Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

832 citation(s) found for "Ha, Chris".

Abstract Sun705: Comparison of 5-Year Neurologically Intact Survival Between an Automated Head Up CardiopulmonaryResuscitation Registry and a National Cardiac Arrest Registry
Moore, Johanna , Bachista, Kerry, Salverda, Bayert, Wittmer, Jeff, White, Shaun, Holley, Joe , Cole, J. W., Emanuelson, Lauren, Goodloe, Jeffrey M. , Cox, Matthew, Gomes, Darrin, Siegel, Lewis, Williamson, Chris T., Holloway, Christopher, Sposeto, Tony, Carter, Mark, Hunt, Nathaniel , Poorzand, Pouria, DeVries, R., Cole, Jerome, Davis, Brian, Reynolds, James, Gomes, Darrin, Williamson, Chris, Crawford, William, Carter, Mark, Duval, Sue , Poorzand, Pouria, Debaty, Guillaume P.

Circulation | November 3, 2025 | Volume: 152 | Issue: Suppl_3 | Pages: No page available

10.1161/circ.152.suppl_3.sun705 Get It

Background: Pre-clinical animal studies have demonstrated improved cerebral blood flow and neurological survival with Automated Head Up Position (AHUP) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as compared to flat conventional (C) CPR. AHUP CPR consists of 1) automated head and thorax elevation 2) active compression decompression CPR and 3) an impedance threshold device. Subsequently, observational propensity-matched studies of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients demonstrated a time-dependent association between survival with intact neurological function (SNF) and application of AHUP CPR. However, comparison of AHUP CPR outcomes with contemporaneous C-CPR controls is lacking. Hypothesis: Use of AHUP CPR for OHCA by first responder agencies will demonstrate a higher incidence of SNF compared to C-CPR outcomes from a national registry Methods: Data from the previous 5 years (2020-2024) from an AHUP-CPR Registry comprised of OHCA patients routinely treated by first responders with AHUP CPR were compared with data from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES). Patient demographics, arrest characteristics, ROSC, SHD, and SNF were recorded. SNF was defined as a Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 at hospital discharge. A two-sample test of proportions was used for outcome comparisons. Results: Nine AHUP registry sites (MN, FL, TN, IL, OK, VA, AL, IA, MI) were included. Summary 5-year demographics (Table 1) and clinical outcomes (Table 2) are presented. For 2020-2024 AHUP sites, the average time (mm:ss, SD) from 9-1-1 call to start of CPR was 9:09 (4:37) and time to start of AHUP CPR was 12:46 (5:57). The AHUP registry had a higher 5-yr incidence of SNF versus the CARES registry (difference 2.8%, 95% CI 1.8-3.8, p < 0.00001). This difference was consistent year over year (Figure 1). Secondary outcomes of sustained return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge in the AHUP registry were also significantly higher than CARES registry data (Table 2). Conclusions: Over a 5-year period, an unadjusted analysis of aggregate data from two OHCA patient registries demonstrated that the incidence of survival with intact neurological function was higher in patients treated with AHUP CPR as part of first responder care versus patients treated with more conventional CPR methods.
Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Fasciotomy and Debridement for Chronic Plantar Fasciopathy: Six-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes from a Retrospective Case Series
Ha, Chris Thuc , Romero, J. García , Carta, Karina González , Murthy, Naveen S. , Sellon, Jacob L. , Boettcher, Brennan J. , Ha, Chris , Romero, Joshua M , Gonzalez-Carta, Karina , Murthy, Naveen S , Sellon, Jacob L

Foot & Ankle International | November 3, 2025 | Volume: 46 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1239-1247

