Citations

AbstractObjectiveWhereas studies in adult epilepsy patients have shown higher rates of suicidal ideation and attempt, such studies in children are limited. Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project database, we compared the risk of self‐injurious behavior and suicidal ideation in a population‐based cohort of childhood epilepsy to controls.MethodsWe studied 339 cases with epilepsy and 678 age‐ and sex‐matched controls followed to a median age of 24.7 and 23.4 years, and identified 98 subjects with self‐injurious behavior or suicidal ideation (43 with epilepsy and 55 controls). All behaviors were categorized using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale.ResultsThose with epilepsy had a significantly higher rate of any self‐injurious behavior and suicidal ideation (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04‐2.35) and tended to have an increased risk of suicidal ideation and attempt (HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 0.93‐2.37). The prevalence of preceding mood and substance abuse disorders was similarly high in both cases and controls with self‐injurious behavior or suicidal ideation; however, preceding attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder was more than twice as common in the epilepsy cases. Among cases with epilepsy, we did not identify any specific epilepsy‐related variable that was significantly correlated with risk of self‐injurious behavior or suicidal ideation.SignificanceChildren, teens, and young adults with a history of childhood epilepsy are at greater risk of self‐injurious behavior, highlighting the need for careful screening of mental health concerns as part of routine epilepsy care.

Objective: To evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on global access to care and practice patterns for children with epilepsy. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of pediatric neurologists across the world affiliated with the International Child Neurology Association, the Chinese Child Neurology Society, the Child Neurology Society, and the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium. Results were analyzed in relation to regional burden of COVID-19 disease. Results: From April 10 to 24, 2020, a sample of 212 respondents from 49 countries indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed many aspects of pediatric epilepsy care, with 91.5% reporting changes to outpatient care, 90.6% with reduced access to electroencephalography (EEG), 37.4% with altered management of infantile spasms, 92.3% with restrictions in ketogenic diet initiation, 93.4% with closed or severely limited epilepsy monitoring units, and 91.3% with canceled or limited epilepsy surgery. Telehealth use had increased, with 24.7% seeing patients exclusively via telehealth. Changes in practice were related both to COVID-19 burden and location. Conclusions: In response to COVID-19, pediatric epilepsy programs have implemented crisis standards of care that include increased telemedicine, decreased EEG use, changes in treatments of infantile spasms, and cessation of epilepsy surgery. The long-term impact of these abrupt changes merit careful study.

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurologic disorders seen in children, with the highest incidence in the first year of life. Diagnostic accuracy can be challenging because many seizure mimics must be considered. Electroencephalography and neuroimaging can be critical in determining etiology and syndrome. Genetic testing is a high-yield endeavor, particularly in early-life epilepsies. Up to one-fourth of children with epilepsy will develop drug-resistant seizures. Comorbidities are very common in children with epilepsy, including intellectual disability in 25% and learning disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in a significant minority. These comorbidities must be recognized and addressed as part of the child’s overall care.

Background Cardioversion is common among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We hypothesised that novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) used in clinical practice resulted in similar rates of stroke compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for cardioversion. Methods Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II, patients with AF who had a cardioversion, follow-up data and an AF diagnosis within 6 months of enrolment were identified retrospectively. Clinical outcomes were compared for patients receiving a NOAC or VKA for 1 year following cardioversion. Results Among 13 004 patients with AF, 2260 (17%) underwent cardioversion. 1613 met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. At the time of cardioversion, 283 (17.5%) were receiving a VKA and 1330 (82.5%) a NOAC. A transoesophageal echocardiogram (TOE) was performed in 403 (25%) cardioversions. The incidence of stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) at 30 days was the same for patients having (3.04 per 100 patient-years) or not having (3.04 per 100 patient-years) a TOE (p=0.99). There were no differences in the incidence of death (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.28, p=0.61), cardiovascular hospitalisation (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.35, p=0.91), stroke/TIA (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.30 to 4.74, p=0.81) or bleeding-related hospitalisation (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.52, p=0.45) at 1 year for patients treated with either a NOAC or VKA. Conclusions Cardioversion was a low-risk procedure for patients treated with NOAC, and there were statistically similar rates of stroke/TIA 30 days after cardioversion as for patients treated with VKA. There were no statically significant differences in death, stroke/TIA or major bleeding at 1 year among patients treated with NOAC compared with VKA after cardioversion.

