Citations

Background: Limited studies have detailed the risk of mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction among women who previously received mantle field radiation. Methods: A single institution retrospective review from 2010 to 2020 of patients previously treated with mantle field radiation (MF-RT) and subsequent mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction was performed. Patients with prior whole breast irradiation (WBI) were also included as a reference group. Demographic, comorbidity, and surgical factors were collected. The primary outcome was major complications, defined as those requiring reoperation, intravenous antibiotics, or debridement. Results: Fourteen patients with prior MF-RT (27 breasts) and 129 with prior WBI (132 breasts) underwent mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Prior MF-RT patients were significantly younger (43.8 versus 57.5, P < 0.001) and had significantly lower body mass index (23.6 versus 26.8, P = 0.004) compared with prior WBI patients. Nipple-sparing mastectomy was significantly more common in the mantle than in the WBI patients (78.6% versus 35.9%, P = 0.03). Most (13, 92.9%) prior mantle patients underwent tissue expander/implant-based reconstruction. Three (21.4%) prior MF-RT patients had major complications at any point, but none required an alternative type of reconstruction. On multiple variable analysis, there was no significant difference in major complication risk among prior MF-RT versus WBI patients (HR 0.74, confidence interval 0.20–2.70, P = 0.74). Conclusion: Immediate tissue expander/implant-based reconstruction in prior MF-RT patients seems safe, with a complication risk similar to that of prior WBI patients.

ObjectivesMetabolic dysfunction‐associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most prevalent liver disorder in Western countries, with approximately 20%–30% of the MASLD patients progressing to severe stages. There is an urgent need for noninvasive, cost‐effective, widely accessible, and precise biomarkers to evaluate liver steatosis. This study aims to assess and compare the diagnostic performance of a novel reference frequency method‐based ultrasound attenuation coefficient estimation (ACE) in both fundamental (RFM‐ACE‐FI) and harmonic (RFM‐ACE‐HI) imaging for detecting and grading liver steatosis.MethodsAn Institutional Review Board‐approved prospective study was carried out between December 2018 and October 2022. A total number of 130 subjects were enrolled in the study. The correlation between RFM‐ACE‐HI values and magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI‐PDFF), as well as between RFM‐ACE‐FI values and MRI‐PDFF were calculated. The diagnostic performance of RFM‐ACE‐FI and RFM‐ACE‐HI was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, as compared to MRI‐PDFF. The reproducibility of RFM‐ACE‐HI was assessed by interobserver agreement between two sonographers.ResultsA strong correlation was observed between RFM‐ACE‐HI and MRI‐PDFF, with R = 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83–0.92; P < .001), while the correlation between RFM‐ACE‐FI and MRI‐PDFF was R = 0.65 (95% CI: 0.50–0.76; P < .001). The area under the ROC (AUROC) curve for RFM‐ACE‐HI in staging liver steatosis grades of S ≥ 1 and S ≥ 2 was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.91–0.99; P < .001) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93–1.00; P < .001), respectively, and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.65–0.85) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70–0.88) for RFM‐ACE‐FI, respectively. Great reproducibility was achieved for RFM‐ACE‐HI, with an interobserver agreement of R = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94–0.99; P < .001).ConclusionsThe novel RFM‐ACE‐HI method offered high liver steatosis diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility, which has important clinical implications for early disease intervention and treatment evaluation.

ABSTRACTIntroductionLung transplantation has become increasingly utilized in patients with COVID‐19. While several single‐center and UNOS database studies have been published on lung transplants (LTs) for end‐stage lung disease (ESLD) from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), there is a lack of multi‐center and international data.MethodsThis is a multicenter analysis from 11 high‐volume lung transplant centers in the United States and Europe. Data were collected through the Multi‐Institutional ECLS Registry and stratified by ESLD due to COVID‐19 versus other etiologies. Demographics and clinical variables were compared using Chi‐square test and Fisher's exact test. Survival was assessed by Kaplan‐Meier curves and compared by log‐rank test with propensity score matching.ResultsOf 1606 lung transplant recipients, 46 (2.9%) were transplanted for ESLD from COVID‐19 compared to 1560 (97.1%) without a history of COVID‐19. Among COVID‐19 patients, 30 (65.2%) had COVID‐19‐associated ARDS and 16 (34.8%) had post‐COVID‐19 fibrosis. COVID‐19 patients had higher lung allocation scores (78.0 vs. 44.4, p < 0.0001), had severely limited functional status (37.0% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.0001), had higher preoperative ECMO usage (65.2% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.0001), and spent less time on the waitlist (32 vs. 137 days, p < 0.0001). A 30‐day survival was comparable between COVID‐19 and non‐COVID‐19 patients before (100% vs. 98.7%, p = 0.39) and after propensity matching (p = 0.15).ConclusionsPatients who received LTs due to COVID‐19 had short‐term survival comparable to that of patients without COVID‐19. Our findings support the idea that lung transplantation should be considered for select patients with ESLD due to COVID‐19.

