Citations

Abstract Background In 2021, the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation established the Multi‐Disciplinary Post‐Acute Sequelae of SARS‐CoV‐2 Infection Collaborative to provide guidance from established Long COVID clinics for the evaluation and management of Long COVID. The collaborative previously published eight Long COVID consensus guidance statements using a primarily symptom‐based approach. However, Long COVID symptoms most often do not occur in isolation. Aims This compendium aims to equip clinicians with an efficient, up‐to‐date clinical resource for evaluating and managing adults experiencing Long COVID symptoms. The primary intended audience includes physiatrists, primary care physicians, and other clinicians who provide first‐line assessment and management of Long COVID symptoms, especially in settings where subspecialty care is not readily available. This compendium provides a holistic framework for assessment and management, symptom‐specific considerations, and updates on prevalence, health equity, disability considerations, pathophysiology, and emerging evidence regarding treatments under investigation. Because Long COVID closely resembles other infection‐associated chronic conditions (IACCs) such as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, the guidance in this compendium may also be helpful for clinicians managing these related conditions. Methods Guidance in this compendium was developed by the collaborative's established modified Delphi approach. The collaborative is a multidisciplinary group whose members include physiatrists, primary care physicians, pulmonologists, cardiologists, psychiatrists, neuropsychologists, neurologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech and language pathologists, patients, and government representatives. Over 40 Long COVID centers are represented in the collaborative. Results Long COVID is defined by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as “an IACC that occurs after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and is present for at least 3 months as a continuous, relapsing and remitting, or progressive disease state that affects one or more organ systems.” The current global prevalence of Long COVID is estimated to be 6%. Higher prevalence has been identified among female gender, certain racial and ethnic groups, and individuals who live in nonurban areas. However, anyone can develop Long COVID after being infected with the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus. Long COVID can present as a wide variety of symptom clusters. The most common symptoms include exaggerated fatigue and diminished energy windows, postexertional malaise (PEM)/postexertional symptom exacerbation (PESE), cognitive impairment (brain fog), dysautonomia, pain/myalgias, and smell and taste alterations. Holistic assessment should include a traditional history, physical examination, and additional diagnostic testing, as indicated. A positive COVID‐19 test during acute SARS‐CoV‐2 infection is not required to diagnose Long COVID, and currently, there is no single laboratory finding that is definitively diagnostic for confirming or ruling out the diagnosis of Long COVID. A basic laboratory assessment is recommended for all patients with possible Long COVID, and consideration for additional labs and diagnostic procedures is guided by the patient's specific symptoms. Current management strategies focus on symptom‐based supportive care. Critical considerations include energy conservation strategies and addressing comorbidities and modifiable risk factors. Additionally, (1) it is essential to validate the patient's experience and provide reassurance that their symptoms are being taken seriously because many patients have had their symptoms dismissed by loved ones and clinicians; (2) physical activity recommendations must be carefully tailored to the patient's current activity tolerance because overly intense activity can trigger PEM/PESE and worsened muscle damage; and (3) treatment recommendations should be delivered with humility because there are many persistent unknowns related to Long COVID. To date, there are limited data to guide medication management specifically in the context of Long COVID. As such, medication use generally follows standard practice regarding indications and dosing, with extra attention to prioritize (1) patient preference via shared decision‐making and (2) cautious use of medications that may improve some symptoms (eg, cognitive/attention impairment) but may worsen other symptoms (eg, PEM/PESE). Numerous clinical trials are investigating additional treatments. The return‐to‐work process for individuals with Long COVID can be challenging because symptoms can fluctuate, vary in nature, affect multiple functional areas (eg, physical and cognitive), and often manifest as an “invisible disability” that may not be readily acknowledged by employers or coworkers. Clinicians can help patients return to work by identifying suitable workplace accommodations and resources, providing necessary documentation, and recommending occupational or vocational therapy when needed. If these efforts are unsuccessful and work significantly worsens Long COVID symptoms or impedes recovery, applying for disability may be warranted. Long COVID is recognized as a potential disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Conclusion To contribute to the overall health and well‐being for all patients, Long COVID care should be delivered in a holistic manner that acknowledges challenges faced by the patient and uncertainties in the field. For more detailed information on assessment and management of specific Long COVID symptoms, readers can reference the collaborative's symptom‐specific consensus guidance statements.

