Background Myeloma causes profound immunodeficiency and recurrent, serious infections. Around 5500 new cases of myeloma are diagnosed per year in the UK, and a quarter of patients will have a serious infection within 3 months of diagnosis. We aimed to assess whether patients newly diagnosed with myeloma benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infection, and to investigate the effect on antibiotic-resistant organism carriage and health care-associated infections in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Methods TEAMM was a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in patients aged 21 years and older with newly diagnosed myeloma in 93 UK hospitals. All enrolled patients were within 14 days of starting active myeloma treatment. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to levofloxacin or placebo with a computerised minimisation algorithm. Allocation was stratified by centre, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and intention to proceed to high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. All investigators, patients, laboratory, and trial coordination staff were masked to the treatment allocation. Patients were given 500 mg of levofloxacin (two 250 mg tablets), orally once daily for 12 weeks, or placebo tablets (two tablets, orally once daily for 12 weeks), with dose reduction according to estimated glomerular filtration rate every 4 weeks. Follow-up visits occurred every 4 weeks up to week 16, and at 1 year. The primary outcome was time to first febrile episode or death from all causes within the first 12 weeks of trial treatment. All randomised patients were included in an intention-to-treat analysis of the primary endpoint. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN51731976, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, number 2011-000366-35. Findings Between Aug 15, 2012, and April 29, 2016, we enrolled and randomly assigned 977 patients to receive levofloxacin prophylaxis (489 patients) or placebo (488 patients). Median follow-up was 12 months (IQR 8-13). 95 (19%) first febrile episodes or deaths occurred in 489 patients in the levofloxacin group versus 134 (27%) in 488 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0•66, 95% CI 0•51-0•86; p=0•0018. 597 serious adverse events were reported up to 16 weeks from the start of trial treatment (308 [52%] of which were in the levofloxacin group and 289 [48%] of which were in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were similar between the two groups except for five episodes (1%) of mostly reversible tendonitis in the levofloxacin group. Interpretation Addition of prophylactic levofloxacin to active myeloma treatment during the first 12 weeks of therapy significantly reduced febrile episodes and deaths compared with placebo without increasing health care-associated infections. These results suggest that prophylactic levofloxacin could be used for patients with newly diagnosed myeloma undergoing anti-myeloma therapy.

We measured immunosuppression at myeloma diagnosis and assessed the impact on survival in 5826 UK myeloma trial patients. Polyclonal immunoglobulin levels were below normal in 85% of patients and above normal in only 0.4% of cases for IgA, 0.2% for IgM and no cases for IgG. Immunoparesis had a greater impact in recent trials: median overall survival (OS) was up to 3 years longer for patients without immunoparesis compared to the old trials, less than 1 year longer. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 39%, 36% and 57% longer for patients with normal IgG, IgA and IgM levels, respectively. The depth of IgM suppression, but not the depth of IgG or IgA suppression, was prognostic for survival: the most severely suppressed IgM tertile of patients OS was 0.9 years shorter than those in the top tertile, and 2.6 years shorter than OS of those with normal IgM levels (p = .007). The degree of suppression of polyclonal IgM levels below normal was associated with worse PFS (p = .0002). Infection does not appear to be the main mechanism through which immunoparesis affects survival. We hypothesise that IgM immunoparesis impacts through a combination of being associated with more aggressive disease and reduced immune surveillance against relapse.

BackgroundEthnicity data collection has been proven to be important in health care but despite government initiatives remains incomplete and mostly un-validated in the UK. Accurate self-reported ethnicity data would enable experts to assess inequalities in health and access to services and help to ensure resources are targeted appropriately. The aim of this paper is to explore the reasons for the observed gap in ethnicity data by examining the perceptions and experiences of healthy South Asian volunteers. South Asians are the largest ethnic minority group accounting for 50% of all ethnic minorities in the UK 2001 census.MethodsFive focus groups, conducted by trained facilitators in the native language of each group, recruited 36 South Asian volunteers from local community centres and places of worship. The topic guide focused on five key areas:1) general opinions on the collection of ethnicity, 2) experiences of providing ethnicity information, 3) categories used in practice, 4) opinions of other indicators of ethnicity e.g. language, religion and culture and 5) views on how should this information be collected. The translated transcripts were analysed using a qualitative thematic approach.ResultsThe findings of this Cancer Research UK commissioned study revealed that participants felt that accurate recording of ethnicity data was important in healthcare with several stating the increased prevalence of certain diseases in minority ethnic groups as an appropriate justification to improve this data. The overwhelming majority raised no objections to providing this data when the purpose of data collection is fully explained.ConclusionsThis study confirmed that the collection of patients' ethnicity data is deemed important by potential patients but there remains uncertainty and unease as to how the data may be used. A common theme running through the focus groups was the willingness to provide these data, strongly accompanied by a desire to have more information with regard to its use.

Objectives To compare patient and tumour characteristics at presentation from two large bladder cancer cohorts, with recruitment separated by 15–20 years To identify significant differences in the West Midlands' urothelial cancer of the bladder (UCB) population during this period. Patients and Methods Data were collected prospectively from 1478 patients newly diagnosed with UCB in the West Midlands from January 1991 to June 1992 (Cohort 1), and from 1168 patients newly diagnosed with UBC within the same region from December 2005 to April 2011 (Cohort 2). Gender, age, smoking history, and tumour grade, stage, type, multiplicity and size at presentation were compared using a Pearson chi‐square test or Cochran–Armitage trend test, as appropriate. Result Cohort 2 had a higher proportion of male patients (P = 0.021), elderly patients (P < 0.001), grade 3 tumours (P < 0.001), Ta/T1 tumours (P = 0.008), multiple tumours (P < 0.001), and tumours of ≤2 cm in diameter (P < 0.001). Conclusions There were significant differences between the cohorts. These differences are potentially explained by an ageing population, changes in grading practices, improved awareness of important symptoms, improved cystoscopic technology, and reductions in treatment delays. Regional cohorts remain important for identifying changes in tumour and patient characteristics that may influence disease management in the UK and beyond.

No abstract