No abstract

Objective Real‐world clinical effectiveness of liraglutide 3.0 mg, in combination with diet and exercise, was investigated 4 and 6 months post initiation. Changes in absolute and percent body weight were examined from baseline. Methods A cohort of liraglutide 3.0 mg initiators in 2015 and 2016 was identified from six Canadian weight‐management clinics. Post initiation values at 4 and 6 months were compared with baseline values using a paired t test. Results The full cohort consisted of 311 participants, with 210 in the ≥ 4‐month persistence group and 167 in the ≥ 6‐month persistence group. Average baseline BMI was 40.7 kg/m2, and weight was 114.8 kg. There was a significant change in body weight 6 and 4 months after initiation of treatment in persistent subjects (≥ 6‐month: −8.0 kg, P < 0.001; ≥ 4‐month: −7.0 kg, P < 0.001) and All Subjects, regardless of persistence (−7.3 kg; P < 0.001). Percentage change in body weight from baseline was −7.1% in the ≥ 6‐month group and −6.3% in the ≥ 4‐month group, and All Subjects lost 6.5% body weight. Of participants in the ≥ 6‐month group, 64.10% and 34.5% lost ≥ 5% and > 10% body weight, respectively. Conclusions In a real‐world setting, liraglutide 3.0 mg, when combined with diet and exercise, was associated with clinically meaningful weight loss.

BackgroundEarly goal-directed therapy (EGDT) is recommended in international guidance for the resuscitation of patients presenting with early septic shock. However, adoption has been limited and uncertainty remains over its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.ObjectivesThe primary objective was to estimate the effect of EGDT compared with usual resuscitation on mortality at 90 days following randomisation and on incremental cost-effectiveness at 1 year. The secondary objectives were to compare EGDT with usual resuscitation for requirement for, and duration of, critical care unit organ support; length of stay in the emergency department (ED), critical care unit and acute hospital; health-related quality of life, resource use and costs at 90 days and at 1 year; all-cause mortality at 28 days, at acute hospital discharge and at 1 year; and estimated lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness.DesignA pragmatic, open, multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with an integrated economic evaluation.SettingFifty-six NHS hospitals in England.ParticipantsA total of 1260 patients who presented at EDs with septic shock.InterventionsEGDT (n = 630) or usual resuscitation (n = 630). Patients were randomly allocated 1 : 1.Main outcome measuresAll-cause mortality at 90 days after randomisation and incremental net benefit (at £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year) at 1 year.ResultsFollowing withdrawals, data on 1243 (EGDT,n = 623; usual resuscitation,n = 620) patients were included in the analysis. By 90 days, 184 (29.5%) in the EGDT and 181 (29.2%) patients in the usual-resuscitation group had died [p = 0.90; absolute risk reduction −0.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) −5.4 to 4.7; relative risk 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.20]. Treatment intensity was greater for the EGDT group, indicated by the increased use of intravenous fluids, vasoactive drugs and red blood cell transfusions. Increased treatment intensity was reflected by significantly higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and more advanced cardiovascular support days in critical care for the EGDT group. At 1 year, the incremental net benefit for EGDT versus usual resuscitation was negative at −£725 (95% CI −£3000 to £1550). The probability that EGDT was more cost-effective than usual resuscitation was below 30%. There were no significant differences in any other secondary outcomes, including health-related quality of life, or adverse events.LimitationsRecruitment was lower at weekends and out of hours. The intervention could not be blinded.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 90 days for EGDT compared with usual resuscitation among adults identified with early septic shock presenting to EDs in England. On average, costs were higher in the EGDT group than in the usual-resuscitation group while quality-adjusted life-years were similar in both groups; the probability that it is cost-effective is < 30%.Future workThe ProMISe (Protocolised Management In Sepsis) trial completes the planned trio of evaluations of EGDT across the USA, Australasia and England; all have indicated that EGDT is not superior to usual resuscitation. Recognising that each of the three individual, large trials has limited power for evaluating potentially important subgroups, the harmonised approach adopted provides the opportunity to conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis, enhancing both knowledge and generalisability.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN36307479.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 97. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundInternationally, hospital survival is lower for patients admitted at weekends and at night. Data from the UK National Cardiac Arrest Audit (NCAA) indicate that crude hospital survival was worse after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) at night versus day, and at weekends versus weekdays, despite similar frequency of events.ObjectiveTo describe IHCA demographics during three day/time periods—weekday daytime (Monday to Friday, 08:00 to 19:59), weekend daytime (Saturday and Sunday, 08:00 to 19:59) and night-time (Monday to Sunday, 20:00 to 07:59)—and to compare the associated rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) for >20 min (ROSC>20 min) and survival to hospital discharge, adjusted for risk using previously developed NCAA risk models. To consider whether any observed difference could be attributed to differences in the case mix of patients resident in hospital and/or the administered care.MethodsWe performed a prospectively defined analysis of NCAA data from 27 700 patients aged ≥16 years receiving chest compressions and/or defibrillation and attended by a hospital-based resuscitation team in response to a resuscitation (2222) call in 146 UK acute hospitals.ResultsRisk-adjusted outcomes (OR (95% CI)) were worse (p<0.001) for both weekend daytime (ROSC>20 min 0.88 (0.81 to 0.95); hospital survival 0.72 (0.64 to 0.80)), and night-time (ROSC>20 min 0.72 (0.68 to 0.76); hospital survival 0.58 (0.54 to 0.63)) compared with weekday daytime. The effects were stronger for non-shockable than shockable rhythms, but there was no significant interaction between day/time of arrest and age, or day/time of arrest and arrest location. While many daytime IHCAs involved procedures, restricting the analyses to IHCAs in medical admissions with an arrest location of ward produced results that are broadly in line with the primary analyses.ConclusionsIHCAs attended by the hospital-based resuscitation team during nights and weekends have substantially worse outcomes than during weekday daytimes. Organisational or care differences at night and weekends, rather than patient case mix, appear to be responsible.

