Innovative tools are urgently needed to accelerate the evaluation and subsequent approval of novel treatments that may slow, halt, or reverse the relentless progression of Parkinson disease (PD). Therapies that intervene early in the disease continuum are a priority for the many candidates in the drug development pipeline. There is a paucity of sensitive and objective, yet clinically interpretable, measures that can capture meaningful aspects of the disease. This poses a major challenge for the development of new therapies and is compounded by the considerable heterogeneity in clinical manifestations across patients and the fluctuating nature of many signs and symptoms of PD. Digital health technologies (DHT), such as smartphone applications, wearable sensors, and digital diaries, have the potential to address many of these gaps by enabling the objective, remote, and frequent measurement of PD signs and symptoms in natural living environments. The current climate of the COVID-19 pandemic creates a heightened sense of urgency for effective implementation of such strategies. In order for these technologies to be adopted in drug development studies, a regulatory-aligned consensus on best practices in implementing appropriate technologies, including the collection, processing, and interpretation of digital sensor data, is required. A growing number of collaborative initiatives are being launched to identify effective ways to advance the use of DHT in PD clinical trials. The Critical Path for Parkinson’s Consortium of the Critical Path Institute is highlighted as a case example where stakeholders collectively engaged regulatory agencies on the effective use of DHT in PD clinical trials. Global regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, are encouraging the efficiencies of data-driven engagements through multistakeholder consortia. To this end, we review how the advancement of DHT can be most effectively achieved by aligning knowledge, expertise, and data sharing in ways that maximize efficiencies.

Innovative tools are urgently needed to accelerate the evaluation and subsequent approval of novel treatments that may slow, halt, or reverse the relentless progression of Parkinson disease (PD). Therapies that intervene early in the disease continuum are a priority for the many candidates in the drug development pipeline. There is a paucity of sensitive and objective, yet clinically interpretable, measures that can capture meaningful aspects of the disease. This poses a major challenge for the development of new therapies and is compounded by the considerable heterogeneity in clinical manifestations across patients and the fluctuating nature of many signs and symptoms of PD. Digital health technologies (DHT), such as smartphone applications, wearable sensors, and digital diaries, have the potential to address many of these gaps by enabling the objective, remote, and frequent measurement of PD signs and symptoms in natural living environments. The current climate of the COVID-19 pandemic creates a heightened sense of urgency for effective implementation of such strategies. In order for these technologies to be adopted in drug development studies, a regulatory-aligned consensus on best practices in implementing appropriate technologies, including the collection, processing, and interpretation of digital sensor data, is required. A growing number of collaborative initiatives are being launched to identify effective ways to advance the use of DHT in PD clinical trials. The Critical Path for Parkinson’s Consortium of the Critical Path Institute is highlighted as a case example where stakeholders collectively engaged regulatory agencies on the effective use of DHT in PD clinical trials. Global regulatory agencies, including the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, are encouraging the efficiencies of data-driven engagements through multistakeholder consortia. To this end, we review how the advancement of DHT can be most effectively achieved by aligning knowledge, expertise, and data sharing in ways that maximize efficiencies.

Background: Local anaesthetic thoracoscopy (LAT) is an important procedure in the management pathway of patients with pleural effusions, particularly those with suspected malignancy. The last survey evaluating the use and development of LAT services in the UK was conducted over a decade ago. Objectives: We performed a survey of LAT practices in the UK to explore procedural preferences and variations in practice. Methods: The online survey was cascaded via regional pleural specialists to sites performing LAT. One response per site was accepted. Results: Thirty-seven responses were received from England, Scotland and Wales. Most centres have regular access to a dedicated list and a designated area to perform LAT. 97% of the centres have at least 2 trained thoracoscopists. Some variation in practice is seen with patient preparation pre-procedure and medication use. Other procedures, such as insertion of indwelling pleural catheters and adhesiolysis, are not uncommon to be undertaken at the time of LAT. Conclusions: Overall, the results are comparable, excepting some minor variations in patient preparation pre-procedure. We hope that this survey functions as an information resource for centres developing a LAT service or for those considering expansion.

