Citations

Importance Lensectomy with primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is often used in the management of nontraumatic pediatric cataract, but long-term data evaluating the association of age and IOL location with the incidence of complications are limited. Objective To describe the incidence of complications and additional eye surgeries through 5 years following pediatric lensectomy with primary IOL implantation and association with age at surgery and IOL location. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study used Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group cataract registry data from 61 institution- and community-based practices over 3 years (June 2012 to July 2015). Participants were children younger than 13 years without baseline glaucoma who had primary IOL implantation (345 bilateral and 264 unilateral) for nontraumatic cataract. Data analysis was performed between September 2021 and January 2023. Exposures Lensectomy with primary IOL implantation. Main Outcome and Measures Five-year cumulative incidence of complications by age at surgery (<2 years, 2 to <4 years, 4 to <7 years, and 7 to <13 years) and by IOL location (sulcus vs capsular bag) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Results The cohort included 609 eyes from 491 children (mean [SD] age, 5.6 [3.3] years; 261 [53%] male and 230 [47%] female). Following cataract extraction with primary IOL implantation, a frequent complication was surgery for visual axis opacification (VAO) (cumulative incidence, 32%; 95% CI, 27%-36%). Cumulative incidence was lower with anterior vitrectomy at the time of IOL placement (12%; 95% CI, 8%-16%) vs without (58%; 95% CI, 50%-65%), and the risk of undergoing surgery for VAO was associated with not performing anterior vitrectomy (hazard ratio [HR], 6.19; 95% CI, 3.70-10.34; P < .001). After adjusting for anterior vitrectomy at lens surgery, there were no differences in incidence of surgery for VAO by age at surgery (<2 years, HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.63-2.87], 2 to <4 years, HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.44-1.68], 4 to <7 years, HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.72-1.56]; P = .74) or by capsular bag vs sulcus IOL fixation (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.36-4.17; P = .75). Cumulative incidence of glaucoma plus glaucoma suspect by 5 years was 7% (95% CI, 4%-9%), which did not differ by age after controlling for IOL location and laterality. Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study, a frequent complication following pediatric lensectomy with primary IOL was surgery for VAO, which was associated with primary anterior vitrectomy not being performed but was not associated with age at surgery or IOL location. The risk of glaucoma development across all ages at surgery suggests a need for long-term monitoring.

Introduction: Repeated 6MWT in clinic are inconvenient for patients and disruptive to usual clinic throughput. Digital measures may be a means to overcome these challenges and reliably measure functional capacity. Methods: As part of an observational clinical trial (NCT04191356), during an 8-week observation period, patients with heart failure (HF) utilize arm-band biosensors (Biofourmis Everion®) for at least 15 hours daily while carrying out daily activities and complete an in-clinic investigator-guided 6MWT on the first and last days of participation. Interim data (N=30, age 56.17 ± 11.26; 24 males; 3 NYHA I, 25 NYHA II, 2 NYHA III) are used for validation, where the distance of baseline 6MWT is used as reference standard. Results: Passive 6MWT, which is the maximum 6-minute step count derived from daily accelerometer data (Fig 1), is strongly correlated with the reference standard (R=0.7501, P<0.0001, N=30) (Fig 2). Further analysis (Fig 2) reveals that regardless of the duration of the step count, the digital measures consistently have strong correlations with the reference standard, with the highest correlation obtained by Passive 10MWT (R=0.7746, P<0.0001, N=30). Conclusions: Early data highlights that accelerometer data collected during daily activities appears to indicate functional capacity of HF patients. Continued data will validate digital measures against various patient outcomes. Fig 1 Aggregation of Passive 6MWT from step count recorded during daily activities Fig 2 Correlation between accelerometer-derived passive step count digital measures and distance manually measured during baseline investigator-guided 6MWT as reference standard (N=30)

SummaryBackgroundThere is limited real‐world data on comparative effectiveness of different biologic or small molecule agents as second‐line therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi‐institutional database to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib, vedolizumab and ustekinumab in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) with prior exposure to a TNFi. Failure of medical therapy was defined as a composite outcome of intravenous steroids or colectomy within 2 years. One‐to‐one propensity score matching was performed for demographics, disease extent, mean haemoglobin, C‐reactive protein, albumin and calprotectin, prior IBD medications and steroid use between cohorts.ResultsAmong 2141 patients with UC and prior exposure to TNFi, 348 (16.2%), 716 (33.4%) and 1077 (50.3%) were switched to tofacitinib, ustekinumab and vedolizumab, respectively. After propensity‐score matching, there was no difference in the composite outcome (aOR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55–1.07) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.31–5.50) in the tofacitinib cohort than the vedolizumab cohort. There was no difference in the risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.89–1.86) but higher risk of colectomy (aOR: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.24–5.58) in the tofacitinib cohort than the ustekinumab cohort. The vedolizumab cohort had a higher risk of composite outcome (aOR: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.29–2.16) than the ustekinumab cohort.ConclusionUstekinumab might be the preferred second‐line therapy over tofacitinib and vedolizumab in patients with UC that were previously exposed to a TNFi.

AbstractIntroductionWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use in a large sample of individuals with early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset 40‐64 years) at the midway point of data collection for the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS).MethodsBaseline NPS (Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire; Geriatric Depression Scale) and psychotropic medication use from 282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease (EOnonAD; n = 70).ResultsAffective behaviors were the most common NPS in EOAD at similar frequencies to EOnonAD. Tension and impulse control behaviors were more common in EOnonAD. A minority of participants were using psychotropic medications, and use was higher in EOnonAD.DiscussionOverall NPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants. Future research will investigate moderators and etiological drivers of NPS, and NPS differences in EOAD versus late‐onset AD.