PURPOSE Survival for patients with melanoma has recently improved. The propensity of melanoma to metastasize to the brain remains a common and serious feature of this disease. The purposes of this study were to evaluate prognostic factors for patients with newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) in a large cohort treated with modern multimodal therapies, compare those results with those in prior eras, and update the Melanoma Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). METHODS Univariable and multivariable (MVA) analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival were performed on 1,796 patients with newly diagnosed MBM treated between January 01, 2015, and December 31, 2021, using a multi-institutional retrospective database. Multiple imputation was used to address missingness of potential predictors. Significant variables in combined MVA were used to update the Melanoma GPA. Comparisons were made with legacy cohorts. RESULTS Median survivals for cohorts A (1985-2007, n = 481), B (2006-2015, n = 823), and C (2015-2021, n = 1,796) were 6.7, 9.8, and 16.6 months and median follow-up times were 40.1, 43.6, and 48.8 months, respectively. In combined MVA, significant prognostic factors for survival were higher Karnofsky Performance Status, fewer MBMs, absence of extracranial metastases, lower serum lactate dehydrogenase, and no immunotherapy before MBM. These factors were incorporated into the updated Melanoma GPA. The combined median and 3-year survivals for patients with GPA 0-1, 1.5-2, and 2.5-4.0 were 5.4, 13.2, and 43.2 months and 12.4%, 28.8%, and 51.6%, respectively. CONCLUSION Prognostic factors have changed and survival has improved for patients with MBM but varies widely by GPA. The updated Melanoma GPA calculator (BrainMetGPA), available free online, can be used to estimate survival, individualize treatment, stratify clinical trials, guide surveillance, and augment clinical trial eligibility. Multidisciplinary treatment is essential. Trials are needed to elucidate the optimal sequencing of various therapeutic modalities.

Background: Despite the availability of effective vaccines and a recent decrease in annual deaths, coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) remains a leading cause of death. Serological studies of anti-nucleocapsid (N) antibody response to infection provide insights into host immunobiology of adaptive immune response, which holds promise for identifying high-risk individuals for adverse acute and chronic COVID-19 outcomes. Hypothesis: Among participants previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, traditional vascular disease risk factors are associated with higher anti-N antibodies while vaccination is associated with lower anti-N antibodies. Methods: Among previously infected participants, anti-N antibodies were measured from dried blood spots collected between February 2021-February 2023 among 1,419 Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R) participants with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. We measured anti-N IgG antibodies reported as median fluorescence intensity (MFI) units; reactivity (i.e., seropositivity) was defined based on MFI above a validated threshold. Vascular disease risk factors were assessed via pre-pandemic in-person examination, questionnaires, and medical record review. Multivariable generalized linear models regressed anti-N reactivity (modified Poisson) or LN transformed MFI (linear). Results: Among 1,419 participants with prior infection, mean age (standard deviation) was 65.8(12.1) years, 61% were women, and 42.8% were self-reported from a race/ethnicity minority group. Participant reactivity to nucleocapsid peaked at 69% by 4 months post-infection and waned to only 44% ≥12 months after infection. After multivariable adjustment, higher anti-N antibody response was associated with older age, Hispanic (vs. White) or American Indian (vs. White) race/ethnicity, lower income and education, former smoking, and higher anti-spike antibody levels. Asian race (vs. White) and vaccination ( even after infection ) were associated with lower nucleocapsid reactivity; common cardiometabolic co-morbidities were not associated with anti-N reactivity or levels (Figures 1 and 2). Conclusions: Among participants previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, select sociodemographic and behavioral risk factors were associated with higher anti-N antibody levels while vaccination was associated with lower anti-N antibody levels. The observation that vaccination, even after infection, is related to lower anti-N antibody levels merits further investigation.

