Citations

Abstract Introduction Combat casualty care requires standardized proficiency criteria to ensure readiness in austere environments, yet gaps persist in defining performance thresholds for critical trauma skills. The Combat Medical Skills Sustainment Consortium (CMSSC), a novel military-civilian collaboration, aimed to validate competency thresholds for 21 Department of Defense-identified trauma skills. Materials and Methods A prospective cohort study (2022-2025) enrolled 1,495 military and civilian personnel across five academic centers, stratified by experience (novice, intermediate, expert). Skills, including cricothyroidotomy, whole blood transfusion, and ultrasound-guided vascular access, were assessed using validated checklists in Role 2-congruent simulations. Statistical analysis compared checklist performance against participant experience with a priori checklist scores estimated at 40% (novices) and 90% (experts). Results Competency thresholds were established, ranging from 77% (mechanical ventilation) to 100% (handoff). Experts achieved 85%-98% proficiency across most skills, with novices at 34%-97%. A ceiling effect was observed for less complex skills consistent with the power law of practice. Conclusion The Combat Medical Skills Sustainment Consortium validated standardized assessment tools, with potential to address readiness gaps through military-civilian synergy. Findings support consortium-guided curriculum development and highlight the need for longitudinal skill decay studies. Impact This study sets a benchmark for trauma care skills assessment, facilitating rapid adoption across military and civilian settings.

PURPOSE The continuous development of new imaging approaches, molecular phenotyping, genetic subtypes, prognosis assessments, and effective therapies across a range of disease states has created a need to redefine terminology and best practices for clinical trial conduct in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Methods We convened an international expert committee of diverse working groups, the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4 (PCWG4), between 2016 and 2025. Our objective was to formulate updated criteria based on emerging evidence and clinical trial data in a biomarker context to provide guidance for clinical trial design, eligibility, and end point assessments for patients with advanced prostate cancer. RESULTS PCWG4 redefines terminology around the disease state and previous therapies in a patient-centric context and terminology focused on androgen pathway modulation. We consider imaging, with a particular focus on positron emission tomography (PET)–defined disease. New recommendations are provided for disease state terminology, defining eligibility criteria, response and delay/prevent end points, intervals for reassessments including imaging, and patient-reported outcome determination. We provide recommendations in a biomarker-based context of use for the intended indication, reflective of patient benefit for specific interventions. We emphasize the need for development of validated PET imaging and molecular and phenotypic criteria as well as trial designs to appropriately risk stratify patients, predict and assess benefit, and measure post-treatment outcomes reliably in a trial framework. CONCLUSION PCWG4 updates recommendations on patient and tumor characterization, therapy development, and imaging criteria and extends guidance into earlier androgen pathway modulator–naïve/sensitive disease states to reflect an evolving, heterogeneous, and diverse patient population to optimize treatment benefits for all patients.