10.1177/10711007251372136 | PMID 41178389 Get It

Background: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous fasciotomy and debridement (USPFD) is a minimally invasive treatment for patients with plantar fasciopathy refractory to conservative management. Previous studies have shown clinical improvement with USPFD, but pain relief and patient satisfaction have not been demonstrated beyond 2 years. Methods: This retrospective case series included patients who underwent USPFD at a quaternary academic medical center between April 2013 and January 2018, with refractory plantar fasciopathy and at least 4 years’ follow-up. Patient outcomes were assessed through electronic surveys and telephone interviews. Primary outcome measures included mean changes in visual analog scale pain (VAS-Pain) scores and patient satisfaction via Likert scale. Secondary measures included VAS-Pain with the first 5 steps, VAS-Pain during daily weightbearing, and procedural complications. Results: Seventy unique procedures were identified among 62 patients. Follow-up data were obtained from 51 of 62 patients (82%) who responded to surveys or phone calls. This corresponded to 58 of 70 procedures (83%) at a mean postprocedure follow-up of 6.6 ± 1.4 years. Patients had a mean duration of symptoms of 2.1 ± 3.0 years prior to the procedure. Baseline VAS-Pain was 6.8 ± 2.2 and final follow-up VAS-Pain was 0.7 ± 1.1. At the last follow-up, patient-reported VAS-Pain with first 5 steps was 0.9 ± 1.6 and VAS-Pain with weightbearing through the day was 1.3 ± 1.8. Overall, 91% (53/58) of the procedures were considered successful, where patients responded they were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” and 52 of 58 (90%) procedural responses indicated that based on the outcome, they would recommend the procedure to others. Final follow-up VAS-Pain, VAS-first 5 steps, and VAS-weightbearing, were all improved in the success vs failure groups ( P ≤ .002). No complications were reported. Conclusion: USPFD was associated with high patient satisfaction and durable pain relief for chronic plantar fasciopathy at an average follow-up of 6.6 ± 1.4 years.
Development and pilot of a tool evaluating community-engaged group processes and community-centered impact for institutional level advisory boards
Allen, Michele , Graff, Yasamin, Carlin, Caroline , Apolinário-Wilcoxon, Antonia, Baukol, Paulette, Boman, Kristin , Brewer, LaPrincess, Dwivedi, Roli , Eder, Milton , Gust, Susan, Hang, Mikow, Novillo, Walter, Ortega, Luis, Pergament, Shannon , Pulley, Chris, Shirley, Rebecca, Ly-Xiong, Sida, Baukol, Paulette, Brewer, LaPrincess, Gust, Susan, Shirley, Rebecca

Journal of Clinical and Translational Science | October 28, 2025 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1017/cts.2025.10177 | PMID 41496783 Get It

