Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

32 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Placebo use in vaccine trials: recommendations of a WHO expert panel.

ABSTRACT: Vaccines are among the most cost-effective interventions against infectious diseases. Many candidate vaccines targeting neglected diseases in low- and middle-income countries are now progressing to large-scale clinical testing. However, controversy surrounds the appropriate design of vaccine trials and, in particular, the use of unvaccinated controls (with or without placebo) when an efficacious vaccine already exists. This paper specifies four situations in which placebo use may be acceptable, provided that the study question cannot be answered in an active-controlled trial design; the risks of delaying or foregoing an efficacious vaccine are mitigated; the risks of using a placebo control are justified by the social and public health value of the research; and the research is responsive to local health needs. The four situations are: (1) developing a locally affordable vaccine, (2) evaluating the local safety and efficacy of an existing vaccine, (3) testing a new vaccine when an existing vaccine is considered inappropriate for local use (e.g. based on epidemiologic or demographic factors), and (4) determining the local burden of disease.

SUBMITTER: Rid A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4157320 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Chronic Stroke Outcome Measures for Motor Function Intervention Trials: Expert Panel Recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundAbout half of survivors with stroke experience severe and significant long-term disability. The purpose of this article is to review the state of the science and to make recommendations for measuring patient-centric outcomes in interventions for motor improvement in the chronic stroke phase.Methods and resultsA 9-member expert panel reviewed evidence to identify measures of upper and lower extremity function used to date as outcomes in trials with patients who experienced a stroke ≥6 months before assessment. Outcome measures were screened using StrokEDGE consensus panel recommendations, and evaluated for availability of a published minimal clinically important difference. Measures meeting these criteria were further evaluated with regard to their level of measurement, psychometric properties, and ability of minimal clinically important difference to capture gains associated with improved function and clinical relevance to patients, to arrive at recommendations. A systematic literature review yielded 115 clinical trials of upper and lower extremity function in chronic stroke that used a total of 34 outcome measures. Seven of these had published minimal clinically important differences and were recommended or highly recommended by StrokEDGE. Those are the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity and Lower Extremity scales, Wolf Motor Function Test, Action Research Arm Test, Ten-Meter and Six-Minute Walk Tests, and the Stroke Impact Scale. All had evidence for their psychometric performance, although the strength of evidence for validity varied, especially in populations with chronic stroke Fugl-Meyer Upper and Lower Extremity scales showing the strongest evidence for validity.ConclusionsThe panel recommends that the Fugl-Meyer Upper and Lower Extremity scales be used as primary outcomes in intervention trials targeting motor function in populations with chronic stroke. The other 6 measures are recommended as secondary outcomes.

| S-EPMC5289112 | biostudies-literature

Immunological outcomes of new tuberculosis vaccine trials: WHO panel recommendations.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC2443198 | biostudies-literature

Measures of resting state EEG rhythms for clinical trials in Alzheimer's disease: Recommendations of an expert panel.

Project description:The Electrophysiology Professional Interest Area (EPIA) and Global Brain Consortium endorsed recommendations on candidate electroencephalography (EEG) measures for Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. The Panel reviewed the field literature. As most consistent findings, AD patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia showed abnormalities in peak frequency, power, and "interrelatedness" at posterior alpha (8-12 Hz) and widespread delta (< 4 Hz) and theta (4-8 Hz) rhythms in relation to disease progression and interventions. The following consensus statements were subscribed: (1) Standardization of instructions to patients, resting state EEG (rsEEG) recording methods, and selection of artifact-free rsEEG periods are needed; (2) power density and "interrelatedness" rsEEG measures (e.g., directed transfer function, phase lag index, linear lagged connectivity, etc.) at delta, theta, and alpha frequency bands may be use for stratification of AD patients and monitoring of disease progression and intervention; and (3) international multisectoral initiatives are mandatory for regulatory purposes.

| S-EPMC8647863 | biostudies-literature

The selection of comparators for randomized controlled trials of health-related behavioral interventions: recommendations of an NIH expert panel.

Project description:ObjectivesTo provide recommendations for the selection of comparators for randomized controlled trials of health-related behavioral interventions.Study design and settingThe National Institutes of Health Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research convened an expert panel to critically review the literature on control or comparison groups for behavioral trials and to develop strategies for improving comparator choices and for resolving controversies and disagreements about comparators.ResultsThe panel developed a Pragmatic Model for Comparator Selection in Health-Related Behavioral Trials. The model indicates that the optimal comparator is the one that best serves the primary purpose of the trial but that the optimal comparator's limitations and barriers to its use must also be taken into account.ConclusionWe developed best practice recommendations for the selection of comparators for health-related behavioral trials. Use of the Pragmatic Model for Comparator Selection in Health-Related Behavioral Trials can improve the comparator selection process and help resolve disagreements about comparator choices.

| S-EPMC6543841 | biostudies-literature

Care Gaps and Recommendations in Vestibular Migraine: An Expert Panel Summit.

