Citations

Importance Currently, there are no standardized outcome domains or measures in clinical trials for facial aging. Heterogeneity in outcome domains and measurement instruments across clinical trials creates difficulty in directly comparing interventions, determining superior therapies, and developing high-quality meta-analyses. Objective To develop a core outcome set (COS) of essential domains to be reported in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of interventions for facial aging. Evidence Review PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL were searched from September 2005 to September 2015. An updated search of the same databases was performed from September 2015 to February 2026. Studies were included if (1) they were randomized clinical trial or controlled clinical trial in design, (2) they assessed the efficacy or safety of an intervention for facial aging, (3) they were published in English, and (4) they involved human participants. Complementary sources, including patient interviews, were used to capture further relevant outcomes. Two rounds of Delphi surveys, followed by consensus meetings, were used to identify outcome domains considered most important by both patient and physician stakeholders. Findings The final COS consists of 6 outcome domains: (1) overall convenience of treatment; (2) time to return to normal work and social activity; (3) overall assessment of focused area of treatment (at the point in time when treatment is expected to provide peak benefit); (4) duration of treatment effect; (5) severity of persistent local or systemic adverse events, including pigmentary change, skin texture change, delayed healing, scarring, and serious adverse events; and (6) patient satisfaction with treatment. Conclusions and Relevance The 6 outcome domains identified through a Delphi consensus are recommended for reporting in future facial aging trials to ensure that outcomes that matter most to patients and clinicians are measured and that results are comparable across interventions.

Abstract Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) commonly induces transient acute (APTH) or persistent (PPTH) post-traumatic headache (PTH) that often resembles migraine. As orexin B sensitizes male but not female murine, nonhuman primate, and human dorsal root ganglion neurons and supradural orexin B/orexin receptor 2 (OX2R) signaling elicits migraine-like pain in naïve male, but not female, mice we explored possible sexually dimorphic contributions of orexin B/OX2R to PTH. In mice of both sexes, mTBI-induced transient cephalic allodynia, a surrogate measure of APTH. After APTH resolution, allodynia was reinstated by exposure to normally innocuous stress or by inhalational delivery of a subthreshold concentration of umbellulone, a TRPA1 agonist, suggesting the expression of PPTH. In contrast to these nonselective stimuli, subthreshold supradural orexin B induced PPTH only in male mTBI mice. Intranasal delivery of a CRISPR/Cas9 plasmid to edit trigeminal OX2R expression prevented APTH and development of PPTH selectively in male mTBI mice. Daily oral suvorexant, a dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA), beginning immediately after mTBI, prevented APTH as well as PPTH. Critically, starting suvorexant treatment after resolution of APTH also prevented stress- or umbellulone-induced PPTH. EEG/EMG-defined sleep architecture or immobility-defined sleep was not disrupted in this mTBI model suggesting that suvorexant benefits are unlikely related to sleep modulation. Our findings reveal a male-specific mechanism of PTH maintained by orexin B/OX2R signaling and suggest that approved DORAs may be beneficial in treating APTH and preventing transition to PPTH in men. Importantly, DORAs may also be effective in men with established PPTH.

ABSTRACT Apheresis medicine is a continually evolving field with numerous studies published each year. To help apheresis practitioners stay up to date with the current literature, members of the American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Attending Physician Subcommittee identified and summarized 10 seminal articles published in 2025, from the field of apheresis medicine. PubMed was used to identify articles published in four topics including donor apheresis, therapeutic apheresis, apheresis education, and apheresis collection for cellular therapy. These articles met at least one of the following criteria: novel findings, practice‐altering outcomes, international in scope, randomized‐controlled trial, relevant to current clinical practice, and/or provide evidence for category III or IV indications based on the ASFA 9th Special Issue of the Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice‐Evidence‐Based Approach. Full length, peer‐reviewed manuscripts in English with data from human subjects were included while case reports, review articles, and meta‐analyses were excluded.

Abstract The persistent global rise in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) challenges the effectiveness of current risk factor-based algorithms in primary prevention. Most myocardial infarctions occur in individuals without prior symptoms or recognized standard modifiable risk factors, underscoring the need to improve risk stratification. Coronary CT imaging, including coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), enables direct non-invasive visualization of coronary atherosclerosis, supporting a shift from population-based prevention towards personalized, disease-based risk assessment and targeted preventive treatment. CCTA provides comprehensive evaluation of plaque burden, composition, stenosis severity, and high-risk plaque (HRP) features, thereby refining risk stratification and guiding personalized treatment decisions. The presence and total burden of coronary atherosclerotic plaque are considered the primary CCTA-derived markers for guiding preventive therapy, while noncalcified plaque burden and HRP features may support treatment intensification. Advances in CT technology, including photon-counting CT, and the application of artificial intelligence-based tools may further refine risk assessment by enabling accurate and reproducible plaque quantification and characterization. Although no randomized trials have yet demonstrated that CCTA-based screening improves clinical outcomes in asymptomatic individuals compared with standard care, the same is true of traditional cardiovascular risk scores. Three large ongoing randomized trials are currently evaluating whether CCTA-guided, personalized prevention strategies can reduce ASCVD events. The results are eagerly awaited and may redefine the role of CCTA in asymptomatic individuals.