Helen Hickey

Atypical meningiomas are an intermediate grade brain tumour with a recurrence rate of 39–58 %. It is not known whether early adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the risk of tumour recurrence and whether the potential side-effects are justified. An alternative management strategy is to perform active monitoring with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to treat at recurrence. There are no randomised controlled trials comparing these two approaches. A total of 190 patients will be recruited from neurosurgical/neuro-oncology centres across the United Kingdom, Ireland and mainland Europe. Adult patients undergoing gross total resection of intracranial atypical meningioma are eligible. Patients with multiple meningioma, optic nerve sheath meningioma, previous intracranial tumour, previous cranial radiotherapy and neurofibromatosis will be excluded. Informed consent will be obtained from patients. This is a two-stage trial (both stages will run in parallel): Stage 1 (qualitative study) is designed to maximise patient and clinician acceptability, thereby optimising recruitment and retention. Patients wishing to continue will proceed to randomisation. Stage 2 (randomisation) patients will be randomised to receive either early adjuvant radiotherapy for 6 weeks (60 Gy in 30 fractions) or active monitoring. The primary outcome measure is time to MRI evidence of tumour recurrence (progression-free survival (PFS)). Secondary outcome measures include assessing the toxicity of the radiotherapy, the quality of life, neurocognitive function, time to second line treatment, time to death (overall survival (OS)) and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. ROAM/EORTC-1308 is the first multi-centre randomised controlled trial designed to determine whether early adjuvant radiotherapy reduces the risk of tumour recurrence following complete surgical resection of atypical meningioma. The results of this study will be used to inform current neurosurgery and neuro-oncology practice worldwide. ISRCTN71502099 on 19 May 2014.

Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust. An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group’s average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods. Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were ‘Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials’ (considered the highest priority), ‘Methods to minimise attrition’ and ‘Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure’. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, ‘Radiotherapy study designs’ and ‘Low carbon trials’, were not priorities. This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with a focus on topics that will have most impact and relevance.

Insertion of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) for the treatment of hydrocephalus is one of the most common neurosurgical procedures in the UK, but failures caused by infection occur in approximately 8% of primary cases. VPS infection is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality and its management results in substantial cost to the health service. Antibiotic-impregnated (rifampicin and clindamycin) and silver-impregnated VPS have been developed to reduce infection rates. Whilst there is some evidence showing that such devices may lead to a reduction in VPS infection, there are no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to support their routine use. Overall, 1,200 patients will be recruited from 17 regional neurosurgical units in the UK and Ireland. Patients of any age undergoing insertion of their first VPS are eligible. Patients with previous indwelling VPS, active and on-going cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or peritoneal infection, multiloculated hydrocephalus requiring multiple VPS or neuroendoscopy, and ventriculoatrial or ventriculopleural shunt planned will be excluded. Patients will be randomised 1:1:1 to either standard silicone (comparator), antibiotic-impregnated, or silver-impregnated VPS. The primary outcome measure is time to VPS infection. Secondary outcome measures include time to VPS failure of any cause, reason for VPS failure (infection, mechanical failure, or patient failure), types of bacterial VPS infection (organism type and antibiotic resistance), and incremental cost per VPS failure averted. The British antibiotic and silver-impregnated catheters for ventriculoperitoneal shunts multi-centre randomised controlled trial (the BASICS trial) is the first multi-centre RCT designed to determine whether antibiotic or silver-impregnated VPS reduce early shunt infection compared to standard silicone VPS. The results of this study will be used to inform current neurosurgical practice and may potentially benefit patients undergoing shunt surgery in the future. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN49474281 .

Background: There are controversies about the most effective treatment to eradicate first growth of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P aeruginosa) from the lower airways of patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). UK guidelines recommend oral treatment, but some advocate intravenous (IV) treatment. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial comparing two treatment strategies to eradicate P aeruginosa in CF patients. Methods/Principal Findings: Two surveys were conducted. Survey [1] included clinicians who were responsible for the treatment of individuals with CF, to assess their clinical practice, opinions and numbers of potentially eligible patients. Survey [2] included adults and young people aged 13 years or more with CF and parents of children with CF aged less than 13 years, identified at six UK CF centres, who fulfilled eligibility criteria for the proposed clinical trial, to assess their views about the interventions and their willingness to participate in the trial. Generally clinicians treat first or new growth of P aeruginosa with oral antibiotics, but 90% reported that they would consider IV treatment of first isolation of P aeruginosa. 74% of clinicians would consider recruiting their patients and 45% of consumers would consider entry for themselves or their children into a trial comparing oral with intravenous antibiotics. The median rate per annum for first or new growths of P aeruginosa in adults was 3% (range 1% to 9%) and in children was 10% (range 3% to 23%). If the trial was conducted across the UK, with a consent rate of 45%, then the number of eligible patients per annum who would be willing to take part in a study would be approximately 41 adults and 203 children. Conclusions: This work demonstrates the importance of feasibility studies in preparation for multicentre clinical trials. It confirmed the uncertainty amongst clinicians and patients about the clinical question, enabled assessment of the number of potentially eligible patients, the proportion of patients and clinicians prepared to participate and aspects of trial design which might encourage this. It showed that a clinical trial was feasible, but only if patients were recruited from across United Kingdom.