Abstract Introduction: While evaluation approaches for community-academic research groups are established, few tools exist for academic institutional advisory groups across multi-core centers and research, education, and clinical care missions. Institutional advisory group evaluation should consider group processes and their impact on community-centered outcomes. This study describes the community-engaged development of a mixed-method evaluation approach to address this gap and presents pilot outcomes across an NIH-funded center. Methods: We utilized a Community of Practice model to co-develop a survey with 14 community and academic representatives of four advisory groups. The final survey included five categories of group process and four categories of outcomes. Storytelling sessions with community partners explored areas where the survey identified discrepancies in perspectives between community and academic team members, as well as areas with lower scores. Results: Nine community and 14 academic (staff and faculty) partners completed the survey. Respondents positively assessed group process outcomes (shared values, leadership, community-centeredness, and decision-making), and slightly less positive assessments of institutional outcomes. Storytelling sessions confirmed the overall satisfaction of community partners but highlighted actionable concerns within power-sharing, decision-making, funding equity, and trust-building. Conclusions: The results of this equity-centered evaluation suggest the utility and importance of participatory, mixed-methods approaches to evaluating community-academic institutional advisory groups.
Endothelial Cell Loss 1 Year After Successful DMEK in the Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study
Lass, Jonathan H. , Lass, Jonathan H., Benetz, Beth Ann, Verdier, David D., Szczotka-Flynn, Loretta B., Bauza, Colleen E., Reed, Zachariah W., Greiner, Mark A., Mian, Shahzad I., Patel, Sanjay V., Pramanik, Sudeep, Price, Francis W., Soper, Mark C., Terry, Mark A., Titus, Michael S., Kollman, Craig, Beck, Roy W., Price, Marianne O., Group, Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study, Gang, Anjulie, Hall, Taylor, Lucas, Katelyn, Lynn, Ashlyn, Cole, Shawna, Phelps, Derek, Baratz, Keith H. , Hardtke, Elainey, Treichel, Emily J., Hood, Christopher , Nallasamy, Nambi , Verkade, Angela , Jones, Kristin, Shapiro, Jeremy N. , Leavy, Lisa, Sinkey, Chris, Tenkman, Lawrence R., Gordon, DJ, Ketcherside, Christopher, Fox, Jenni, Coonfield, Kristy, Vislisel, Jesse M., Sharma, Yogi, Young, Angela M. , Schoenberg, Evan, Kelly, Sharra, Huffman, James, Sears, Melinda, Stone, Merisa, Phillips, Paul, Maloney, Charlene, Jun, Albert S. , Maria, Christina, Boyce, Michelle, Kam, Yong, Crosser, Vicki, Chen, Jessica , Straiko, Michael D., Bauer, Alex, Croasdale, Christopher, Brown, Gayle Waldheim, Veldman, Peter B., Evans, Que, Majmudar, Parag A., Epstein, Rachel , Vaidya, Neal, Rosselson, Marie, Nykaza, Jim, Jurkunas, Ula V., Venkateswaran, Nandini, Cheung, Michael K., Ayres, Brandon D. , Haught, Drew Monteleone, Prasad, Elizabeth, Toti, G, Wier, Jim, Brandsdorfer, Ari, Pape, Denise, Hansen, Mark, Hardten, David R., Reeves, Sherman, Dreyer, Allison, Mack, Megan, Hamill, M. Bowes , Nguyen, Jessica, Koo, Ellen, Stanfield, Ryan, Greenwood, Michael, Ernst, L, Messer, Brooke, Risbrudt, Nick, Stofferahn, Seth, Saville, Alyson, Castaneda, Leslie, Torres, Nidia, Potts, Luke B. , Alexander, Jamie, Rinn, Jennifer, Bokosky, John, Cardenas, Ilina, Murphy, Doreen, Priebe, Kinsey, Sica, Chris, Buckman, Natalie, Ansin, Amy, Clover, Jameson , Pivoney, Charles, Vizzerra, Anthony, Elbanhawy, Lindsey, Mullins, Monica, Statz, Brianne, Fout, Elizabeth, Drury, Donna, Tavolazzi, Trisha, Lass, Jonathan, Lass, Jonathan, Szczotka-Flynn, Loretta, Richards, Leslie, Raghupathy, Sangeetha, Spruill, Rashad, Bauza, Colleen, Kollman, Craig, Garrett, Kaitlyn, Reed, Zachariah, Benetz, Beth Ann, Lê, Jimmy T. , Redford, Maryann , Arafah, Baha M. , Greiner, Mark, Johnson, Paula C, Keeler, D. K., Monnier, Vincent M. , Titus, Michael, Verdier, David, Soper, Mark, Velhuisen, Paul Van, Hawkins, Barbara S., Macsai, Marian S., Patel, Sanjay, Mian, Shahzad, Pramanik, Sudeep, Price, Francis, Terry, Mark, Sell, David, Gabrielson, Deanna, Barton, Glenn, Bear, Andrew, Das, Pravamaya, Dawson, Lauren, Dingess, Ryan, Madere, Mark, Sengupta, Pratim , Wadleigh, Garth, Greiner, Mark A. , Lass, Jonathan H., Benetz, Beth Ann, Verdier, David D., Szczotka-Flynn, Loretta B., Bauza, Colleen E., Reed, Zachariah W., Greiner, Mark A., Mian, Shahzad I., Patel, Sanjay V., Pramanik, Sudeep, Price, Francis W., Soper, Mark C., Terry, Mark A., Titus, Michael S., Kollman, Craig, Price, Marianne O., Group, Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study, Gang, Anjulie, Hall, Taylor, Lucas, Katelyn, Lynn, Ashlyn, Cole, Shawna, Phelps, Derek, Hood, Christopher, Sáles, Christopher S. , Sinkey, Chris, Gordon, DJ, Ketcherside, Christopher, Fox, Jenni, Young, Angela, Schoenberg, Evan, Kelly, Sharra, Huffman, James, Sears, Melinda, Stone, Merisa, Srikumaran, Divya S. , Daoud, Yassine J. , Eghrari, Allen Omid , Ali, Muhammad , Croasdale, Christopher, Brown, Gayle Waldheim, Epstein, Rachel H. , Vaidya, Neal, Jurkunas, Ula V. , Cheung, Michael, Prasad, Elizabeth, Toti, Gwen, Brandsdorfer, Ari, Pape, Denise, Hansen, Mark, Reeves, Sherman, Dreyer, Allison, Mack, Megan, Nguyen, Jessica, Greenwood, Michael, Messer, Brooke, Saville, Alyson, Omar, Ahmed F. , Castaneda, Leslie, Torres, Nidia, Rinn, Jennifer, Bokosky, John, Cardenas, Ilina, Murphy, Doreen, Priebe, Kinsey, Sica, Chris, Schmidt, Gregory A. , Lass, Jonathan, Lass, Jonathan, Price, Marianne O. , Szczotka-Flynn, Loretta, Richards, Leslie, Bauza, Colleen, Beck, Roy W. , Kollman, Craig, McCarthy, Chris, Garrett, Kaitlyn, Reed, Zachariah, Benetz, Beth Ann, Greiner, Mark, Johnson, Paula, Titus, Michael, Verdier, David, Soper, Mark, Aleppo, Grazia , Bateman-House, Alison , Tu, Elmer Yuchen , Patel, Sanjay, Mian, Shahzad, Pramanik, Sudeep, Price, Francis, Terry, Mark, Sell, David, Gabrielson, Deanna, Barton, Glenn, Bear, Andrew, Das, Pravamaya, Dingess, Ryan, Sengupta, Paromita