Project description:Vestibular migraine (VM) is an increasingly recognized pathology yet remains as an underdiagnosed cause of vestibular disorders. While current diagnostic criteria are codified in the 2012 Barany Society document and included in the third edition of the international classification of headache disorders, the pathophysiology of this disorder is still elusive. The Association for Migraine Disorders hosted a multidisciplinary, international expert workshop in October 2020 and identified seven current care gaps that the scientific community needs to resolve, including a better understanding of the range of symptoms and phenotypes of VM, the lack of a diagnostic marker, a better understanding of pathophysiologic mechanisms, as well as the lack of clear recommendations for interventions (nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic) and finally, the need for specific outcome measures that will guide clinicians as well as research into the efficacy of interventions. The expert group issued several recommendations to address those areas including establishing a global VM registry, creating an improved diagnostic algorithm using available vestibular tests as well as others that are in development, conducting appropriate trials of high quality to validate current clinically available treatment and fostering collaborative efforts to elucidate the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying VM, specifically the role of the trigemino-vascular pathways.

| S-EPMC8762211 | biostudies-literature

Advancing Symptom Science Through Symptom Cluster Research: Expert Panel Proceedings and Recommendations.

Project description:An overview of proceedings, findings, and recommendations from the workshop on "Advancing Symptom Science Through Symptom Cluster Research" sponsored by the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) and the Office of Rare Diseases Research, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, is presented. This workshop engaged an expert panel in an evidenced-based discussion regarding the state of the science of symptom clusters in chronic conditions including cancer and other rare diseases. An interdisciplinary working group from the extramural research community representing nursing, medicine, oncology, psychology, and bioinformatics was convened at the National Institutes of Health. Based on expertise, members were divided into teams to address key areas: defining characteristics of symptom clusters, priority symptom clusters and underlying mechanisms, measurement issues, targeted interventions, and new analytic strategies. For each area, the evidence was synthesized, limitations and gaps identified, and recommendations for future research delineated. The majority of findings in each area were from studies of oncology patients. However, increasing evidence suggests that symptom clusters occur in patients with other chronic conditions (eg, pulmonary, cardiac, and end-stage renal disease). Nonetheless, symptom cluster research is extremely limited and scientists are just beginning to understand how to investigate symptom clusters by developing frameworks and new methods and approaches. With a focus on personalized care, an understanding of individual susceptibility to symptoms and whether a "driving" symptom exists that triggers other symptoms in the cluster is needed. Also, research aimed at identifying the mechanisms that underlie symptom clusters is essential to developing targeted interventions.

| S-EPMC5939621 | biostudies-literature

ClinGen Myeloid Malignancy Variant Curation Expert Panel recommendations for germline RUNX1 variants.

Project description:Standardized variant curation is essential for clinical care recommendations for patients with inherited disorders. Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) variant curation expert panels are developing disease-associated gene specifications using the 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guidelines to reduce curation discrepancies. The ClinGen Myeloid Malignancy Variant Curation Expert Panel (MM-VCEP) was created collaboratively between the American Society of Hematology and ClinGen to perform gene- and disease-specific modifications for inherited myeloid malignancies. The MM-VCEP began optimizing ACMG/AMP rules for RUNX1 because many germline variants have been described in patients with familial platelet disorder with a predisposition to acute myeloid leukemia, characterized by thrombocytopenia, platelet functional/ultrastructural defects, and a predisposition to hematologic malignancies. The 28 ACMG/AMP codes were tailored for RUNX1 variants by modifying gene/disease specifications, incorporating strength adjustments of existing rules, or both. Key specifications included calculation of minor allele frequency thresholds, formulating a semi-quantitative approach to counting multiple independent variant occurrences, identifying functional domains and mutational hotspots, establishing functional assay thresholds, and characterizing phenotype-specific guidelines. Preliminary rules were tested by using a pilot set of 52 variants; among these, 50 were previously classified as benign/likely benign, pathogenic/likely pathogenic, variant of unknown significance (VUS), or conflicting interpretations (CONF) in ClinVar. The application of RUNX1-specific criteria resulted in a reduction in CONF and VUS variants by 33%, emphasizing the benefit of gene-specific criteria and sharing internal laboratory data.

