Dataset Information

Hypothermia for moderate or severe neonatal encephalopathy in low-income and middle-income countries (HELIX): a randomised controlled trial in India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although therapeutic hypothermia reduces death or disability after neonatal encephalopathy in high-income countries, its safety and efficacy in low-income and middle-income countries is unclear. We aimed to examine whether therapeutic hypothermia alongside optimal supportive intensive care reduces death or moderate or severe disability after neonatal encephalopathy in south Asia.

Methods

We did a multicountry open-label, randomised controlled trial in seven tertiary neonatal intensive care units in India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. We enrolled infants born at or after 36 weeks of gestation with moderate or severe neonatal encephalopathy and a need for continued resuscitation at 5 min of age or an Apgar score of less than 6 at 5 min of age (for babies born in a hospital), or both, or an absence of crying by 5 min of age (for babies born at home). Using a web-based randomisation system, we allocated infants into a group receiving whole body hypothermia (33·5°C) for 72 h using a servo-controlled cooling device, or to usual care (control group), within 6 h of birth. All recruiting sites had facilities for invasive ventilation, cardiovascular support, and access to 3 Tesla MRI scanners and spectroscopy. Masking of the intervention was not possible, but those involved in the magnetic resonance biomarker analysis and neurodevelopmental outcome assessments were masked to the allocation. The primary outcome was a combined endpoint of death or moderate or severe disability at 18-22 months, assessed by the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (third edition) and a detailed neurological examination. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02387385.

Findings

We screened 2296 infants between Aug 15, 2015, and Feb 15, 2019, of whom 576 infants were eligible for inclusion. After exclusions, we recruited 408 eligible infants and we assigned 202 to the hypothermia group and 206 to the control group. Primary outcome data were available for 195 (97%) of the 202 infants in the hypothermia group and 199 (97%) of the 206 control group infants. 98 (50%) infants in the hypothermia group and 94 (47%) infants in the control group died or had a moderate or severe disability (risk ratio 1·06; 95% CI 0·87-1·30; p=0·55). 84 infants (42%) in the hypothermia group and 63 (31%; p=0·022) infants in the control group died, of whom 72 (36%) and 49 (24%; p=0·0087) died during neonatal hospitalisation. Five serious adverse events were reported: three in the hypothermia group (one hospital readmission relating to pneumonia, one septic arthritis, and one suspected venous thrombosis), and two in the control group (one related to desaturations during MRI and other because of endotracheal tube displacement during transport for MRI). No adverse events were considered causally related to the study intervention.

Interpretation

Therapeutic hypothermia did not reduce the combined outcome of death or disability at 18 months after neonatal encephalopathy in low-income and middle-income countries, but significantly increased death alone. Therapeutic hypothermia should not be offered as treatment for neonatal encephalopathy in low-income and middle-income countries, even when tertiary neonatal intensive care facilities are available.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research, Garfield Weston Foundation, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Translations

For the Hindi, Malayalam, Telugu, Kannada, Singhalese, Tamil, Marathi and Bangla translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

SUBMITTER: Thayyil S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8371331 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTime-critical neonatal trials in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) raise several ethical issues. Using a qualitative-dominant mixed-methods design, we explored informed consent process in Hypothermia for encephalopathy in low and middle-income countries (HELIX) trial conducted in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.MethodsTerm infants with neonatal encephalopathy, aged less than 6 hours, were randomly allocated to cooling therapy or usual care, following informed parental consent. The consenting process was audio-video (A-V) recorded in all cases. We analysed A-V records of the consent process using a 5-point Likert scale on three parameters-empathy, information and autonomy. In addition, we used exploratory observation method to capture relevant aspects of consent process and discussions between parents and professionals. Finally, we conducted in-depth interviews with a subgroup of 20 parents and 15 healthcare professionals. A thematic analysis was performed on the observations of A-V records and on the interview transcripts.ResultsA total of 294 A-V records of the HELIX trial were analysed. Median (IQR) score for empathy, information and autonomy was 5 (0), 5 (1) and 5 (1), respectively. However, thematic analysis suggested that the consenting was a ceremonial process; and parental decision to participate was based on unreserved trust in the treating doctors, therapeutic misconception and access to an expensive treatment free of cost. Most parents did not understand the concept of a clinical trial nor the nature of the intervention. Professionals showed a strong bias towards cooling therapy and reported time constraints and explaining to multiple family members as key challenges.ConclusionDespite rigorous research governance and consent process, parental decisions were heavily influenced by situational incapacity and a trust in doctors to make the right decision on their behalf. Further research is required to identify culturally and context-appropriate strategies for informed trial participation.

Project description:We previously reported early results of a randomized trial of whole-body hypothermia for neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy showing a significant reduction in the rate of death or moderate or severe disability at 18 to 22 months of age. Long-term outcomes are now available.In the original trial, we assigned infants with moderate or severe encephalopathy to usual care (the control group) or whole-body cooling to an esophageal temperature of 33.5°C for 72 hours, followed by slow rewarming (the hypothermia group). We evaluated cognitive, attention and executive, and visuospatial function; neurologic outcomes; and physical and psychosocial health among participants at 6 to 7 years of age. The primary outcome of the present analyses was death or an IQ score below 70.Of the 208 trial participants, primary outcome data were available for 190. Of the 97 children in the hypothermia group and the 93 children in the control group, death or an IQ score below 70 occurred in 46 (47%) and 58 (62%), respectively (P=0.06); death occurred in 27 (28%) and 41 (44%) (P=0.04); and death or severe disability occurred in 38 (41%) and 53 (60%) (P=0.03). Other outcome data were available for the 122 surviving children, 70 in the hypothermia group and 52 in the control group. Moderate or severe disability occurred in 24 of 69 children (35%) and 19 of 50 children (38%), respectively (P=0.87). Attention-executive dysfunction occurred in 4% and 13%, respectively, of children receiving hypothermia and those receiving usual care (P=0.19), and visuospatial dysfunction occurred in 4% and 3% (P=0.80).The rate of the combined end point of death or an IQ score of less than 70 at 6 to 7 years of age was lower among children undergoing whole-body hypothermia than among those undergoing usual care, but the differences were not significant. However, hypothermia resulted in lower death rates and did not increase rates of severe disability among survivors. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Neonatal Research Network; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00005772.).

