Plain English summaryWith the growing movement to engage patients in research, questions are being asked about who is engaging patients and how they are being engaged. Internationally, research groups are supporting and funding patient-oriented research studies that engage patients in the identification of research priorities and the design, conduct and uptake of research. As we move forward, we need to know what meaningful patient engagement looks like, how it benefits research and clinical practice, and what are the barriers to patient engagement?We conducted a review of the published literature looking for trials that report engaging patients in the research. We included both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative trials. We looked at these trials for important study characteristics, including how patients were engaged, to better understand the practices used in trials. Importantly, we also discuss the number of trials reporting patient engagement practices relative to all published trials. We found that very few trials report any patient engagement activities even though it is widely supported by many major funding organizations. The findings of our work will advance patient-oriented research by showing how patients can be engaged and by stressing that patient engagement practices need to be better reported.AbstractBackgroundPatient-Oriented Research (POR) is research informed by patients and is centred on what is of importance to them. A fundamental component of POR is that patients are included as an integral part of the research process from conception to dissemination and implementation, and by extension, across the research continuum from basic research to pragmatic trials [J Comp Eff Res 2012, 1:181–94, JAMA 2012, 307:1587–8]. Since POR’s inception, questions have been raised as to how best to achieve this goal.We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative trials that report engaging patients in their research. Our main goal was to describe the characteristics of published trials engaging patients in research, and to identify the extent of patient engagement activities reported in these trials.MethodsThe MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Cinahl, PsycINFO, Cochrane Methodology Registry, and Pubmed were searched from May 2011 to June 16th, 2016. Title, abstract and full text screening of all reports were conducted independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted from included trials by one reviewer and verified by a second. All trials that report patient engagement for the purposes of research were included.ResultsOf the 9490 citations retrieved, 2777 were reviewed at full text, of which 23 trials were included. Out of the 23 trials, 17 were randomized control trials, and six were non-randomized comparative trials. The majority of these trials (83%, 19/23) originated in the United States and United Kingdom. The trials engaged a range of 2-24 patients/ community representatives per study. Engagement of children and minorities occurred in 13% (3/23)...

Background. Many cancer patients receive supplemental ascorbate (vitamin C) in the belief that it synergizes the anticancer effects of chemotherapy and reduces its toxicity. Methods. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the antitumor effects and toxicity of ascorbate treatment. Medline (1946 to March 2014), EMBASE (1947 to March 2014), and the Cochrane central register (1993 to March 2014) were searched for randomized and observational studies. Results. Of 696 identified records, 61 full‐text articles were screened and 34 were included. In total, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 322), 12 phase I/II trials (n = 287), 6 observational studies (n = 7,599), and 11 case reports (n = 267) were identified. Because of study heterogeneity, no meta‐analyses were performed. No RCTs reported any statistically significant improvements in overall or progression‐free survival or reduced toxicity with ascorbate relative to control arm. Evidence for ascorbate's antitumor effects was limited to case reports and observational and uncontrolled studies. Conclusion. There is no high‐quality evidence to suggest that ascorbate supplementation in cancer patients either enhances the antitumor effects of chemotherapy or reduces its toxicity. Given the high financial and time costs to patients of this treatment, high‐quality placebo‐controlled trials are needed.

No abstract

This review supports the evidence linking perioperative blood transfusions to negative outcomes. The most convincing association was with post-operative complications, some association with long-term cancer outcomes, and no convincing association with mortality. These findings support the initiation, and further study, of restrictive transfusion protocols.