a risk of in of the patients with mucosal with of without of patients who endoscopic as a of inflammation at and on during of in to of patients that to endoscopic in patients with UC, who were the disease and endoscopic after and and then at the third were to patients with or between and in the of and colectomy were of mucosal was the with and a disease patients with UC with and in that with endoscopic as with to after patients in The most endoscopic of ulcerative colitis is with of inflammation and ulcerative colitis is by mucosal and at the and in a and The between and is usually and may within in in the endoscopic of disease activity is and have been to the of endoscopic and are within the for UC, which is for trial The Ulcerative Colitis of the and the of and each with or of This is the first endoscopic of in The is the of in the of the colon at the of the a of to the of a a was made to the of the a to a of that the of the from to for ulcerative for The endoscopic features of inflammation are and at least of the active colitis is characterised by a of to the of the and with a and mucosal to colitis is characterised by and in et to Crohn’s disease, in UC are in The of is a disease, mucosal can in of and The of in UC has therefore been the of information on colon can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC Detailed information on can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC in ulcerative multiple endoscopic be to by be are not or the is not UC, a an increased risk for and the be by a second is the most in the of and then management in a is to a the mucosal to the and extra-intestinal is for diagnosis, of disease and of and The following and updates of the ECCO guideline on UC is a chronic inflammatory to the of features have been and they can be into mucosal and information on on the can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC a of ulcerative a of two from at least the colon the and the be be by including endoscopic of disease and current be by in or an before the features found in UC are observed in of patients within of the first of The distinction from colitis which is characterised by and is therefore a is the with the for the of ulcerative colitis and the of a inflammatory not ulcerative colitis at an after an may to and a definitive by features or has been as the with the for UC It can be in of patients within after this the of is but may into a the disease mucosal or mucosal and an or mucosal during the of disease least after The of ulcerative colitis is based upon the of and mucosal and a inflammatory with with active inflammation and The of features for UC has not been of UC is in of cases two or of the following features an and in the of of inflammation from to a of ulcerative colitis may the of of these is in the of from patients to an UC a of continuous inflammation that in the rectum and with a in The between the and the is can disease, the extent of during the of the disease or after may such as from continuous to inflammation of the of these features is to in the of to Crohn’s disease, the may features to and as as of and increased inflammation is usually not observed disease is characterised by the of active mucosal features to chronic mucosal such as and as as may mucosal is characterised by the of and inflammatory the can some features of such as with and of usually the of is from endoscopic mucosal inflammation may in cases with disease and has been with of mucosal inflammation following has been can be to between and active disease, as as to the of disease have been for this in therapeutic of or mucosal a definitions of from inflammation with to of the as in with of an increased with of or a high of been with a risk of The of histopathology to and to the level of inflammation may have in therapeutic mucosal is from endoscopic mucosal have a for diagnosis, with the at and endoscopic activity in and disease, but for The of histopathology as the or to disease activity is in to and may be in and with There and updates of the ECCO guideline on and is in UC, found in of for of et criteria for on the level of patients without or evidence of active disease, is an appropriate the of a to may be with the of or evidence of the criteria for of chronic disease are and the level is between and a of and of chronic disease is The most of in UC are of chronic disease, and a of or anaemia, and are but also be is by the as a in to a of in and in All UC patients be for anaemia, and this a and be with and is with and The level of with and is by the of and in et is in ulcerative colitis patients is Detailed information on and can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC is the second most in UC, in of can be as and of with ulcerative colitis is based on of inflammation and exclusion of other specific of classification for has been but not is and affects in an This is and and is with disease is a and which affects small is of UC and can for to of is on the basis of features of inflammatory with or features of and The of is made according to the is the current as can inflammation before and The of management is the of of and of trial in patients is of the UC usually within Patients may from and Patients with usually or for symptom for be with a and are to be in with patients with active to or of are The and of and in are The of not as the to the risk of the with not is based on which be in patients with active UC, to or with disease and are the statements to in et Patients on therapy and or with a of be or other as these can statements & in et of is made on a be is usually based on that of the ulcerative are required in cases and can be with or usually affects the of the the and has a It is to disease and is based on that of the are usually or or may be can be with or and or are by a as most on the and to The of with disease activity is are to be the first of has been and has to in therefore be a to is not or are an but advice is to on and inflammation can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC UC It can be and usually to and of the not to an and may has to UC, is has an and is The of to of to an usually of or or and have each been to be of in cases statements & in et the most condition UC chronic and are also in these patients. of the to treat UC have the to is a risk for and colon is as a in patients with for is and small is a be statements to in et was to the of and to the risk of in but therapy has been to to or the was with a disease and therefore be the of to disease with is the statements to in et or after of in UC patients is in et and in et on and disease can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC Ulcerative colitis patients at risk of opportunistic infections are with in and with and a of infections be is an risk for opportunistic infections to are according to the for Disease and is as a by a that has under for can be or UC patients are not but may have as a of their medical in et is an risk for and in the risk of in a of for All for the of OI, and the of at a may an increased risk of This risk is of the and of but may be by the of OI, have not been to the risk of All ulcerative colitis patients be for at patients with also be is in patients with ulcerative colitis of is in inflammatory bowel disease, by the disease and by the be after of the may be required to of be in patients at risk and for at least after has patients who are with high to of the of in to of with therapy in ulcerative colitis be but therapy is not is the increased risk of UC patients be to is not a for in et UC patients also be for the be by not a with or is but they can the of in on or can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC information on and can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC of in patients with is increased and is in the be by a of history, and according to and national be at and before therapy are to the and are in of is to and be in patients being with with the Patients with therapy before patients with active UC and be after of in et of active therapy must be and for at least in et be to UC patients before and be before can to after & in et UC patients taking who be for infections and UC patients therapy infections with in et active infections are is statements to in et the risk of and infections with in et The to or infections in et therapy be during and disease be before Ulcerative colitis is an risk for with and are in to disease It to be established this to patients with ulcerative be disease, has been to be in patients without ulcerative colitis and is therefore disease, of be by risk and are of is in has been to be in of to and a of to an increased risk for with patients with inflammatory bowel disease are to can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC There is evidence that ulcerative colitis affects of in with ulcerative colitis the for UC patients are to have similar as the but patients from of as they to not to be by UC can and in et causes and is in patients to a the of are and pouch in patients may to and by to an or in et The in after pouch is to that of subjects in et at a of disease, the risk of is the as in at a of active disease the risk of activity during pregnancy may the of ulcerative colitis Patients be to during to the most appropriate a with and is in et Disease activity at or during pregnancy is with and The risk of in from with ulcerative colitis not to be increased to most ulcerative colitis is of risk to the for and information on of can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC of ulcerative colitis be in patients who to in to the risk of during pregnancy during pregnancy a high risk of and and are best and without to these UC patients who be to their to disease and pregnancy in et to their during pregnancy, with and be as the a is an in specific situations be in a with for UC during pregnancy can to during the first and to in the third but is to represent a risk for the in et information on endoscopy, and can be found in Supplementary material, available as Supplementary data at ECCO-JCC is that UC is with an increased risk of the risk between et described a including and that after of disease the risk was that the incidence of in UC patients was the risk of may have been has a incidence of at at and at This may the increased of the of that inflammation or the to maintenance therapy or The risk of cancer in ulcerative colitis is increased with the is with disease extent and or inflammatory activity has been that is disease a of may by this in patients who are at colitis or in patients with Patients with extensive colitis the risk of colitis patients an risk is not increased in patients with UC to the without may be an for and a of cancer an risk for cancer The most risk for are an increased risk of to and disease may be of previous inflammatory and have also been found to be a risk of is with an increased the risk

