Citations

18585 Background: The Quality of life (QOL) and psychosocial needs of the 30–40% of prostate cancer patients who experience biochemical recurrence are not known. The impact of having a rising PSA, anticipation of undergoing PSA testing, and living with prostate cancer may increase psychological distress and decrease QOL. Aim: to evaluate the psychosocial treatment needs of men with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer (br-PCa) and to develop a treatment to address these needs. Methods: 28 men with br-PCa, 58–87 years, were enrolled. A qualitative research approach was used, consisting of six, 2 hour, semi-structured, focus groups containing 4–6 men per group. Data were content coded and grouped into categories following the structure of the focus group guide. The major conceptual themes were then summarized by 2 independent reviewers. Discrepancies were discussed with a third researcher until a consensus was reached. These results were used to guide development of a multi-disciplinary quality of life intervention. Results: Participants defined QOL as the ability to stay active both physically and mentally without limitation in the performance of usual activities. There was a consensus that prostate cancer led to substantial anxiety related to PSA testing, treatment side effects, and fear of recurrence. Participants were enthusiastic about receiving adjuvant multidisciplinary treatment for prostate cancer focusing on anxiety management, nutrition, exercise, management of treatment side effects, and medical education. Participants desired a male group leader and feedback was mixed regarding whether spouses should be involved. Conclusions: Men with br-PCa report experiencing substantial anxiety and were enthusiastic about receiving a structured intervention to these needs. Based on our findings an intervention has been developed and is currently being compared to usual care. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones are a systematic assessment framework for medical trainees within the six core competencies of practice. Their use by internal medicine subspecialties, including semiannual reports to the ACGME, was mandated beginning in 2014. The Milestones, which were based on specific, observable behaviors, improved upon the prior subjective, global comparisons of each fellow with an “average” fellow in his or her field and served the goals of competency-based medical education. However, the original set of Milestones has proven challenging to apply and interpret. Part of the challenge stems from the use of identical Milestones across all medicine subspecialties, which led to unclear relevance of the patient care and medical knowledge domains to the practice of pulmonary and critical care. This also precluded their use for individualized feedback or development of a learning plan for fellows. In addition, verbose behavioral descriptors, which were designed to provide specificity, ultimately led to rater fatigue among assessors and clinical competency committees. Therefore, the ACGME convened committees for each of the medical subspecialties to revise the original Milestones in an effort to improve subspecialty relevance, minimize educational jargon, and simplify the current iteration. New patient care and medical knowledge Milestones were created to be subspecialty specific and improve utility. The remaining four Milestones were developed as a common set of shorter Milestones, harmonized across specialties. For pulmonary, critical care, and combined fellowship programs, the resulting Milestones 2.0 aims to simplify the use, implementation, and interpretation of this framework for program directors, trainees, and society.

Background: Question prompt lists (QPLs) are structured sets of disease-specific questions intended for patient use, encouraging patients to ask questions to facilitate their consultation with their physician. Aim: The aim of this study was to develop a QPL specific to adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), created by esophageal experts. Methods: The QPL content (78 questions) was derived through a modified Delphi method consisting of 2 rounds. In round 1, 18 esophageal experts provided 5 answers to the prompt “What you wish your patients would ask” and “What questions do patients often not ask, that I wish they would ask?” In round 2, the experts rated each question on a 5-point Likert scale, and responses rated as “essential” or “important,” determined by an a priori threshold of ≥4.0, were accepted for the QPL. Results: Twelve esophageal experts participated. Of 143 questions from round 1, 110 (76.9%) were accepted for inclusion in the QPL, meeting a median value of ≥4.0, and, subsequently, it reduced to 78, minimizing redundancy. Median values ranged between 4.0 and 5.0, with the highest agreement median (5.0) for questions asking dosing and timing of proton pump inhibitor therapy, and surveillance in Barrett’s. Questions were categorized into the following categories: “What does this illness mean,” “lifestyle modifications,” “general treatment,” “treatment with proton pump inhibitors,” “What I should expect for my future,” and “Barrett’s.” The largest number of questions covered lifestyle modifications (21.8%), with the highest agreement median (5.0) for “How helpful are lifestyle modifications in GERD?” Conclusions: A preliminary GERD-specific QPL, the first of its kind, was developed by esophageal experts. Modification after more patient consultation and feedback is planned in subsequent versions to create a GERD-QPL for eventual use in clinical gastroenterology.

Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is frequently observed with hypertension treatment, but its contribution to adverse outcomes is unknown. The SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) was a randomized trial of adults, age ≥50 years at high risk for cardiovascular disease with a seated systolic blood pressure (BP) of 130 to 180 mm Hg and a standing systolic BP ≥110 mm Hg. Participants were randomized to a systolic BP treatment goal of either <120 or <140 mm Hg. OH was defined as a drop in systolic BP ≥20 or diastolic BP ≥10 mm Hg 1 minute after standing from a seated position. We used Cox models to examine the association of OH with cardiovascular disease or adverse study events by randomized BP goal. During the follow-up period (median 3years), there were 1170 (5.7%) instances of OH among those assigned a standard BP goal and 1057 (5.0%) among those assigned the intensive BP goal. OH was not associated with higher risk of cardiovascular disease events (primary outcome: hazard ratio 1.06 [95% CI, 0.78–1.44]). Moreover, OH was not associated with syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, injurious falls, or acute renal failure. OH was associated with hypotension-related hospitalizations or emergency department visits (hazard ratio, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.11–2.82]) and bradycardia (hazard ratio, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.19–3.15]), but these associations did not differ by BP treatment goal. OH was not associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease events, and BP treatment goal had no effect on OH’s association with hypotension and bradycardia. Symptomless OH during hypertension treatment should not be viewed as a reason to down-titrate therapy even in the setting of a lower BP goal. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

AbstractBackgroundSeveral registry-based analyses suggested a survival advantage for married versus single patients with pancreatic cancer. The mechanisms underlying the association of marital status and survival are likely multiple and complex and, therefore, may be obscured in analyses generated from large population-based databases. The goal of this research was to characterize this potential association of marital status with outcomes in patients with resected pancreatic cancer who underwent combined modality adjuvant therapy on a prospective clinical trial.Materials and MethodsThis is an ancillary analysis of 367 patients with known marital status treated on NRG Oncology/RTOG 97-04. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.ResultsOf 367 patients, 271 (74%) were married or partnered and 96 (26%) were single. Married or partnered patients were more likely to be male. There was no association between marital status and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) on univariate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09 and 1.01, respectively) or multivariate analyses (HR, 1.05 and 0.98, respectively). Married or partnered male patients did not have improved survival compared with female or single patients.ConclusionAncillary analysis of data from NRG Oncology/RTOG 97-04 demonstrated no association between marital and/or partner status and OS or DFS in patients with resected pancreatic cancer who received adjuvant postoperative chemotherapy followed by concurrent external beam radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Clinical trial identification number. NCT00003216.