JAMA Ophthalmology | October 17, 2025 | Volume: 143 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1053

10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2025.4261 | PMID 41105099 Get It

Importance The effect of cornea donor diabetes on endothelial cell density (ECD) and morphometry after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is not known. Objective To determine whether endothelial cell loss (ECL) and morphometric changes 1 year after successful DMEK are related to cornea donor’s diabetes status. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 2022 to July 2024 at 28 US clinical sites (46 surgeons) and 13 eye banks. Included in the trial were the eyes of recipients (some of whom received tissue from donors without diabetes and others who received tissue from donors with diabetes) who underwent successful DMEK, primarily for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy, and had at least 1 analyzable postoperative endothelial image. Intervention DMEK performed with a cornea from a donor without or with diabetes, assigned using a minimization procedure to achieve an approximate 2:1 distribution. Main Outcomes and Measures ECD, ECL, coefficient of variation in cell area (CV), and percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX) at 1 year from eye bank and postoperative specular central endothelial images. Results A total 1274 eyes of 982 recipients (mean [SD] age, 70 [8] years; 569 female [57.9%]; 816 [64.1%] with tissue from donors without diabetes and 458 [35.9%] with tissue from donors with diabetes) were included in the study. Preoperatively, mean (SD) central ECD in tissue from donors without diabetes and with diabetes were 2676 (290) cells/mm 2 and 2671 (286) cells/mm 2 , respectively. At 1 year, mean (SD) ECL was 28.3% (16.1%) and 28.0% (17.0%), in the donor groups without and with diabetes, respectively (adjusted mean difference = −0.4%; 95% CI, −2.3% to 1.4%), resulting in a mean (SD) 1-year ECD of 1927 (498) cells/mm 2 and 1920 (496) cells/mm 2 , respectively (adjusted mean difference = 10 cells/mm 2 ; 95% CI, −36 to 56; P = .95). No difference in ECD at 1 year associated with diabetes severity was noted ( P = .97). Mean (SD) CV did not differ at 1 year between the 2 groups of eyes (31.5% [4.1%] vs 31.4% [4.1%]; adjusted mean difference = −0.4%; 95% CI, −0.9% to 0.1%; P = .51), and mean (SD) HEX did not differ at 1 year between the 2 groups of eyes (57.7% [5.8%] vs 57.2% [5.8%]; adjusted mean difference = 0.1%, 95% CI, −0.8% to 0.9%; P = .33). Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found that ECL and morphometry 1 year after DMEK were not affected by cornea donor diabetes status. With comparable 1-year graft success with tissue from donors with and without diabetes demonstrated in this trial, these findings support the use of corneas from donors with diabetes for endothelial keratoplasty procedures. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05134480
Donor Diabetes and 1-Year Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Success Rate