BACKGROUND: Postal and electronic questionnaires are widely used for data collection in epidemiological studies but non-response reduces the effective sample size and can introduce bias. Finding ways to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires would improve the quality of health research. OBJECTIVES: To identify effective strategies to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched 14 electronic databases to February 2008 and manually searched the reference lists of relevant trials and reviews, and all issues of two journals. We contacted the authors of all trials or reviews to ask about unpublished trials. Where necessary, we also contacted authors to confirm methods of allocation used and to clarify results presented. We assessed the eligibility of each trial using pre-defined criteria. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of methods to increase response to postal or electronic questionnaires. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on the trial participants, the intervention, the number randomised to intervention and comparison groups and allocation concealment. For each strategy, we estimated pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) in a random-effects model. We assessed evidence for selection bias using Egger's weighted regression method and Begg's rank correlation test and funnel plot. We assessed heterogeneity among trial odds ratios using a Chi(2) test and the degree of inconsistency between trial results was quantified using the I(2) statistic. MAIN RESULTS: PostalWe found 481 eligible trials. The trials evaluated 110 different ways of increasing response to postal questionnaires. We found substantial heterogeneity among trial results in half of the strategies. The odds of response were at least doubled using monetary incentives (odds ratio 1.87; 95% CI 1.73 to 2.04; heterogeneity P < 0.00001, I(2) = 84%), recorded delivery (1.76; 95% CI 1.43 to 2.18; P = 0.0001, I(2) = 71%), a teaser on the envelope - e.g. a comment suggesting to participants that they may benefit if they open it (3.08; 95% CI 1.27 to 7.44) and a more interesting questionnaire topic (2.00; 95% CI 1.32 to 3.04; P = 0.06, I(2) = 80%). The odds of response were substantially higher with pre-notification (1.45; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.63; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 89%), follow-up contact (1.35; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.55; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 76%), unconditional incentives (1.61; 1.36 to 1.89; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 88%), shorter questionnaires (1.64; 95% CI 1.43 to 1.87; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 91%), providing a second copy of the questionnaire at follow up (1.46; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.90; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 82%), mentioning an obligation to respond (1.61; 95% CI 1.16 to 2.22; P = 0.98, I(2) = 0%) and university sponsorship (1.32; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.54; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 83%). The odds of response were also increased with non-monetary incentives (1.15; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 79%), personalised questionnaires (1.14; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.22; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 63%), use of hand-written addresses (1.25; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45; P = 0.32, I(2) = 14%), use of stamped return envelopes as opposed to franked return envelopes (1.24; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.35; P < 0.00001, I(2) = 69%), an assurance of confidentiality (1.33; 95% CI 1.24 to 1.42) and first class outward mailing (1.11; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21; P = 0.78, I(2) = 0%). The odds of response were reduced when the questionnaire included questions of a sensitive nature (0.94; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.00; P = 0.51, I(2) = 0%).ElectronicWe found 32 eligible trials. The trials evaluated 27 different ways of increasing response to electronic questionnaires. We found substantial heterogeneity among trial results in half of the strategies. The odds of response were increased by more than a half using non-monetary incentives (1.72; 95% CI 1.09 to 2.72; heterogeneity P < 0.00001, I(2) = 95%), shorter e-questionnaires (1.73; 1.40 to 2.13; P = 0.08, I(2) = 68%), including a statement that others had responded (1.52; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.70), and a more interesting topic (1.85; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.26). The odds of response increased by a third using a lottery with immediate notification of results (1.37; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.65), an offer of survey results (1.36; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.61), and using a white background (1.31; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.56). The odds of response were also increased with personalised e-questionnaires (1.24; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.32; P = 0.07, I(2) = 41%), using a simple header (1.23; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.48), using textual representation of response categories (1.19; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.36), and giving a deadline (1.18; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.34). The odds of response tripled when a picture was included in an e-mail (3.05; 95% CI 1.84 to 5.06; P = 0.27, I(2) = 19%). The odds of response were reduced when "Survey" was mentioned in the e-mail subject line (0.81; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.97; P = 0.33, I(2) = 0%), and when the e-mail included a male signature (0.55; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.80; P = 0.96, I(2) = 0%). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Health researchers using postal and electronic questionnaires can increase response using the strategies shown to be effective in this systematic review.