Project description:BackgroundIn neonatal encephalopathy, the clinical manifestations of injury can only be reliably assessed several years after an intervention, complicating early prognostication and rendering trials of promising neuroprotectants slow and expensive. We aimed to determine the accuracy of thalamic proton magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy (MRS) biomarkers as early predictors of the neurodevelopmental abnormalities observed years after neonatal encephalopathy.MethodsWe did a prospective multicentre cohort study across eight neonatal intensive care units in the UK and USA, recruiting term and near-term neonates who received therapeutic hypothermia for neonatal encephalopathy. We excluded infants with life-threatening congenital malformations, syndromic disorders, neurometabolic diseases, or any alternative diagnoses for encephalopathy that were apparent within 6 h of birth. We obtained T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and diffusion-weighted MRI and thalamic proton MRS 4-14 days after birth. Clinical neurodevelopmental tests were done 18-24 months later. The primary outcome was the association between MR biomarkers and an adverse neurodevelopmental outcome, defined as death or moderate or severe disability, measured using a multivariable prognostic model. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to examine the prognostic accuracy of the individual biomarkers. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01309711.FindingsBetween Jan 29, 2013, and June 25, 2016, we recruited 223 infants who all underwent MRI and MRS at a median age of 7 days (IQR 5-10), with 190 (85%) followed up for neurological examination at a median age of 23 months (20-25). Of those followed up, 31 (16%) had moderate or severe disability, including one death. Multiple logistic regression analysis could not be done because thalamic N-acetylaspartate (NAA) concentration alone accurately predicted an adverse neurodevelopmental outcome (area under the curve [AUC] of 0·99 [95% CI 0·94-1·00]; sensitivity 100% [74-100]; specificity 97% [90-100]; n=82); the models would not converge when any additional variable was examined. The AUC (95% CI) of clinical examination at 6 h (n=190) and at discharge (n=167) were 0·72 (0·65-0·78) and 0·60 (0·53-0·68), respectively, and the AUC of abnormal amplitude integrated EEG at 6 h (n=169) was 0·73 (0·65-0·79). On conventional MRI (n=190), cortical injury had an AUC of 0·67 (0·60-0·73), basal ganglia or thalamic injury had an AUC of 0·81 (0·75-0·87), and abnormal signal in the posterior limb of internal capsule (PLIC) had an AUC of 0·82 (0·76-0·87). Fractional anisotropy of PLIC (n=65) had an AUC of 0·82 (0·76-0·87). MRS metabolite peak-area ratios (n=160) of NAA-creatine (<1·29) had an AUC of 0·79 (0·72-0·85), of NAA-choline had an AUC of 0·74 (0·66-0·80), and of lactate-NAA (>0·22) had an AUC of 0·94 (0·89-0·97).InterpretationThalamic proton MRS measures acquired soon after birth in neonatal encephalopathy had the highest accuracy to predict neurdevelopment 2 years later. These methods could be applied to increase the power of neuroprotection trials while reducing their duration.FundingNational Institute for Health Research UK.

Project description:IntroductionThe development of type 2 diabetes mellitus disproportionately affects South Asian women with prior gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). The Lifestyle InterVention IN Gestational diabetes (LIVING) Study is a randomised controlled trial of a low-intensity lifestyle modification programme tailored to women with previous GDM, in India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, aimed at preventing diabetes/pre-diabetes. The aim of this process evaluation is to understand what worked, and why, during the LIVING intervention implementation, and to provide additional data that will assist in the interpretation of the LIVING Study results. The findings will also inform future scale-up efforts if the intervention is found to be effective.Methods and analysisThe Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) methodological approach informed the evaluation framework. Michie's Behaviour Change Theory and Normalisation Process Theory were used to guide the design of our qualitative evaluation tools within the overall RE-AIM evaluation framework. Mixed methods including qualitative interviews, focus groups and quantitative analyses will be used to evaluate the intervention from the perspectives of the women receiving the intervention, facilitators, site investigators and project management staff. The evaluation will use evaluation datasets, administratively collected process data accessed during monitoring visits, check lists and logs, quantitative participant evaluation surveys, semistructured interviews and focus group discussions. Interview participants will be recruited using maximum variation purposive sampling. We will undertake thematic analysis of all qualitative data, conducted contemporaneously with data collection until thematic saturation has been achieved. To triangulate data, the analysis team will engage in constant iterative comparison among data from various stakeholders.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been obtained from the respective human research ethics committees of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India; University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; and site-specific approval at each local site in the three countries: India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. This includes approvals from the Institutional Ethics Committee at King Edwards Memorial Hospital, Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Centre for Disease Control New Delhi, Goa Medical College, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Madras Diabetes Research Foundation, Christian Medical College Vellore, Fernandez Hospital Foundation, Castle Street Hospital for Women, University of Kelaniya, Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Charitable Hospital, Birdem General Hospital and the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research. Findings will be documented in academic publications, presentations at scientific meetings and stakeholder workshops.Trial registration numbersClinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2017/06/008744); Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry (SLCTR/2017/001) and ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03305939); Pre-results.