BackgroundGlioma interventional studies should collect data aligned with patient priorities, enabling treatment benefit assessment and informed decision-making. This requires effective data... Show moreBackgroundGlioma interventional studies should collect data aligned with patient priorities, enabling treatment benefit assessment and informed decision-making. This requires effective data synthesis and meta-analyses, underpinned by consistent trial outcome measurement, analysis, and reporting. Development of a core outcome set (COS) may contribute to a solution.MethodsA 5-stage process was used to develop a COS for glioma trials from the UK perspective. Outcome lists were generated in stages 1: a trial registry review and systematic review of qualitative studies and 2: interviews with glioma patients and caregivers. In stage 3, the outcome lists were de-duplicated with accessible terminology, in stage 4 outcomes were rated via a 2-round Delphi process, and stage 5 comprised a consensus meeting to finalize the COS. Patient-reportable COS outcomes were identified.ResultsIn Delphi round 1, 96 participants rated 35 outcomes identified in stages 1 and 2, to which a further 10 were added. Participants (77/96) rated the resulting 45 outcomes in round 2. Of these, 22 outcomes met a priori threshold for inclusion in the COS. After further review, a COS consisting of 19 outcomes grouped into 7 outcome domains (survival, adverse events, activities of daily living, health-related quality of life, seizure activity, cognitive function, and physical function) was finalized by 13 participants at the consensus meeting.ConclusionsA COS for glioma trials was developed, comprising 7 outcome domains. Additional research will identify appropriate measurement tools and further validate this COS. Show less
Introduction: Primary brain tumours, specifically gliomas, are a rare disease group. The disease and treatment negatively impacts on patients and those close to them. The high rates of physical and... Show moreIntroduction: Primary brain tumours, specifically gliomas, are a rare disease group. The disease and treatment negatively impacts on patients and those close to them. The high rates of physical and cognitive morbidity differ from other cancers causing reduced health-related quality of life. Glioma trials using outcomes that allow holistic analysis of treatment benefits and risks enable informed care decisions. Currently, outcome assessment in glioma trials is inconsistent, hindering evidence synthesis. A core outcome set (COS) - an agreed minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported - may address this. International initiatives focus on defining core outcomes assessments across brain tumour types. This protocol describes the development of a COS involving UK stakeholders for use in glioma trials, applicable across glioma types, with provision to identify subsets as required. Due to stakeholder interest in data reported from the patient perspective, outcomes from the COS that can be patient-reported will be identified. Methods and analysis: Stage I: (1) trial registry review to identify outcomes collected in glioma trials and (2) systematic review of qualitative literature exploring glioma patient and key stakeholder research priorities. Stage II: semi-structured interviews with glioma patients and caregivers. Outcome lists will be generated from stages I and II. Stage III: study team will remove duplicate items from the outcome lists and ensure accessible terminology for inclusion in the Delphi survey. Stage IV: a two-round Delphi process whereby the outcomes will be rated by key stakeholders. Stage V: a consensus meeting where participants will finalise the COS. The study team will identify the COS outcomes that can be patient-reported. Further research is needed to match patient-reported outcomes to available measures. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained (REF SMREC 21/59, Cardiff University School of Medicine Research Ethics Committee). Study findings will be disseminated widely through conferences and journal publication. The final COS will be adopted and promoted by patient and carer groups and its use by funders encouraged. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021236979. Show less
Sluijs, P.J. van der; Joosten, M.; Alby, C.; Gilmore, K.; Dubourg, C.; Fradin, M.; ... ; Santen, G.W.E. 2022
Purpose: Genome-wide sequencing is increasingly being performed during pregnancy to identify the genetic cause of congenital anomalies. The interpretation of prenatally identified variants can be... Show morePurpose: Genome-wide sequencing is increasingly being performed during pregnancy to identify the genetic cause of congenital anomalies. The interpretation of prenatally identified variants can be challenging and is hampered by our often limited knowledge of prenatal phenotypes. To better delineate the prenatal phenotype of Coffin-Siris syndrome (CSS), we collected clinical data from patients with a prenatal phenotype and a pathogenic variant in one of the CSS-associated genes. Methods: Clinical data was collected through an extensive web-based survey. Results: We included 44 patients with a variant in a CSS-associated gene and a prenatal phenotype; 9 of these patients have been reported before. Prenatal anomalies that were frequently observed in our cohort include hydrocephalus, agenesis of the corpus callosum, hypoplastic left heart syndrome, persistent left vena cava, diaphragmatic hernia, renal agenesis, and intrauterine growth restriction. Anal anomalies were frequently identified after birth in patients with ARID1A variants (6/14, 43%). Interestingly, pathogenic ARID1A variants were much more frequently identified in the current prenatal cohort (16/44, 36%) than in postnatal CSS cohorts (5%-9%). Conclusion: Our data shed new light on the prenatal phenotype of patients with pathogenic variants in CSS genes. (C) 2022 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
Core Outcome Sets (COS) define minimum outcomes to be measured and reported in clinical effectiveness trials for a particular health condition/health area. Despite recognition as critical to... Show moreCore Outcome Sets (COS) define minimum outcomes to be measured and reported in clinical effectiveness trials for a particular health condition/health area. Despite recognition as critical to clinical research design for other health areas, none have been developed for neuro-oncology. COS development projects should carefully consider: scope (how the COS should be used), stakeholders involved in development (including patients as both research partners and participants), and consensus methodologies used (typically a Delphi survey and consensus meeting), as well as dissemination plans. Developing COS for neuro-oncology is potentially challenging due to extensive tumor subclassification (including molecular stratification), different symptoms related to anatomical tumor location, and variation in treatment options. Development of a COS specific to tumor subtype, in a specific location, for a particular intervention may be too narrow and would be unlikely to be used. Equally, a COS that is applicable across a wider area of neuro-oncology may be too broad and therefore lack specificity. This review describes why and how a COS may be developed, and discusses challenges for their development, specific to neuro-oncology. The COS under development are briefly described, including: adult glioma, incidental/untreated meningioma, meningioma requiring intervention, and adverse events from surgical intervention for pediatric brain tumors. Show less
Dijk, E. van; Biesma, H.; Cordes, M.; Smeets, D.; Neerincx, M.; S. das; ... ; Ylstra, B. 2018