Price, Francis W. , Szczotka‐Flynn, Loretta , Bauza, Colleen , Reed, Zachariah W., Arafah, Baha M. , Greiner, Mark A. , Johnson, Paula, Keeler, Devon B., Pramanik, Sudeep, Soper, Mark, Terry, Mark A., Titus, Michael S. , Verdier, David D. , Kollman, Craig, Lass, Jonathan H. , Lass, Jonathan H., Group, Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study, Gang, Anjulie, Hall, Taylor, Lynn, A. G., Cole, Shawna, Phelps, Derek, Baratz, Keith H. , Hardtke, Elainey, Treichel, Emily J., Hood, Christopher , Nallasamy, Nambi , Verkade, Angela , Jones, Kristin, Shapiro, Jeremy, Leavy, Lisa, Sinkey, Chris, Tenkman, Lawrence R., Gordon, DJ, Ketcherside, Christopher, Fox, Jenni, Coonfield, Kristy, Vislisel, Jesse M., Sharma, Yogi, Young, Angela M. , Schoenberg, Evan, Kelly, Sharra, Huffman, James L. , Sears, Melinda, Stone, Merisa, Phillips, Paul, Maloney, Charlene, Jun, Albert S. , Maria, Christina, Boyce, Michelle, Kam, Yong, Crosser, Vicki, Chen, Jessica , Straiko, Michael D., Bauer, Alex, Croasdale, Christopher, Brown, Gayle Waldheim, Veldman, Peter B., Evans, Que, Majmudar, Parag A., Epstein, Rachel , Vaidya, N. N., Nykaza, Jim, Venkateswaran, Nandini, Ayres, Brandon D. , Haught, Drew Monteleone, Prasad, Elizabeth, Toti, Gwen, Wier, Jim, Brandsdorfer, Ari, Pape, Denise, Hansen, Mark D., Hardten, David R., Reeves, Sherman W., Dreyer, Allison, Mack, Megan, Hamill, Mark, Nguyen, Jessica , Stanfield, Ryan, Greenwood, Michael , Ernst, Lindsay, Risbrudt, Nick, Saville, Alyson, Castaneda, Leslie, Torres, Nidia, Potts, Luke B. , Alexander, Jamie, Rinn, Jennifer, Bokosky, John, Cardenas, Ilina, Murphy, Doreen, Priebe, Kinsey, Sica, Chris, Buckman, Natalie, Ansin, Amy, Clover, Jameson , Pivoney, Charles, Vizzerra, Anthony, Elbanhawy, Lindsey, Mullins, Monica, Statz, Brianne, Fout, Elizabeth, Drury, Donna, Tavolazzi, Trisha, Lass, Jonathan, Lass, Jonathan, Richards, Leslie, Raghupathy, Sangeetha, Spruill, Rashad, Bauza, Colleen, Beck, Roy, Garrett, Kaitlyn, Reed, Zachariah, Benetz, Beth Ann , Lê, Jimmy T. , Redford, Maryann , Arafah, Baha, Greiner, Mark, Keeler, Devon, Monnier, Vincent M. , Titus, Michael, Verdier, David, Velhuisen, Paul Van, Hawkins, Barbara S., Macsai, Marian S., Patel, Sanjay, Mian, Shahzad I. , Pramanik, Sudeep , Price, Francis, Terry, Mark, Sell, David, Gabrielson, Deanna, Barton, Glenn, Bear, Andrew, Das, Pravamaya, Dawson, Lauren, Dingess, Ryan, Madere, Mark, Wadleigh, Garth, Price, Marianne O. , Mian, Shahzad I. , Patel, Sanjay V. , Pramanik, Sudeep, Titus, Michael S., Beck, Roy W. , Lass, Jonathan H., Group, Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study, Lynn, Ashlyn, Cole, Shawna, Phelps, Derek, Hardtke, Elainey, Hood, Christopher, Shapiro, Jeremy, Sáles, Christopher S. , Leavy, Lisa, Gordon, DJ, Fox, Jenni, Coonfield, Kristy, Young, Angela, Schoenberg, Evan, Kelly, Sharra, Huffman, James, Sears, Melinda, Stone, Merisa, Srikumaran, Divya S. , Daoud, Yassine J. , Eghrari, Allen Omid , Ali, Muhammad , Crosser, Vicki, Croasdale, Christopher, Brown, Gayle Waldheim, Evans, Que, Epstein, Rachel H. , Nykaza, Jim, Jurkunas, Ula V. , Cheung, Michael, Wier, Jim, Brandsdorfer, Ari, Pape, Denise, Mack, Megan, Hamill, M. Bowes, Nguyen, Jessica, Koo, Ellen H. , Stanfield, Ryan, Risbrudt, Nick, Saville, Alyson, Omar, Ahmed F. , Castaneda, Leslie, Torres, Nidia, Bokosky, John, Cardenas, Ilina, Murphy, Doreen, Priebe, Kinsey, Schmidt, Gregory A. , Elbanhawy, Lindsey, Statz, Brianne, Tavolazzi, Trisha, Lass, Jonathan, Lass, Jonathan, Richards, Leslie, Spruill, Rashad, Bauza, Colleen, Beck, Roy, McCarthy, Chris, Reed, Zachariah, Arafah, Baha, Greiner, Mark, Titus, Michael, Verdier, David, Velhuisen, Paul Van, Aleppo, Grazia , Bateman-House, Alison , Tu, Elmer Yuchen , Patel, Sanjay, Price, Francis, Terry, Mark, Sell, David, Barton, Glenn, Das, Pravamaya, Dingess, Ryan, Madere, Mark, Sengupta, Partha Pratim , Wadleigh, Garth