Preliminary clinical data indicate that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with neurological and neuropsychiatric illness. Responding to this, a weekly virtual coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) neurology multi-disciplinary meeting was established at the National Hospital, Queen Square, in early March 2020 in order to discuss and begin to understand neurological presentations in patients with suspected COVID-19-related neurological disorders. Detailed clinical and paraclinical data were collected from cases where the diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed through RNA PCR, or where the diagnosis was probable/possible according to World Health Organization criteria. Of 43 patients, 29 were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive and definite, eight probable and six possible. Five major categories emerged: (i) encephalopathies (n = 10) with delirium/psychosis and no distinct MRI or CSF abnormalities, and with 9/10 making a full or partial recovery with supportive care only; (ii) inflammatory CNS syndromes (n = 12) including encephalitis (n = 2, para- or post-infectious), acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (n = 9), with haemorrhage in five, necrosis in one, and myelitis in two, and isolated myelitis (n = 1). Of these, 10 were treated with corticosteroids, and three of these patients also received intravenous immunoglobulin; one made a full recovery, 10 of 12 made a partial recovery, and one patient died; (iii) ischaemic strokes (n = 8) associated with a pro-thrombotic state (four with pulmonary thromboembolism), one of whom died; (iv) peripheral neurological disorders (n = 8), seven with Guillain-Barré syndrome, one with brachial plexopathy, six of eight making a partial and ongoing recovery; and (v) five patients with miscellaneous central disorders who did not fit these categories. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a wide spectrum of neurological syndromes affecting the whole neuraxis, including the cerebral vasculature and, in some cases, responding to immunotherapies. The high incidence of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, particularly with haemorrhagic change, is striking. This complication was not related to the severity of the respiratory COVID-19 disease. Early recognition, investigation and management of COVID-19-related neurological disease is challenging. Further clinical, neuroradiological, biomarker and neuropathological studies are essential to determine the underlying pathobiological mechanisms that will guide treatment. Longitudinal follow-up studies will be necessary to ascertain the long-term neurological and neuropsychological consequences of this pandemic.

Abstract The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-19 1,2 , host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases 3–7 . They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease.

In recent years, there has been an increased focus on placing patients at the center of health care research and evaluating clinical care in order to improve their experience and ensure that research is both robust and of maximum value for the use of medicinal products, therapy, or health services. This paper provides an overview of patients' involvement in clinical research and service evaluation along with its benefits and limitations. We describe and discuss patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the trends in current research. Both the patient-reported experiences measures (PREMs) and patient and public involvement (PPI) initiative for including patients in the research processes are also outlined. PROs provide reports from patients about their own health, quality of life, or functional status associated with the health care or treatment they have received. PROMs are tools and/or instruments used to report PROs. Patient report experiences through the use of PREMs, such as satisfaction scales, providing insight into the patients' experience with their care or a health service. There is increasing international attention regarding the use of PREMS as a quality indicator of patient care and safety. This reflects the ongoing health service commitment of involving patients and the public within the wider context of the development and evaluation of health care service delivery and quality improvement.