Risk-adjusted mortality has strong support from the critical care community as a quality indicator for benchmarking ICU performance but is dependent on up-to-date, accurate risk models. ICU outcome prediction can also contribute to both randomized and nonrandomized research and potentially contribute to individual patient management, although generic risk models should not be used to guide individual treatment decisions.

Summary Objective Liraglutide 3.0 mg is associated with clinically significant weight loss in clinical trials, but real‐world data are lacking. In this analysis, weight loss and persistence outcomes with liraglutide 3.0 mg were assessed across obesity classes, in a real‐world clinical setting. Methods Secondary analysis of an observational, retrospective study of liraglutide 3.0 mg for weight management (as adjunct to diet and exercise) at six Wharton Medical Clinics in Canada. Patients were categorized by body mass index (BMI, kg/m2) into obesity class I (BMI 30–34.9); class II (BMI 35–39.9); and class III (BMI ≥40). Change in weight, categorical weight loss, time to maintenance dose (defined as the time to reach the full liraglutide 3.0 mg maintenance dose) and persistence were assessed for each class and for differences between classes. Results Of 308 patients, 70 (22.7%) had obesity class I, 83 (26.9%) obesity class II and 155 (50.3%) obesity class III. Similar percentage change in weight was observed between obesity classes (mean [standard deviation, SD]: −7.0% [6.0], −6.6% [6.0] and −6.1% [5.0], respectively; p = .640), and similar proportions achieved ≥5% weight loss (60.4%, 62.0% and 55.3%, respectively; p = .717) at 6 months. Mean time to maintenance dose (SD) was 64.2 (56.4) d, 76.4 (56.3) d and 71.4 (54.5) d for obesity classes I, II and III, respectively (p = .509). Persistence with medication was also similar between obesity classes (p = .358). Conclusions These findings suggest that real‐world treatment with liraglutide 3.0 mg, regardless of obesity class, is associated with similar clinically significant weight loss, time to maintenance dose and medication persistence.

Significant regional variation in hospital mortality for patients admitted to critical care following surgery was observed. Critical care bed utilisation seemed to better explain this observation and was associated with improved outcome.

Objectives To assess real‐world effectiveness, safety, and usage of erenumab in Canadian patients with episodic and chronic migraine with prior ineffective prophylactic treatments. Background In randomized controlled trials, erenumab demonstrated efficacy for migraine prevention in patients with ≤4 prior ineffective prophylactic migraine therapies. The “Migraine prevention with AimoviG: Informative Canadian real‐world study” (MAGIC) assessed real‐world effectiveness of erenumab in Canadian patients with migraine. Methods MAGIC was a prospective open‐label, observational study conducted in Canadian patients with chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) with two to six categories of prior ineffective prophylactic therapies. Participants were administered 70 mg or 140 mg erenumab monthly based on physician’s assessment. Migraine attacks were self‐assessed using an electronic diary and patient‐reported outcome questionnaires. The primary outcome was the proportion of subjects achieving ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) after the 3‐month treatment period. Results Among the 95 participants who mostly experienced two (54.7%) or three (32.6%) prior categories of ineffective prophylactic therapies and who initiated erenumab, treatment was generally safe and well tolerated; 89/95 (93.7%) participants initiated treatment with 140 mg erenumab. At week 12, 32/95 (33.7%) participants including 17/64 (26.6%) CM and 15/32 (48.4%) EM achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD while 30/86 (34.9%) participants including 19/55 (34.5%) CM and 11/31 (35.5%) EM achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD at week 24. Through patient‐reported outcome questionnaires, 62/95 (65.3%) and 45/86 (52.3%) participants reported improvement of their condition at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. Physicians observed improvement in the condition of 78/95 (82.1%) and 67/86 (77.9%) participants at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. Conclusion One‐third of patients with EM and CM achieved ≥50% MMD reduction after 3 months of erenumab treatment. This study provides real‐world evidence of erenumab effectiveness, safety, and usage for migraine prevention in adult Canadian patients with multiple prior ineffective prophylactic treatments.