JAMA Ophthalmology | October 17, 2025 | Volume: 143 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1043

10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2025.4253 | PMID 41105094 Get It

Importance If the success of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is not affected by whether the donor has diabetes, then the donor pool should expand. Objective To determine whether the 1-year DMEK success rate is affected by the presence of diabetes in the donor. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial conducted from February 2022 to July 2025 at 28 clinical sites (46 surgeons), with donor corneas provided by 13 eye banks in the US. Included in the study were individuals undergoing low to moderate risk DMEK (95% for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy). Study data were analyzed from April to September 2025. Intervention DMEK performed with a cornea from a donor without or with diabetes, assigned using a minimization procedure (comparable with randomization) to achieve an approximate 2:1 distribution, respectively. Main Outcomes and Measures Graft success at 1 year Results A total of 1097 individuals (1421 study eyes; median [IQR] age, 71 [66-76] years; 631 female [57.5%]) were included in the study. The 1-year cumulative probability of graft success was 96.3% (95% CI, 95.0%-97.5%) among 912 study eyes (64.2%) receiving tissue from donors without diabetes and 97.1% (95% CI, 95.5%-98.4%) among 509 study eyes (35.8%) receiving tissue from donors with diabetes (difference between groups = 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, −1.2 to 2.6; P = .63). The 1-year cumulative probability of graft success was 96.5% (95% CI, 93.6%-98.9%) in the mild donor diabetes severity subgroup (n = 173) and 97.3% (95% CI, 95.4%-98.8%) in the moderate to severe donor diabetes severity subgroup (n = 336), using a diabetes severity rating scale based on medical history. The rates of primary donor failure, early failure related to surgical complications, and subsequent failure were as follows: 2.5% (23 of 912), 0.7% (6 of 912), and 0.3% (3 of 912), respectively, in recipients of tissue from a donor without diabetes, and 2.6% (13 of 509), 0.4% (2 of 509), and 0%, respectively, among recipients of tissue from a donor with diabetes. There were no failures due to graft rejection. Conclusions and Relevance The 1-year success rate in eyes undergoing DMEK with successfully prepared tissue was very high regardless of donor diabetes status. These results, supported by the separately reported finding that endothelial cell loss and cornea morphometry after 1 year were not affected by donor diabetes status, provide strong support for having no restrictions on the use of tissue from donors with diabetes for DMEK. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05134480
Differences in clinical trial and FDA approval datasets: implications for clinical and policy decision-making for noninvasive colorectal cancer screening tests
Doubeni, Chyke A. , Estes, Chris , Fendrick, A. Mark , Kisiel, John B. , Limburg, Paul J.