In September 2006, members of the Sex, Gender and Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain met to discuss the following: (1) what is known about sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia; (2) what are the "best practice" guidelines for pain research with respect to sex and gender; and (3) what are the crucial questions to address in the near future? The resulting consensus presented herein includes input from basic science, clinical and psychosocial pain researchers, as well as from recognized experts in sexual differentiation and reproductive endocrinology. We intend this document to serve as a utilitarian and thought-provoking guide for future research on sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia, both for those currently working in this field as well as those still wondering, "Do I really need to study females?"

CONTEXT: Guidelines for antiretroviral therapy are important for clinicians worldwide given the complexity of the field and the varied clinical situations in which these agents are used. The International AIDS Society-USA panel has updated its recommendations as warranted by new developments in the field. OBJECTIVE: To provide physicians and other human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) clinicians with current recommendations for the use of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected adults in circumstances for which there is relatively unrestricted access to drugs and monitoring tools. The recommendations are centered on 4 key issues: when to start antiretroviral therapy; what to start; when to change; and what to change. Antiretroviral therapy in special circumstances is also described. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A 16-member noncompensated panel was appointed, based on expertise in HIV research and patient care internationally. Data published or presented at selected scientific conferences from mid 2004 through May 2006 were identified and reviewed by all members of the panel. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data that might change previous guidelines were identified and reviewed. New guidelines were drafted by a writing committee and reviewed by the entire panel. CONCLUSIONS: Antiretroviral therapy in adults continues to evolve rapidly, making delivery of state-of-the-art care challenging. Initiation of therapy continues to be recommended in all symptomatic persons and in asymptomatic persons after the CD4 cell count falls below 350/microL and before it declines to 200/microL. A nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor or a protease inhibitor boosted with low-dose ritonavir each combined with 2 nucleoside (or nucleotide) reverse transcriptase inhibitors is recommended with choice being based on the individual patient profile. Therapy should be changed when toxicity or intolerance mandate it or when treatment failure is documented. The virologic target for patients with treatment failure is now a plasma HIV-1 RNA level below 50 copies/mL. Adherence to antiretroviral therapy in the short-term and the long-term is crucial for treatment success and must be continually reinforced.

OBJECTIVE: To update recommendations for antiretroviral therapy for adult human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, based on new information and drugs that are available. PARTICIPANTS: A 17-member international physician panel with antiretroviral research and HIV patient care experience initially convened by the International AIDS Society-USA in December 1995. EVIDENCE: Available clinical and basic science data including phase 3 controlled trials; data on clinical, virologic, and immunologic end points; research conference reports; HIV pathogenesis data; and panel expert opinion. Recommendations were limited to therapies available (US Food and Drug Administration approved) in 1999. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The panel assesses new research reports and interim results and regularly meets to consider how the new data affect therapy recommendations. Recommendations are updated via full-panel consensus. Guidelines are presented as recommendations if the supporting evidence warrants routine use in the particular situation and as considerations if data are preliminary or incomplete but suggestive. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of new antiretroviral drugs has expanded treatment choices. The importance of adherence, emerging long-term complications of therapy, recognition and management of antiretroviral failure, and new monitoring tools are addressed. Optimal care requires individualized management and ongoing attention to relevant scientific and clinical information in the field.

1. Eighty-five patients have been studied soon after a ligamentous injury at the foot or ankle. These patients were treated in one of three ways, and in fifty-six patients the results were evaluated six to fifteen months after injury. 2. It is concluded: a) that ligamentous injuries at the foot and ankle frequently produce a proprioceptive deficit affecting the muscles of the injured leg; b) that such a deficit is responsible for the symptom of "giving way" of the foot; and c) that the incidence of both the proprioceptive deficit and the symptom of "giving way" can substantially be reduced by treatment after injury with the coordination exercises described in this study. 3. The mechanism of production of the proprioceptive defect is discussed.

Apart from one post-mortem study, the incidence of adhesions following laparotomy has not been well documented. 1. In a prospective analysis of 210 patients undergoing a laparotomy, who had previously had one or more abdominal operations, we found that 93% had intra-abdominal adhesions that were a result of their previous surgery. This compared with 115 first-time laparotomies in which 10.4% had adhesions. 2. Over a 25-year period, 261 of 28 297 adult general surgical admissions were for intestinal obstruction from adhesions (0.9%). Of 4502 laparotomies, 148 were for adhesive obstruction (3.3%). 3. Over a 13-year period all laparotomies were followed up for an average of 14.5 months (range 0-91 months). From these 2708 laparotomies, 26 developed intestinal obstruction due to postoperative adhesions within 1 year of surgery (1%). Fourteen did so within 1 month of surgery (0.5%). 4. The majority of the operations producing intestinal obstruction were lower abdominal, principally involving the colon. The volume of general surgical work from adhesions is large and the incidence of early intestinal obstruction is high.