Abstract Purpose Data regarding the incidence, onset, and management of complex outpatient antimicrobial therapy–induced neutropenia (COIN) are limited, and pharmacist involvement in COIN management has not been reported. This report describes the incidence, onset, and management of COIN at a large academic medical center. Methods This multisite retrospective cohort study examined adult patients undergoing serum laboratory monitoring for antimicrobials over a 4-year period. Patients receiving chemotherapy or immunosuppressants were excluded. Data collected included the antimicrobial regimen, complete blood count, duration of antimicrobial therapy until outcome occurrence, infectious syndrome, type of intervention, outcome, and pharmacist involvement. Logistic regression was used to assess risk factors for COIN incidence. The primary outcome was the incidence of COIN by antimicrobial drug. Results From 4,261 treatment episodes, 161 cases of COIN were identified (3.8% COIN incidence). The most common antimicrobials associated with COIN were intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, and meropenem. The majority of COIN events were attributed to a combination of at least 2 antimicrobials. Piperacillin/tazobactam was significantly associated with higher odds of developing COIN (odds ratio [OR], 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-3.34; P = 0.038), whereas ertapenem was associated with significantly lower odds of COIN (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77; P = 0.005). The median time to neutropenia diagnosis was 22 days (interquartile range, 14-29 days) from the time of inpatient antimicrobial start. Intervention for COIN occurred in 66.5% of cases, with neutrophil count recovering in 96.9% of these patients. Clinical pharmacists initiated 74.8% of interventions. Conclusion COIN can be effectively identified and managed by a multidisciplinary team reviewing routine laboratory monitoring, enabling most patients to safely complete antimicrobial treatment.

ABSTRACTBackgroundPrimary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma (pcALCL) and lymphomatoid papulosis (LyP) are indolent CD30‐positive lymphoproliferative disorders that rarely express TCR‐γδ. However, primary cutaneous gamma‐delta T‐cell lymphoma (pcGDTCL), characterized by TCR‐γδ expression on neoplastic cells, is a rare, aggressive cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma with a poor prognosis. Accurate differentiation is essential due to distinct clinical behavior and treatment.MethodsWe identified 11 TCR‐γδ‐positive pcALCL cases from internal and consultation files, verified by two cutaneous lymphoma experts, with clinicopathologic data recorded.ResultsThe median age was 68 years (range 38–95). Most cases presented as a single dermal lesion on the upper extremities. All were ALK‐negative, CD30‐positive (> 90% tumor cells), TCR‐βF1‐negative, and diffusely TCR‐γδ‐positive. CD4−/CD8− (54.5%) and CD4+/CD8− (45.5%) immunophenotypes were observed. CD2 (63.6%) and CD3 (54.5%) were the most common T‐cell antigens. Ulceration, inflammation (both 45.5%), and necrosis (36.4%) were frequent. Angiotropism, angiocentricity, and myxoid stroma appeared in one case; epidermotropism in two. Four of ten tested were DUSP22‐rearranged, and TP63 was negative in all eight tested.ConclusionsMost ALK‐negative TCR‐γδ‐positive pcALCL were CD4−/CD8−, followed by CD4+/CD8−. DUSP22 rearrangement occurred in 40% of cases, similar to reports in typical pcALCL. Its prognosis and the role of DUSP22 are yet to be clarified.

Marfan Syndrome (MFS) is often associated with progressive aortic root dilation, ultimately leading to aortic aneurysm and dissection. While recent work showed increased transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) signaling contributes to aneurysm formation in aorta, efficacious therapeutic targets remain elusive. Consistent with prior reports of progeroid phenotypes in a subset of Marfan patients we previously demonstrated increased cellular senescence in a MFS mouse model. Here, we sought to determine whether administration of senolytic drugs reduces cellular senescent markers, TGF-β signaling, and aortic root dilation in aged MFS mice by assessing aortic root dimensions by echocardiography and gene expression levels by quantitative real time PCR at 15 months of age following treatment with vehicle (VEH) or the senolytic compound Fisetin for one month. As expected, aortic sinus dimensions were increased dramatically in fibrillin-1 mutant mice compared to wild-type controls and were associated with increased expression of TGF-β1, the senescence marker CDKN2A, the matrix remodeling enzyme MMP2, and the osteogenic and proliferative gene RUNX2. Consistent with previous data from our group, Fisetin treatment dramatically reduced CDKN2A expression in marfanoid mice compared to VEH, which was associated with reductions in TGF-β1, MMP2, and RUNX2. Phenotypically, we observed modest reductions in aortic sinus dimensions compared to VEH, but no substantive change in ascending aortic dilatation. Collectively, these data suggest that senescent cells are significant contributors to molecular changes occurring in MFS and clearance of senescent cells with Fisetin slows the progression aortic root-dilation in fibrillin-1 mutant mice.

Supplemental O 2 (hyperoxia) in premature infants detrimentally affects bronchial airways leading to increased senescence. Understanding the mechanisms by which hyperoxia initiates senescence in developing airways is critical for future therapeutic strategies. The current study showed that hyperoxia-induced senescence is mediated through increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen species and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. ER stress inhibitors or mitochondria-targeted antioxidants may represent future therapies to blunt detrimental effects of supplemental oxygen in developing lungs.