Background: Local anaesthetic thoracoscopy (LAT) is an important procedure in the management pathway of patients with pleural effusions, particularly those with suspected malignancy. The last survey evaluating the use and development of LAT services in the UK was conducted over a decade ago. Objectives: We performed a survey of LAT practices in the UK to explore procedural preferences and variations in practice. Methods: The online survey was cascaded via regional pleural specialists to sites performing LAT. One response per site was accepted. Results: Thirty-seven responses were received from England, Scotland and Wales. Most centres have regular access to a dedicated list and a designated area to perform LAT. 97% of the centres have at least 2 trained thoracoscopists. Some variation in practice is seen with patient preparation pre-procedure and medication use. Other procedures, such as insertion of indwelling pleural catheters and adhesiolysis, are not uncommon to be undertaken at the time of LAT. Conclusions: Overall, the results are comparable, excepting some minor variations in patient preparation pre-procedure. We hope that this survey functions as an information resource for centres developing a LAT service or for those considering expansion.

Background: Haematological malignancy is an important cause of pleural effusion. Pleural effusions secondary to haematological malignancy are usually lymphocyte predominant. However, several other conditions such as carcinoma, tuberculosis, and chronic heart failure also cause lymphocytic effusions. Lymphocyte subset (LS) analysis may be a useful test to identify haematological malignancy in patients with lymphocytic effusions. However, research into their utility in pleural effusion diagnostic algorithms has not yet been published. Objectives: We aimed to determine the clinical utility of pleural fluid LS analysis and whether it can be applied to a diagnostic algorithm to identify effusions secondary to haematological malignancy. The secondary aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of pleural fluid differential cell count. Methods: Consecutive consenting patients presenting to our pleural service between 2008 and 2013 underwent thoracentesis and differential cell count analysis. We proposed an algorithm which selected patients with lymphocytic effusions (>50%) to have further fluid sent for LS analysis. Two independent consultants agreed on the cause of the original effusion after a 12-month follow-up period. Results: A total of 60 patients had samples sent for LS analysis. LS analysis had an 80% sensitivity (8/10) and a 100% specificity for the diagnosis of haematological malignancy. The positive and negative predictive values were 100 and 96.1%, respectively. Overall 344 differential cell counts were analysed; 16% of pleural effusions with a malignant aetiology were neutrophilic or eosinophilic at presentation. A higher neutrophil and eosinophil count was associated with benign diagnoses, whereas a higher lymphocyte count was associated with malignant diagnoses. Conclusions: LS analysis may identify haematological malignancy in a specific cohort of patients with undiagnosed pleural effusions. A pleural fluid differential cell count provides useful additional information to streamline patient pathway decisions.

Background: Haematological malignancy is an important cause of pleural effusion. Pleural effusions secondary to haematological malignancy are usually lymphocyte predominant. However, several other conditions such as carcinoma, tuberculosis, and chronic heart failure also cause lymphocytic effusions. Lymphocyte subset (LS) analysis may be a useful test to identify haematological malignancy in patients with lymphocytic effusions. However, research into their utility in pleural effusion diagnostic algorithms has not yet been published. Objectives: We aimed to determine the clinical utility of pleural fluid LS analysis and whether it can be applied to a diagnostic algorithm to identify effusions secondary to haematological malignancy. The secondary aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of pleural fluid differential cell count. Methods: Consecutive consenting patients presenting to our pleural service between 2008 and 2013 underwent thoracentesis and differential cell count analysis. We proposed an algorithm which selected patients with lymphocytic effusions (>50%) to have further fluid sent for LS analysis. Two independent consultants agreed on the cause of the original effusion after a 12-month follow-up period. Results: A total of 60 patients had samples sent for LS analysis. LS analysis had an 80% sensitivity (8/10) and a 100% specificity for the diagnosis of haematological malignancy. The positive and negative predictive values were 100 and 96.1%, respectively. Overall 344 differential cell counts were analysed; 16% of pleural effusions with a malignant aetiology were neutrophilic or eosinophilic at presentation. A higher neutrophil and eosinophil count was associated with benign diagnoses, whereas a higher lymphocyte count was associated with malignant diagnoses. Conclusions: LS analysis may identify haematological malignancy in a specific cohort of patients with undiagnosed pleural effusions. A pleural fluid differential cell count provides useful additional information to streamline patient pathway decisions.