Abstract Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic impacted many higher education institutions. Understanding the personal protective beliefs and behaviors surrounding public health measures such as facemasking, social distancing, and handwashing helps to inform public health outreach measures. Objective This study evaluates the beliefs and occurrences of facemasking, social distancing, and handwashing behaviors among people at a multi-campus, public university in Pennsylvania. Methods From October 5 - November 30, 2021, a 10-minute REDCap survey was available to students, faculty, and staff 18 years of age and older at the Pennsylvania State University (PSU). Recruitment included targeted email, social media, digital advertisements, and university newspapers. 4,231 responses were received. Simple percentage associations between the selected factors and facemasking behaviors as well as beliefs on the origin of the COVID-19 virus were made with IBM SPSS Statistics, version 29.0.2.0 (20). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed using R statistical software to identify factors associated with facemasking, social distancing, and handwashing behaviors. Results Of 3,662 completed surveys, 65.2% of respondents were positive that facemasks prevented the transmission of airborne disease, 49.9% of the respondents stated that they wore facemasks always (27.9%), almost always (26.9%), or often (11.1%). 65.3% believed social distancing prevented transmission of COVID-19, 57.5% reported social distancing while on-campus or out in public (always: 18.8%, almost always: 20.3%, often: 18.4%). The response rate for some level of conscientiously washing hands for the 20 second duration was 87.5% (always: 26.0%, almost always: 31.9%, sometimes: 19.9%, only after being out in public: 4.9%, and only when convenient: 4.8%). Belief in effectiveness of personal protective measures was the strongest predictor of masking and social distancing behaviors. Faculty were more likely than students to report consistent masking, while other behaviors lacked this role-based significance. Social distancing was strongly associated with age and political views, and handwashing was strongly associated with gender. Conclusions Beliefs in public health and safety measures during the COVID-19 pandemic did not always match the behaviors of individuals surveyed. Understanding barriers to performing behaviors or public health safety may help inform future areas for targeted intervention. Adherence to personal protective behaviors varied across age, gender, institutional role, and political leaning, further emphasizing the importance of targeted public health education.

AbstractThe tauopathies are defined by pathological tau protein aggregates within a spectrum of clinically heterogeneous neurodegenerative diseases. The primary tauopathies meet the definition of rare diseases in the United States. There is no approved treatment for primary tauopathies. In this context, designing the most efficient development programs to translate promising targets and treatments from preclinical studies to early‐phase clinical trials is vital. In September 2022, the Rainwater Charitable Foundation convened an international expert workshop focused on the translation of tauopathy therapeutics through early‐phase trials. Our report on the workshop recommends a framework for principled drug development and a companion lexicon to facilitate communication focusing on reproducibility and achieving common elements. Topics include the selection of targets, drugs, biomarkers, participants, and study designs. The maturation of pharmacodynamic biomarkers to demonstrate target engagement and surrogate disease biomarkers is a crucial unmet need.Highlights Experts provided a framework to translate therapeutics (discovery to clinical trials). Experts focused on the “5 Rights” (target, drug, biomarker, participants, trial). Current research on frontotemporal degeneration, progressive supranuclear palsy, and corticobasal syndrome therapeutics includes 32 trials (37% on biologics) Tau therapeutics are being tested in Alzheimer's disease; primary tauopathies have a large unmet need.

LAPONITE®-based drug delivery systems for the delivery of drugs and biomolecules with high biological potentiation and synergy.