METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to cytopathology laboratories in 24 Asia-Pacific countries to explore the impact of restrictive measures on access to health care, use of general and personal protective equipment (PPE), and changes in cytology workflow and workload from February to April 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 167 cytopathology laboratories from 24 countries responded to the survey; the majority reported that restrictive measures that limited the accessibility of health care services had been implemented in their cities and/or countries (80.8%) and their hospitals (83.8%). The respondents noted that COVID-19 had an impact on the cytologic workflow as well as the workload. Approximately one-half of the participants reported the implementation of new biosafety protocols (54.5%) as well as improvements in laboratory facilities (47.3%). Rearrangement or redeployment of the workforce was reported in 53.3% and 34.1% of laboratories, respectively. The majority of the respondents reported a significant reduction (>10%) in caseload associated with both gynecological (82.0%) and nongynecological specimens (78.4%). Most laboratories reported no significant change in the malignancy rates of both gynecological (67.7%) and nongynecological specimens (58.7%) compared with the same period in 2019.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant reduction in the number of cytology specimens examined along with the need to implement new biosafety protocols. These findings underscore the need for the worldwide standardization of biosafety protocols and cytology practice.
METHODS: ALPHA is an ongoing, international, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating danicopan as add-on therapy to ravulizumab or eculizumab. Eligible patients were adults (age ≥18 years) with PNH and clinically significant extravascular haemolysis (haemoglobin ≤9·5 g/dL; absolute reticulocyte count ≥120 × 109/L) on ravulizumab or eculizumab for at least 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to danicopan or placebo added to ravulizumab or eculizumab for 12 weeks using an interactive response technology system. Randomisation was stratified based on transfusion history, haemoglobin, and patients enrolled from Japan. The initial oral danicopan dose was 150 mg three times a day; escalation to 200 mg three times a day was permitted based on clinical response. The infusion dose level of eculizumab (every 2 weeks) ranged from 900 mg to 1500 mg, and for ravulizumab (monthly or every 8 weeks) ranged from 3000 mg to 3600 mg. The primary endpoint was change in haemoglobin concentration from baseline to week 12. Here we present the protocol-prespecified interim analysis, planned when approximately 75% of participants were randomly assigned to treatment and completed or discontinued at 12 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04469465).
FINDINGS: Individuals were randomly assigned between Dec 16, 2020, and Aug 29, 2022. At data cutoff (June 28, 2022), 73 individuals were randomly assigned, received treatment, and were analysed for safety (danicopan, n=49; placebo, n=24). The protocol-prespecified interim efficacy analysis set included the first 63 participants (danicopan, n=42; placebo, n=21). At week 12, danicopan plus ravulizumab or eculizumab increased haemoglobin versus placebo plus ravulizumab or eculizumab (least squares mean [LSM] change from baseline: danicopan, 2·94 g/dL [95% CI 2·52 to 3·36]; placebo, 0·50 g/dL [-0·13 to 1·12]; LSM difference, 2·44 g/dL [1·69 to 3·20]; p<0·0001). Grade 3 adverse events in the danicopan group were increased alanine aminotransferase (two [4%] of 49 patients), leukopenia (one [2%]), neutropenia (two [4%]), cholecystitis (one [2%]), COVID-19 (one [2%]), increased aspartate aminotransferase (one [2%]), and increased blood pressure (one [2%]), and in the placebo group were anaemia (one [4%] of 24 patients), thrombocytopenia (one [4%]), and asthenia (one [4%]). The serious adverse events reported in the danicopan group were cholecystitis (one [2%] patient) and COVID-19 (one [2%]) and in the placebo group were anaemia and abdominal pain, both in one (4%) patient. There were no serious adverse events related to study drug or deaths reported in the study.
INTERPRETATION: These primary efficacy and safety results show that danicopan as add-on treatment to ravulizumab or eculizumab significantly improved haemoglobin concentrations at week 12 with no new safety concerns, suggesting an improved benefit-risk profile in patients with PNH and clinically significant extravascular haemolysis.