1. Introduction The redefinition of neuropathic pain,23 which specifically excludes the concept of “dysfunction,” has left a large group of patients without a valid pathophysiological descriptor for their experience of pain. This group comprises people who have neither obvious activation of nociceptors nor neuropathy (defined as disease or damage of the somatosensory system) but in whom clinical and psychophysical findings suggest altered nociceptive function. Typical such patient groups include those labelled as having fibromyalgia, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type 1, other instances of “musculoskeletal” pain (such as “nonspecific” chronic low-back pain), and “functional” visceral pain disorders (such as irritable bowel syndrome, bladder pain syndrome). The aim of this topical review was to propose, for debate, a third mechanistic descriptor intended for chronic pain characterized by altered nociceptive function. 1.1. Historical review Before developing any argument for a third descriptor to accommodate these patients, it is worthwhile reviewing the history of pain terminology. Traditionally, pain mechanisms have been divided into “nociceptive” and “neuropathic” categories. See Table 1 for the historical overview of these definitions.Table 1.: Historical overview of mechanistic pain terminology.1.2. Implications of the changed definition of “neuropathic pain” In the 2005 iteration, “nociceptive” pain was the norm, the “default” or common sense experience of injury = damage ≤pain, familiar to humans. But it evolved that any pain that was not “nociceptive” might be termed “neuropathic” because the latter descriptor included “dysfunction,” which was taken to include any inferred change in nociceptive function. Although it has always been possible to invoke another category, such as “unknown” or “idiopathic,” that strategy runs a poor third to the other 2, as there is no implication of a putative mechanism. The 2011 redefinition of neuropathic pain makes biological and etymological sense. The note that accompanies this definition is stringent: Neuropathic pain is a clinical description (and not a diagnosis), which requires a demonstrable lesion or a disease that satisfies established neurological diagnostic criteria. This robust definition is not being challenged. However, the note that accompanies the 2011 redefinition of nociceptive pain—pain that arises from actual or threatened damage to nonneural tissue and is due to activation of nociceptors—states: This termis designed to contrast with neuropathic pain. The term is used to describe pain occurring with a normally functioning somatosensory nervous system to contrast with the abnormal function seen in neuropathic pain (emphasis added). This perpetuates the “nociceptive–neuropathic” dichotomy as above, except that now the “default” position is neuropathic pain, so that any pain condition that is not characterized by damage to neuronal tissue may attract the term “nociceptive.” This is not only counterintuitive, as surely “a normally functioning somatosensory nervous system” should be taken as the basis for any contrast, but also it fails to accommodate a large group of patients in whom “activation of nociceptors” cannot be confidently established. 2. Proposals This situation requires clarification. The proposals put forward here, as presented in Table 2, include: (1) Assertion of nociceptive pain (2) Confirmation of definition of neuropathic pain, but not as default (3) Need for a third descriptor. Table 2.: Proposed taxonomy for the classification of pain compared with the existing IASP taxonomy from 2011 (http://www.iasp-pain.org/Taxonomy), changes highlighted.2.1. Assertion of nociceptive pain “Nociceptive pain” is the most common human experience of pain. Therefore, we propose that the current IASP 2011 definition of nociceptive pain be used, but that the note be shortened to: “The term is used to describe pain occurring with a normally functioning somatosensory nervous system.” Nociceptive pain should not be defined as the alternative to neuropathic pain. This common-sense biological position presumes that the tissue was “normal” before the noxious stimulus and that the somatosensory apparatus is also “normal.” 2.2. Confirmation of definition of neuropathic pain, but not as default The new definition of neuropathic pain does not require amendment. However, because it is not as common as nociceptive pain and it does not reflect the usual experience of pain, it should not be the default descriptor. 2.3. Need for a third descriptor Even with these points of clarification, the situation of only 2 descriptors will remain unsatisfactory for those patients in whom “activation of nociceptors” cannot be confidently demonstrated or assumed and who also do not meet the definition of “definite” or “probable” neuropathic pain. Appending “possible” neuropathic pain leaves them in taxonomic limbo. In the current state of knowledge, there are reasons to infer that altered nociceptive function does occur in patients experiencing pain in a regional (or more widespread) distribution, unassociated with frank signs of neuropathy but characterized by hypersensitivity in apparently normal tissues. The similarity of such findings to those in frank neural injury or disease suggests that common mechanism(s) may be relevant. A reasonable inference from the presence of these findings is that there has occurred a change in nociceptive processing, probably in the central nervous system. The latter is supported by the findings of demonstrated changes in cerebral activation,16,19,38,39,45 connectivity,4,14,20,25,33,37,41,50 and even in specific cerebral structures1,5,18,22,24,31,36,44 in certain clinical pain states, when also adjusted for depression or anxiety.5,18,21,22,36 However, in these pain conditions, there is no consistent evidence of a lesion or disease of the somatosensory system as a primary cause of the pain, thus disqualifying the pain from attracting the neuropathic descriptor. 2.4. Proposal for a third descriptor It is proposed that a new term be introduced to describe pain states characterized by clinical and psychophysical findings that suggest altered nociception, despite there being no clear evidence of actual or threatened tissue damage causing the activation of nociceptors or evidence for disease or lesion of the somatosensory system causing the chronic pain. The candidate adjectives for this third descriptor include: (1) “Nociplastic,” from “nociceptive plasticity,” to reflect change in function of nociceptive pathways. (2) “Algopathic,” from “algos” (Greek for pain) plus “pathic” (from Greek “patheia” for suffering), paraphrased as “a pathological perception/sensation of pain not generated by injury.” (3) “Nocipathic,” from “nociceptive pathology,” to denote a pathological (ie, not “normal”) state of nociception. The term is intended for clinical usage and is neither a diagnosis nor a synonym for “central sensitization of nociception,” which is a neurophysiological concept. It may well be that the phenomenon of hypersensitivity occurring in ostensibly normal, uninjured tissue without evidence of neuropathy leads to a clinical inference that sensitization may be the underlying mechanism, so that the term is used as a descriptor for that situation. Such reasoning is no different from the phenomenon of observable tissue damage leading to the inference of activation of nociceptors and applying the term “nociceptive pain,” or from the phenomenon of signs of neuropathy leading to the inference of disease or damage of neural structures and applying the term “neuropathic pain.” 3. Discussion 3.1. Do we need a third mechanistic descriptor? The present IASP terminology does not reflect the current understanding that chronic pain is not necessarily a symptom but can result from altered nociceptive function and thus constitute a condition in itself. Consequently, the pain of some large patient groups suffering from altered nociceptive function is currently classified as “pain of unknown origin.” An argument in favour of continuing to use the current nondescriptors “unknown” or “idiopathic” relies on confusion that might arise out of challenges in defining a new descriptor. However, the inability of the current IASP pain terminology to harmonize with current concepts has resulted in the use of other nondefined descriptors such as “dysfunctional”40 or “pathological”35 pain, which not only give no insight into possible mechanisms but also carry implications that may stigmatize patients.9,10 The use of a third mechanistic descriptor in clinical practice has the potential to confer validity on the patient's experience of pain and to facilitate communication between patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders. Clinicians would be encouraged to screen for signs of altered nociceptive function, thus improving diagnosis and treatment, as patients suffering from altered nociceptive function typically respond better to centrally than peripherally targeted therapies. The term would also facilitate research efforts, by identifying altered nociceptive function as an important area for mechanistic studies, establishment of treatment guidelines and development of new treatment strategies. 3.2. When should the descriptor be used and when not? The descriptor is primarily intended for patients suffering from chronic pain conditions characterized by evidence of altered nociceptive processing, such as those currently labelled as fibromyalgia,22 CRPS,47 nonspecific chronic low-back pain,16 irritable bowel syndrome,39 and other “functional” visceral pain disorders.8,48 In addition, patients suffering initially from nociceptive pain, such as osteoarthritis, may develop alterations in nociceptive processing manifested as altered descending pain inhibition3,28 accompanied by spread of hypersensitivity.2,17,29 These patients would then be considered to have a combination of nociceptive and “nociplastic/algopathic/nocipathic” contributors to their pain. The new descriptor is intended to distinguish patients suffering from conditions where altered nociception has been documented from those where the pain mechanisms are still truly unknown. Therefore, the new descriptor does not apply to patients reporting pain without hypersensitivity. As such, it is neither a synonym for idiopathic pain or pain of unknown origin nor a label awarded by exclusion. 3.3. Problems regarding validity and use of the new descriptor Opponents of a new descriptor may argue that mechanisms implicit in the terms “nociceptive” and “neuropathic” are proven, in contrast to the inference of functional changes in the nervous system, which as yet cannot be confirmed. A nociceptive focus may be visualized by radiology or reflected in some laboratory findings. It is argued that neuropathy can be identified by quantitative sensory testing, nerve conduction studies, intra-epidermal nerve fiber density assessments, or by imaging of the central nervous system. However, despite the fact that pathology can be documented for nociceptive and neuropathic pain, the relationship between that pathology and pain mechanisms remains elusive. The latter is illustrated by the low concordance between the degree of tissue damage/inflammation and pain11 or by the low proportion of people with peripheral nerve injury who develop chronic neuropathic pain.32 Although it is true that no specific structural pathology underlying “nociplastic/algopathic/nocipathic” pain has been found, altered nociceptive processing has been documented by quantitative sensory testing,7,15,27,42,47,48 sensory evoked potentials,12,13,34 and functional magnetic resonance imaging.16,19,38,48 Importantly, these functional changes have in many instances been related to pain severity.1,31,41,43 Therefore, while acknowledging these limitations in the current and the proposed pain terminology, there remains a rationale for using the new descriptor to distinguish patients with altered nociception from patients with pain of unknown origin. One unresolved situation is when a patient with nociceptive pain could be classified as also having “nociplastic/algopathic/nocipathic” pain. Clinicians are faced with a continuum of signs of hypersensitivity in patients with chronic pain. Individual differences in sensitivity to stimuli are marked even in healthy subjects26,30 and no clinically useful method to quantify nociceptor activation exists. Although tests of descending pain inhibition could be used clinically,6 the validity and reliability of these tests in a clinical setting remain to be established.49 Therefore, nociceptive and “nociplastic/algopathic/nocipathic” pain should not be regarded as exclusive categorical labels but rather, pragmatically, as concurrent possible mechanistic contributors to the patient's pain. This would be similar to the concurrence of nociceptive and neuropathic contributors in other situations. 3.4. Is future progress in pain research likely to affect the use of the descriptors? These mechanistic terms are descriptors of putative contributors to the experience of pain, not diagnoses; they are placeholders for current concepts and not “set in concrete.” As our knowledge of pain mechanisms advances, so should pain terminology change. 3.5. Concluding remarks This topical review suggests introducing a third mechanistic pain descriptor to be used in patients with clinically determined altered nociception. If the suggestion is well received, the next step will be to define a set of clinically useful positive classification criteria. The term is mechanistic and thus complementary to, but not synonymous with, the proposed ICD-11 diagnostic term “primary pain.”46 By writing this article, the authors hope to open up a fruitful debate regarding modernization of mechanistic pain terminology. Conflict of interest statement E. Kosek has received consultancy and speaker fees in the past 36 months from Eli Lilly and Company and Orion and has ongoing research collaborations with Eli Lilly and Company and AbbVie. M. Cohen has received consultancy fees from Mundipharma and Pfizer for preparation and presentation of educational material. R. Baron has received grants/research support from Pfizer, Genzyme, Grünenthal, and Mundipharma. He is a member of the EU Project No 633491: DOLOR-isk. A member of the IMI “Europain” collaboration and industry members of this are: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Esteve, UCB-Pharma, Sanofi Aventis, Grünenthal, Eli Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF): Member of the ERA_NET NEU-RON/IM-PAIN Project. German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain, NoPain system biology. German Research Foundation (DFG). He has received speaking fees from Pfizer, Genzyme, Grünenthal, Mundipharma, Sanofi Pasteur, Medtronic, Eisai, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astellas, Desitin, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Schering, MSD, and bioCSL. He has been a consultant for Pfizer, Genzyme, Grünenthal, Mundipharma, Allergan, Sanofi Pasteur, Medtronic, Eisai, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astellas, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Biogenidec, AstraZeneca, Merck, AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, and bioCSL. G. F. Gebhart, J. -A. Mico, and A. S.C. Rice have nothing to declare. W. Rief has received consultancy fees from Heel and speaker's fees from Bayer. K. Sluka has been Consultant for DJO, Inc, and Bayer, Inc, received research funding from Medtronic, Inc and royalties from IASP Press.