Abstract T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia (T-PLL) is a rare disease with an aggressive clinical course and a median overall survival of less than three years. Although almost 75% of T-PLL patients are reported to harbor translocations causing the activation of the proto-oncogene TCL1A, T-PLL is genetically heterogenous: most T-PLL patients also have mutations or deletions in the ATM gene and the genes involved in the JAK-STAT pathway are mutated in 76% of cases. There is an urgent need for more rational based therapies, but clinical trials are difficult to perform due to the rareness of the disease. Here, we systematically explored the diversity of drug responses in T-PLL patient samples ex vivo using a drug sensitivity and resistance testing (DSRT) system including 306 oncology drugs (approved or investigational). We also aimed to determine any associations between the genetic aberrations and drug sensitivities in T-PLL patients. Primary mononuclear cells were gathered from 30 T-PLL patients for drug testing. Cells were plated in 384-well plates and subjected to the 306 substances using a 10,000-fold concentration range. After 72 hours, cell viabilities were measured, the results were depicted as dose-response curves for each compound, and differential drug sensitivity scores (sDSS), representing leukemia-specific responses, were computed by comparing patient samples to healthy donors. Drug response profiles across patients were clustered and visualized by hierarchical clustering. The subgroups resulting from the clustering were statistically compared using a two-sample t-test to understand which drug classes were driving the grouping. To delineate heterogeneous pathway dependencies, drug sensitivities were correlated with somatic genetic variants and recurrent chromosomal aberrations. Genetic characterization was performed by targeted amplicon sequencing of tumor cells to profile known recurrent genetic variants (STAT5b, IL2RG, JAK1, JAK3, ATM). Information on chromosomal aberrations (TCL1A translocations, ATM deletions) was derived from parallel clinicopathologic databases. Amplicon sequencing revealed that 70% of T-PLL patients (21/30) harbored a mutation in genes involved in the JAK-STAT pathway (JAK1, JAK3, STAT5b or IL2RG). The most prevalent mutation led to an M511I amino acid exchange in the JAK3 protein (26% of patients). Interestingly, the STAT5b mutations (5/30) did not coexist with any of the JAK mutations in our cohort. Based on DSRT analysis, all T-PLL samples were sensitive to the CDK-inhibitor SNS-032 and the anti-cancer antibiotic actinomycin D. Next, we clustered patients using sDSS values for all 306 different substances, and this showed that patient samples could be divided into 3 main groups, based on their drug responses (Figure). According to two-sample t-test, the grouping was driven by the selective sensitivities of Groups II and III to HDAC inhibitors (belinostat, panobinostat, quisinostat, CUDC-101 and vorinostat) and the selective sensitivity of Group III to PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors (AZD-8055, MK-2206, apitolisib, dactolisib, PF-04691502, ZSTK474, and omipalisib), HSP90 inhibitors (BIIB021, luminespib, alvespimycin, and tanespimycin) as well as JAK inhibitors (ruxolitinib, momelotinib, tofacitinib, gandotinib). Group I samples were on the other hand relatively resistant to these classes of drugs. Surprisingly, despite the prevalence of the signature event of activation of TCL1 (the established AKT coactivator) in nearly all cases, only a subset of cases (group III) responded to PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors. Strikingly, the grouping of selective responses to HDAC, JAK, PI3K/mTOR/Akt and HSP90 inhibitors did not link to the presence of JAK/STAT mutations, TCL1A translocations, or ATM deletion status. Ex vivo drug screening of primary T-PLL samples revealed heterogenous selective drug responses in specific drug classes (such as HDAC-, JAK-, HSP90- and PI3K/Akt/mTOR-inhibitors). Surprisingly, the drug response patterns did not correlate with known recurrent genetic aberrations suggesting that sequencing for recurrent genetic biomarkers cannot easily be turned into effective therapeutic strategies in T-PLL, and that further elucidation of the biological pathways driving T-PLL is needed. Figure 1. Mutation status and clustering of HDAC-, PI3K/mTOR/Akt-, HSP90-, and JAK-inhibitor responses in PLL patients based on sDSS values Figure 1. Mutation status and clustering of HDAC-, PI3K/mTOR/Akt-, HSP90-, and JAK-inhibitor responses in PLL patients based on sDSS values Disclosures Koschmieder: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences, Research Funding; Novartis Foundation: Research Funding; Baxalta/CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences ; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences. Wennerberg:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ding:Merek: Research Funding. Mustjoki:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Objectives To improve the trustworthiness of evidence, studies should be prospectively registered and research reports should adhere to existing standards. We aimed to systematically assess the degree to which endocrinology and internal medicine journals endorse study registration and reporting standards for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs) and observational studies (ObS). Additionally, we evaluated characteristics that predict endorsement of reporting or registration mechanism by these journals. Design Meta-epidemiological study. Setting Journals included in the ‘Endocrinology and Metabolism’ and ‘General and Internal Medicine’ 2017 Journal Citation Reports. Participants Journals with an impact factor of ≥1.0, focused on clinical medicine, and those who publish RCTs, SRs and ObS were included. Primary outcomes Requirement of adherence to reporting guideline and study registration as determined from the journals’ author instructions. Results Of the 170 (82 endocrinology and 88 internal medicine) eligible journals, endorsing of reporting standards was the highest for RCTs, with 35 (43%) of endocrine journals and 55 (63%) of internal medicine journals followed by SRs, with 21 (26%) and 48 (55%), respectively, and lastly, by ObS with 41 (50%) of endocrine journals and 21 (24%) of internal medicine journals. In 78 (46%) journals RCTs were required to be registered and published in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. Only 11 (6%) journals required registration of SRs. Internal medicine journals were more likely to endorse reporting guidelines than endocrine journals except for Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. No other journal characteristic proved to be an independent predictor of reporting standard endorsement for RCTs besides trial registration. Conclusion Our results highlight that study registration requirement and reporting guideline endorsement are suboptimal in internal medicine and endocrine journals. This malpractice may be further enhanced since endorsement does not imply enforcement, impairing the practice of evidence-based medicine.

Purpose Despite increasing emphasis in medical school education on quality and systems improvement, many medical schools lack sufficient faculty with expertise to teach systems improvement. Using the pedagogical content knowledge framework, this study explores how faculty engage students in systems improvement work and faculty perceptions of the outcomes for the health system and students. Method In May–June 2017, the authors interviewed 12 of 13 invited faculty with experience in teaching and engaging first-year medical students in systems improvement work, the course of students’ systems improvement work over time, the impact of students’ projects on health systems, and students’ learning and attitudes about systems improvement. The authors conducted qualitative analysis iteratively with data collection to sufficiency. Results Six emergent themes characterized faculty’s approach to guiding students in systems improvement work: faculty–student relationship, faculty role, student role, faculty–student shared responsibility for projects, faculty and student content knowledge, and project outcomes. The faculty–student relationship was foundational for successful systems improvement work. Faculty roles included project selection, project management, and health systems interactions. Students engaged in systems improvement as their faculty leveraged their knowledge and skills and created meaningful student roles. Faculty and students shared responsibility and colearned systems improvement content knowledge. Faculty defined successful outcomes as students’ learning about the systems improvement process and interprofessional collaboration. Conclusions Findings highlight the critical importance of pedagogical content knowledge to engage early learners in systems improvement work, understand their learning interests and needs, and manage their projects longitudinally.