FUNDING: Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicians managing male infertility were invited to complete an online survey on practices related to SDF diagnostic and treatment approaches. Their responses related to the technical aspects of SDF testing, current professional society guidelines, and the literature were used to generate expert recommendations via the Delphi method. Finally, challenges related to SDF that the clinicians encounter in their daily practice were captured.
RESULTS: The survey was completed by 436 reproductive clinicians. Overall, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase deoxyuridine triphosphate Nick-End Labeling (TUNEL) is the most commonly used assay chosen by 28.6%, followed by the sperm chromatin structure assay (24.1%), and the sperm chromatin dispersion (19.1%). The choice of the assay was largely influenced by availability (70% of respondents). A threshold of 30% was the most selected cut-off value for elevated SDF by 33.7% of clinicians. Of respondents, 53.6% recommend SDF testing after 3 to 5 days of abstinence. Although 75.3% believe SDF testing can provide an explanation for many unknown causes of infertility, the main limiting factors selected by respondents are a lack of professional society guideline recommendations (62.7%) and an absence of globally accepted references for SDF interpretation (50.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest global survey on the technical aspects of SDF testing as well as the barriers encountered by clinicians. Unified global recommendations regarding clinician implementation and standard laboratory interpretation of SDF testing are crucial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 56-question online survey covering various aspects of the evaluation and management of NOA was sent to specialists around the globe. This paper analyzes the results of the second half of the survey dealing with the management of NOA. Results have been compared to current guidelines, and expert recommendations have been provided using a Delphi process.
RESULTS: Participants from 49 countries submitted 336 valid responses. Hormonal therapy for 3 to 6 months was suggested before surgical sperm retrieval (SSR) by 29.6% and 23.6% of participants for normogonadotropic hypogonadism and hypergonadotropic hypogonadism respectively. The SSR rate was reported as 50.0% by 26.0% to 50.0% of participants. Interestingly, 46.0% reported successful SSR in <10% of men with Klinefelter syndrome and 41.3% routinely recommended preimplantation genetic testing. Varicocele repair prior to SSR is recommended by 57.7%. Half of the respondents (57.4%) reported using ultrasound to identify the most vascularized areas in the testis for SSR. One-third proceed directly to microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) in every case of NOA while others use a staged approach. After a failed conventional TESE, 23.8% wait for 3 months, while 33.1% wait for 6 months before proceeding to mTESE. The cut-off of follicle-stimulating hormone for positive SSR was reported to be 12-19 IU/mL by 22.5% of participants and 20-40 IU/mL by 27.8%, while 31.8% reported no upper limit.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest survey to date on the real-world medical and surgical management of NOA by reproductive experts. It demonstrates a diverse practice pattern and highlights the need for evidence-based international consensus guidelines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 56-item questionnaire survey on NOA diagnosis and management was conducted globally from July to September 2022. This paper focuses on part 1, evaluating NOA diagnosis. Data from 367 participants across 49 countries were analyzed descriptively, with a Delphi process used for expert recommendations.
RESULTS: Of 336 eligible responses, most participants were experienced attending physicians (70.93%). To diagnose azoospermia definitively, 81.7% requested two semen samples. Commonly ordered hormone tests included serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (97.0%), total testosterone (92.9%), and luteinizing hormone (86.9%). Genetic testing was requested by 66.6%, with karyotype analysis (86.2%) and Y chromosome microdeletions (88.3%) prevalent. Diagnostic testicular biopsy, distinguishing obstructive azoospermia (OA) from NOA, was not performed by 45.1%, while 34.6% did it selectively. Differentiation relied on physical examination (76.1%), serum hormone profiles (69.6%), and semen tests (68.1%). Expectations of finding sperm surgically were higher in men with normal FSH, larger testes, and a history of sperm in ejaculate.
CONCLUSIONS: This expert survey, encompassing 367 participants from 49 countries, unveils congruence with recommended guidelines in NOA diagnosis. However, noteworthy disparities in practices suggest a need for evidence-based, international consensus guidelines to standardize NOA evaluation, addressing existing gaps in professional recommendations.