Researchers worldwide with information about the Kirsten ras (Ki-ras) tumour genotype and outcome of patients with colorectal cancer were invited to provide that data in a schematized format for inclusion in a collaborative database called RASCAL (The Kirsten ras in-colorectal-cancer collaborative group). Our results from 2721 such patients have been presented previously and for the first time in any common cancer, showed conclusively that different gene mutations have different impacts on outcome, even when the mutations occur at the same site on the genome. To explore the effect of Ki-ras mutations at different stages of colorectal cancer, more patients were recruited to the database, which was reanalysed when information on 4268 patients from 42 centres in 21 countries had been entered. After predetermined exclusion criteria were applied, data on 3439 patients were entered into a multivariate analysis. This found that of the 12 possible mutations on codons 12 and 13 of Kirsten ras, only one mutation on codon 12, glycine to valine, found in 8.6% of all patients, had a statistically significant impact on failure-free survival (P = 0.004, HR 1.3) and overall survival (P = 0.008, HR 1.29). This mutation appeared to have a greater impact on outcome in Dukes' C cancers (failure-free survival, P = 0.008, HR 1.5; overall survival P = 0.02, HR 1.45) than in Dukes' B tumours (failure-free survival, P = 0.46, HR 1.12; overall survival P = 0.36, HR 1.15). Ki-ras mutations may occur early in the development of pre-cancerous adenomas in the colon and rectum. However, this collaborative study suggests that not only is the presence of a codon 12 glycine to valine mutation important for cancer progression but also that it may predispose to more aggressive biological behaviour in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaign www.bjcancer.com