Current Medical Research and Opinion | October 16, 2025 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1691-1696

10.1080/03007995.2025.2576161 | PMID 41098090 Get It

Accelerating eSource scale-up in oncology clinical trials: The i~HD Task Force initiative
Kalra, Dipak, Acito, Tracy, Ammour, Nadir, Basset, Paul, Castleyn, Peter, Caldow, Ross, Couvert, Camille, Cramer, Amy, Harrison, Chris, Holtzem, Joeri, Mariappan, P., Jacobs, Paul, Fransson, Lars, Berthou, Véronique, Jackson, Laurice, Wetzel, Nancy, Thompson, C. C. , Klein, Sharon , Kaoukdji, Fakhry, Ward, Michael, Lengfellner, Joe, Patruno, Anna, Snow, Dawn, Virchow, Isabel , Fritsche, Angela, Coorevits, Pascal , Sundgren, Mats , Sundgren, Mats , Maes, Christophe, Kalra, Dipak, Ammour, Nadir, Burge, Sarah , Caldow, Ross, Couvert, Camille, Cramer, Amy, Mariappan, Pavitra, Jacobs, Paul, Wetzel, Nancy, Thompson, Christopher, Klein, Sharon, Green, Robert, Kaoukdji, Fakhry, Ward, Michael, Nensa, Felix , Lengfellner, Joe, Patruno, Anna, Snow, Dawn, Fritsche, Angela

Cambridge Prisms: Precision Medicine | October 14, 2025 | Volume: 3 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1017/pcm.2025.10004 | PMID 41306345 Get It

Abstract eSource – particularly EHR-to-EDC – is an emerging paradigm in clinical research that enables automated transfer of electronic health record (EHR) data into electronic data capture (EDC) systems, with the potential to reduce site burden, improve data quality and accelerate oncology clinical trial workflows. However, widespread implementation remains limited due to technical, regulatory and operational barriers. To address these challenges, the European Institute for Innovation through Health Data (i~HD) launched the eSource Scale-Up Task Force in 2024. This multi-stakeholder initiative brings together leading oncology centres and pharmaceutical sponsors to establish a consensus-driven roadmap for eSource adoption. Central to this effort are three foundational resources: readiness criteria for early adopters, a performance indicator framework for monitoring success and an operational playbook to guide implementation. This article provides a structured overview of the Task Force’s objectives, collaborative model and outputs, with specific attention to its focus on interoperability, regulatory alignment and real-world validation. While initially developed for oncology, the Task Force’s framework is applicable across therapeutic areas characterized by data-intensive workflows.
Participant Retention in a Prospective Multicenter Cohort of Participants With Pancreatitis and Factors Associated With Attrition
Choate, Radmila , Xu, Jun , Easler, Jeffrey J. , Phillips, Anna E. , Fisher, William E., Fogel, Evan L. , Forsmark, Chris E. , Hart, Phil A. , Park, Walter G. , Vege, Santhi Swaroop, Conwell, Darwin L. , Yadav, Dhiraj, Choate, Radmila , Xu, Jun , Han, Samuel , Phillips, Anna E., Bellin, Melena D. , Pandol, Stephen J. , Serrano, Jose, Van Den Eeden, Stephen K , Vege, Santhi Swaroop , Li, Liang , Conwell, Darwin L. , Yadav, Dhiraj