| S-EPMC6849945 | biostudies-literature

Translating evidence into practice: recommendations by a UK expert panel on the use of aflibercept in diabetic macular oedema.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This paper describes recommendations from a panel of UK retina experts on aflibercept in diabetic macular oedema (DMO). METHODS:A roundtable meeting was held in London, UK in March 2018. The meeting was sponsored by Bayer. RESULTS:Recommendations are based on clinical experience and level 1 evidence. Clinical experience supports the evidence base, reinforcing that aflibercept should be initiated with intensive proactive dosing at 2?mg every 4 weeks. Most panel members use six initial 4-weekly doses as in Protocol T, rather than five initial monthly doses as recommended in the Summary of product characteristics (SmPC). After intensive proactive dosing, patients with a good response (meet Protocol T 'improvement' criteria ?5-letter improvement in visual acuity [VA] and/or ?10% improvement in central subfield thickness [CST] from baseline) but who are not yet stable should continue with 4-weekly aflibercept until stability is reached. Patients with a good response and stability should initiate monitor-and-extend (not in line with SmPC). Those with a sub-optimal response (meet 'improvement' criteria but with additional concerns e.g. fluid worsening on macular volume map) should continue with 4-weekly aflibercept but additional treatments should be considered (aflibercept is not licensed for combination treatment). For patients with no response (no change, or meeting Protocol T 'worsening' criteria [?5-letter decrease in VA and/or???10% increase in CST] from baseline), switching to a non-anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment should be considered. CONCLUSIONS:Clinical experience reinforces that, when using aflibercept in DMO, the licensed posology or Protocol T regimens achieve the best outcomes.

| S-EPMC7182551 | biostudies-literature

A multicentre evaluation and expert recommendations of use of the newly developed BioFire Joint Infection polymerase chain reaction panel.

Project description:Septic arthritis is a serious condition with significant morbidity and mortality, routinely diagnosed using culture. The FDA has recently approved the rapid molecular BioFire® Joint Infection Panel (BJIP) for synovial fluid. We aimed to evaluate the BJIP compared to culture and its potential use in patient management. A multicentre retrospective evaluation of BJIP was conducted in the UK and Ireland. Positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) were calculated between the BJIP and routine culture. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion addressing the optimal or potential case use of the assay practice was facilitated. Three hundred ninety-nine surplus synovial fluid samples (~ 70% from native joints) from eight centres were processed using BJIP in addition to routine culture. An increased yield of positive results was detected using BJIP compared to routine culture (98 vs 83), giving an overall PPA of 91.6% and overall NPA of 93% for the BJIP compared to culture results. The BJIP detected resistant markers and additional organisms that could influence antibiotic choices including Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Kingella kingae. The MDT agreed that the assay could be used, in addition to standard methods, in adult and children patients with specialist advice use based on local needs. Rapid results from BJIP were assessed as having potential clinical impact on patient management. Organisms not included in the panel may be clinically significant and may limit the value of this test for PJI.

| S-EPMC9836977 | biostudies-literature

Use of existing systematic reviews for the development of evidence-based vaccination recommendations: Guidance from the SYSVAC expert panel.

Project description:National immunization technical advisory groups (NITAGs) develop immunization-related recommendations and assist policy-makers in making evidence informed decisions. Systematic reviews (SRs) that summarize the available evidence on a specific topic are a valuable source of evidence in the development of such recommendations. However, conducting SRs requires significant human, time, and financial resources, which many NITAGs lack. Given that SRs already exist for many immunization-related topics, and to prevent duplication and overlap of reviews, a more practical approach may be for NITAGs to use existing SRs. Nevertheless, it can be challenging to identify relevant SRs, to select one SR from among multiple SRs, or to critically assess and effectively use them. To support NITAGs, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Robert Koch Institute and collaborators developed the SYSVAC project, which consists of an online registry of systematic reviews on immunization-related topics and an e-learning course, that supports the use of them (both freely accessible at https://www.nitag-resource.org/sysvac-systematic-reviews). Drawing from the e-learning course and recommendations from an expert panel, this paper outlines methods for using existing systematic reviews when making immunization-related recommendations. With specific examples and reference to the SYSVAC registry and other resources, it offers guidance on locating existing systematic reviews; assessing their relevance to a research question, up-to-dateness, and methodological quality and/or risk of bias; and considering the transferability and applicability of their findings to other populations or settings.

| S-EPMC10015272 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data