BACKGROUND: Durable suppression of replication of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) depends on the use of potent, well-tolerated antiretroviral regimens to which patients can easily adhere. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, noninferiority study involving 517 patients with HIV infection who had not previously received antiretroviral therapy and who were randomly assigned to receive either a regimen of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF), emtricitabine, and efavirenz once daily (tenofovir-emtricitabine group) or a regimen of fixed-dose zidovudine and lamivudine twice daily plus efavirenz once daily (zidovudine-lamivudine group). The primary end point was the proportion of patients without baseline resistance to efavirenz in whom the HIV RNA level was less than 400 copies per milliliter at week 48 of the study. RESULTS: Through week 48, significantly more patients in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group reached and maintained the primary end point of less than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter than did those in the zidovudine-lamivudine group (84 percent vs. 73 percent, respectively; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 4 to 19 percent; P=0.002). This difference excludes the inferiority of the tenofovir DF, emtricitabine, and efavirenz regimen, indicating a significantly greater response with this regimen. Significant differences were also seen in the proportion of patients with HIV RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter (80 percent in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group vs. 70 percent in the zidovudine-lamivudine group; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 2 to 17 percent; P=0.02) and in increases in CD4 cell counts (190 vs. 158 cells per cubic millimeter, respectively; 95 percent confidence interval for the difference, 9 to 55; P=0.002). More patients in the zidovudine-lamivudine group than in the tenofovir-emtricitabine group had adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study drugs (9 percent vs. 4 percent, respectively; P=0.02). In none of the patients did the K65R mutation develop. CONCLUSIONS: Through week 48, the combination of tenofovir DF and emtricitabine plus efavirenz fulfilled the criteria for noninferiority to a fixed dose of zidovudine and lamivudine plus efavirenz and proved superior in terms of virologic suppression, CD4 response, and adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study drugs. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112047.)