Pancreas | October 13, 2025 | Volume: 55 | Issue: 2 | Pages: e162-e172

10.1097/mpa.0000000000002550 | PMID 41081560 Get It

Objectives: Participant retention is essential in prospective studies to minimize bias and maintain validity. This study aimed to estimate retention rates and identify factors influencing attrition in a multicenter cohort (PROCEED) of US adults with acute/recurrent acute pancreatitis (AP/RAP) and chronic pancreatitis (CP). Methods: Participants from the PROCEED study with AP/RAP or CP eligible for follow-up within the designated visit window were included. Retention was defined as completing at least one follow-up visit during the observation period. Retention was analyzed by follow-up mode (in-person and/or medical record review) and disease type (AP/RAP and CP). Retention factors were assessed using univariate analyses (Wilcoxon rank-sum for continuous variables, χ 2 /Fisher's exact for categorical) and multivariable logistic regression. Missing data were adjusted using multiple imputations in statistical modeling. Results: Among 1279 participants (AP/RAP: n=632, median age 47, 48.9% female; CP: n=647, median age 54, 46.5% female), we observed high cumulative and annualized retention rates, with improved retention when incorporating medical record reviews. In multivariable regression analyses, older age was statistically significantly associated with in-person retention in the AP/RAP group ( P =0.0001), while a higher self-reported physical health (assessed with PROMIS Global Health Physical Health T-score) was a key predictor of retention in CP ( P =0.034). Conclusions: Integrating medical records review substantially enhanced retention rates, enabling robust analyses of pancreatitis outcomes and disease progression. Older age and better self-reported physical health were key predictors of retention, highlighting the need for targeted strategies to enhance engagement among younger participants and those with poorer health in long-term studies.
Evaluating dosimetric parameters with a plastic scintillator for megavoltage photon beam quality assurance
Penoncello, Gregory P. , Dunkerley, David A. P. , Mahl, Adam, Miften, Moyed, Altunbas, Cem , Wang, C‐K Chris, Robertson, Daniel , Penoncello, Gregory , Dunkerley, David A P , Altunbas, Cem , Robertson, Daniel G, Jones, Bernard L.

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics | October 11, 2025 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 10 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/acm2.70276 | PMID 41074225 Get It

Abstract Introduction Linear accelerators require a large amount of data to be collected daily, monthly and annually to verify safe deliveries for patients. Different detectors have been utilized to improve the simplicity, efficiency and accuracy of the various experimental setups required to collect the necessary data resulting in reduced data collection and evaluation time. Plastic scintillators are stable and energy independent radiation detectors with high spatial resolution that emit light proportional to the amount of radiation incident on them. With an appropriate photodetector and technique to measure and analyze the light that is emitted, scintillators can be utilized to measure dosimetric parameters necessary for various monthly quality assurance requirements. Methods A uniform cylindrical plastic scintillator imaged by a complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) camera is designed to act as a radiation detector to measure 2D projections of linear accelerator beams. Beams were delivered to the detector to evaluate machine quality assurance (QA) parameters, including beam energy, output, profile consistency and reproducibility as described by TG‐198. These measurements were compared to calculations from the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS). Typical monthly quality assurance (QA) beams were delivered and 2D projections of the scintillation light were measured to validate the accuracy and reproducibility of this detector system for monthly QA. Results The plastic scintillator was able to accurately characterize the radiation beam. Energy and profile measurements were reproducible and within 2%/2mm of calculations in the TPS. Output measurements had maximum variations of up to 1.3% and average differences of 0.5%. Conclusion A simple cylindrical plastic scintillator and CMOS camera radiation detector setup was designed and tested for measuring monthly QA dosimetric parameters specified by TG‐198 with accurate and reproducible output, energy and profiles measurements. This method reduces the number of measurements required, allowing multiple parameters to be evaluated in a single beam delivery.
Exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and connective tissue disease-related interstitial lung disease outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Duangkham, Samapon, Nugent, Kenneth , Ussavarungsi, Kamonpun , Mekraksakit, Poemlarp , Prasitlumkum, Narut , Kewcharoen, Jakrin , Childs, Chris

Future Rare Diseases | October 10, 2025 | Volume: 5 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1080/23995270.2025.2571386 Get It