Objectives Several studies suggest the sensitivity of chest computed tomography (CT) is far greater than that of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in diagnosing COVID-19 patients, and therefore, CT should be included as a primary diagnostic tool. This systematic review aims to stratify studies as high or low risk of bias to determine the true sensitivity of CT for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection according to the unbiased (low risk) studies, a topic of particular importance given the insufficient quantity of RT-PCR kits in many countries. We focus on sensitivity as that is the chief advantage perceived of CT. Materials and Methods This systematic review involved searching the PubMed and Google Scholar databases for articles conducted and published between January 1 and April 15, 2020. The quality assessment tool QUADAS-2 was used to stratify studies according to their risk of bias, and exclusion criteria included not providing the information deemed relevant for such a stratification, such as not indicating if the patients were symptomatic or asymptomatic, or identifying the source of the specimen for the reference standard, RT-PCR (eg, nasal, oropharyngeal, etc). Sensitivity values were then extracted, and random effects meta-analyses were performed. Results Of 641 search results, 37 studies (n = 9610 patients) were included in the analysis. The mean sensitivity of RT-PCR for COVID-19 reported by the biased studies was 70% (n = 5409/7 studies; 95% confidence interval [CI], 43–97; I 2 = 99.1%), compared with 78% by unbiased studies (n = 534/4 studies; 95% CI, 69–87, I 2 = 89.9%). For chest CT, the mean sensitivity reported by biased studies was 94% (n = 3371 patients/24 studies; 95% CI, 92–96; I 2 = 93.1%), compared with 75% by unbiased studies (n = 957/10 studies; 95% CI, 67–83; I 2 = 89.5%). Conclusions The difference between the sensitivities of CT and RT-PCR for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection is lower than previously thought, as after stratifying the studies, the true sensitivity for CT based on the unbiased studies is limited.

5061 Background: The phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006) in treatment-naive patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56, 0.84; P < 0.001) and higher objective response rate (ORR; 51.4% vs 25.7%) with avelumab + axitinib vs sunitinib (Motzer RJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1103-15). NLR has emerged as a potential prognostic biomarker in aRCC; elevated NLR is associated with poorer prognosis. Here, we describe the association of NLR with the efficacy of avelumab + axitinib from JAVELIN Renal 101. Methods: We examined baseline NLR and its association with efficacy outcomes. PFS, best overall response (per blinded independent central review using RECIST 1.1), and overall survival (OS) data from the avelumab + axitinib arm from the first interim analysis of JAVELIN Renal 101 were analyzed (data cutoff, June 20, 2018). Multivariate Cox regression analyses of PFS and OS were also conducted. Results: In the avelumab + axitinib arm, patients with < median NLR (N = 217) had longer observed PFS (stratified HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.634, 1.153) and longer observed OS (stratified HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.300, 0.871) than patients with ≥ median NLR (N = 217). The ORR was 57.1% in patients with < median NLR vs 47.5% in patients with ≥ median NLR, with complete response in 5.5% vs 1.4%. Multivariate analysis showed that low NLR was associated with longer PFS and OS by treating baseline NLR as either a continuous variable or a binary variable (dichotomized by median). Conclusions: Low NLR was associated with better observed treatment outcomes in patients with aRCC who received avelumab + axitinib. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 .

In the past year, there have been numerous advances in our understanding of arrhythmia mechanisms, diagnosis, and new therapies. We have seen advances in basic cardiac electrophysiology with data suggesting that secretoneurin may be a biomarker for patients at risk of ventricular arrhythmias, and we have learned of the potential role of an NPR-C (natriuretic peptide receptor-C) in atrial fibrosis and the role of an atrial specific 2-pore potassium channel TASK-1 as a therapeutic target for atrial fibrillation. We have seen studies demonstrating the role of sensory neurons in sleep apnea–related atrial fibrillation and the association between bariatric surgery and atrial fibrillation ablation outcomes. Artificial intelligence applied to electrocardiography has yielded estimates of age, sex, and overall health. We have seen new tools for collection of patient-centered outcomes following catheter ablation. There have been significant advances in the ability to identify ventricular tachycardia termination sites through high-density mapping of deceleration zones. We have learned that right ventricular dysfunction may be a predictor of survival benefit after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy. We have seen further insights into the role of His bundle pacing on improving outcomes. As our understanding of cardiac laminopathies advances, we may have new tools to predict arrhythmic event rates in gene carriers. Finally, we have seen numerous advances in the treatment of arrhythmias in patients with congenital heart disease.

ABSTRACT Osteoporosis is a chronic condition that reflects reduced bone strength and an associated increased risk for fracture. As a chronic condition, osteoporosis generally requires sustained medical intervention(s) to limit the risks for additional bone loss, compromise of skeletal integrity, and fracture occurrence. Further complicating this issue is the fact that the abrupt cessation of some therapies can be associated with an increased risk for harm. It is in this context that the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented disruption to the provision of health care globally, including near universal requirements for social distancing. In this Perspective, we provide evidence, where available, regarding the general care of patients with osteoporosis in the COVID-19 era and provide clinical recommendations based primarily on expert opinion when data are absent. Particular emphasis is placed on the transition from parenteral osteoporosis therapies. It is hoped that these recommendations can be used to safely guide care for patients with osteoporosis until a return to routine clinical care standards is available. © 2020 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.