OBJECTIVE: Although postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) often complicates recovery from major surgery, the pathogenic mechanisms remain unknown. We explored whether systemic inflammation, in response to surgical trauma, triggers hippocampal inflammation and subsequent memory impairment, in a mouse model of orthopedic surgery. METHODS: C57BL/6J, knock out (lacking interleukin [IL]-1 receptor, IL-1R(-/-)) and wild type mice underwent surgery of the tibia under general anesthesia. Separate cohorts of animals were tested for memory function with fear conditioning tests, or euthanized at different times to assess levels of systemic and hippocampal cytokines and microglial activation; the effects of interventions, designed to interrupt inflammation (specifically and nonspecifically), were also assessed. RESULTS: Surgery caused hippocampal-dependent memory impairment that was associated with increased plasma cytokines, as well as reactive microgliosis and IL-1beta transcription and expression in the hippocampus. Nonspecific attenuation of innate immunity with minocycline prevented surgery-induced changes. Functional inhibition of IL-1beta, both in mice pretreated with IL-1 receptor antagonist and in IL-1R(-/-) mice, mitigated the neuroinflammatory effects of surgery and memory dysfunction. INTERPRETATION: A peripheral surgery-induced innate immune response triggers an IL-1beta-mediated inflammatory process in the hippocampus that underlies memory impairment. This may represent a viable target to interrupt the pathogenesis of postoperative cognitive dysfunction.

Cognitive decline following surgery in older individuals is a major clinical problem of uncertain mechanism; a similar cognitive decline also follows severe infection, chemotherapy, or trauma and is currently without effective therapy. A variety of mechanisms have been proposed, and exploring the role of inflammation, we recently reported the role of IL-1β in the hippocampus after surgery in mice with postoperative cognitive dysfunction. Here, we show that TNF-α is upstream of IL-1 and provokes its production in the brain. Peripheral blockade of TNF-α is able to limit the release of IL-1 and prevent neuroinflammation and cognitive decline in a mouse model of surgery-induced cognitive decline. TNF-α appears to synergize with MyD88, the IL-1/TLR superfamily common signaling pathway, to sustain postoperative cognitive decline. Taken together, our results suggest a unique therapeutic potential for preemptive treatment with anti-TNF antibody to prevent surgery-induced cognitive decline.

Cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) are thought to play a crucial role in the termination of the acute primary HIV-1 syndrome, but clear evidence for this presumption has been lacking. Here we demonstrate positive selection of HIV-1 proviral sequences encoding variants within a CTL epitope in Nef, a gene product critical for viral pathogenicity, during and after seroconversion. These positively selected HIV-1 variants carried epitope sequence changes that either diminished or escaped CTL recognition. Other proviruses had mutations that abolished the Nef epitope altogether. These results provide clear evidence that CTLs exert selection pressure on the viral population in acute HIV-1 infection.