In this study, we report for the first time the in vivo emergence of dual resistance to levofloxacin and rifampin in C. avidum isolated from a patient who received both antibiotics orally in the setting of a salvage debridement and implant retention of an ODRI. Aside from the molecular insights reported here, this study highlights potential limitations of the combination of oral rifampin and levofloxacin in patients undergoing these surgical procedures and the potential need to evaluate specific optimal therapy for emerging ODRI pathogens.

2017 Background: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG and LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Several limitations of the original RANO criteria have been reported. Methods: To address limitations of the original RANO criteria, a large cohort of patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma were evaluated comparing RANO-HGG with modified RANO (mRANO) and immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria to inform the following proposed updates (RANO 2.0). Results: Based on the 2021 WHO classification of glioma, we recommend a single common set of criteria for all gliomas regardless of WHO grade and IDH mutational status. These criteria will be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In newly diagnosed glioblastoma, the post-radiotherapy MRI, usually obtained approximately 4 weeks after completion of radiotherapy, rather than the post-surgical MRI as proposed in original RANO criteria, will be used as the baseline for comparison of subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the first 3 months following radiotherapy, confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI (in 4-8 weeks) will be required for determining radiographic progression of disease (PD) if the patient is clinically stable. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors since these scans do not appear to improve reliability in determining progression. For agents with a high likelihood of producing pseudoprogression such as viral therapies and some other immunotherapies, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is an option. The primary measurement will remain the 2-dimensional maximum cross-sectional area of tumor as the simplest method, but where resources are available, volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type tumors with contrast enhancement, non-enhancing tumor will no longer be evaluated with the possible exception of patients receiving antiangiogenic therapies. However, in tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, both the contrast enhancing and non-enhancing components will be evaluated as target lesions. Conclusions: We hope that these and other proposed changes by the RANO working group will improve response assessment in glioma clinical trials and help the development of more effective therapy for patients.

Background: The purpose of this study was to validate the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) for osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLTs). We hypothesize that the FAOS will meet all 4 psychometric criteria for validity in this patient population. Methods: From 2008 to 2014, a total of 208 patients with OLTs were included in the construct validity portion of the study. All patients completed FAOS and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) scores. Twenty additional patients were prospectively recruited and were asked to complete questionnaires to determine the relevance of each of the FAOS questions as it related to their OLT. Forty-four patients completed the FAOS 1 month after the first FAOS to assess reliability via Spearman correlation coefficient. Responsiveness of the FAOS was assessed with 54 patients who had both preoperative and postoperative FAOS scores via Student paired t test with significance determined as P < .05. In total, 229 unique patients were included in this study. Results: Statistically significant associations were found between all FAOS and SF-12 subscales ( P < .01). The FAOS symptoms subscale demonstrated the lowest correlation with the SF-12 physical health domains. No floor or ceiling effects were identified. Weak correlations were calculated between the 5 FAOS subscales and the SF-12 mental component summary score. All FAOS domains met the threshold for acceptable content validity (score > 2.0). All FAOS subscales demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability, with ICC values ranging from 0.81 (ADL) to 0.92 (Pain). Conclusion: This study demonstrates the acceptable yet moderate construct and content validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the FAOS for patients with OLTs of the ankle joint. We endorse the use of the FAOS in evaluating ankle OLTs in both the research and clinical setting and consider it a useful patient-reported, self-administered instrument following surgical intervention. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case study.

AbstractObjectiveThe Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) seeks to provide comprehensive understanding of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset <65 years), with the current study profiling baseline clinical, cognitive, biomarker, and genetic characteristics of the cohort nearing the data‐collection mid‐point.MethodsData from 371 LEADS participants were compared based on diagnostic group classification (cognitively normal [n = 89], amyloid‐positive EOAD [n = 212], and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease [EOnonAD; n = 70]).ResultsCognitive performance was worse for EOAD than other groups, and EOAD participants were apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 homozygotes at higher rates. An amnestic presentation was common among impaired participants (81%), with several clinical phenotypes present. LEADS participants generally consented at high rates to optional trial procedures.ConclusionsWe present the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic EOAD in the United States to date. EOAD presents with widespread cognitive impairment within and across clinical phenotypes, with differences in APOE ε4 allele carrier status appearing to be relevant.HIGHLIGHTS Findings represent the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) to date. Cognitive impairment was widespread for EOAD participants and more severe than other groups. EOAD participants were homozygous apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 carriers at higher rates than the EOnonAD group. Amnestic presentation predominated in EOAD and EOnonAD participants, but other clinical phenotypes were present.

AbstractOBJECTIVEInvestigation of learning slopes in early‐onset dementias has been limited. The current study aimed to highlight the sensitivity of learning slopes to discriminate disease severity in cognitively normal participants and those diagnosed with early‐onset dementia with and without β‐amyloid positivityMETHODData from 310 participants in the Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (aged 41 to 65) were used to calculate learning slope metrics. Learning slopes among diagnostic groups were compared, and the relationships of slopes with standard memory measures were determinedRESULTSWorse learning slopes were associated with more severe disease states, even after controlling for demographics, total learning, and cognitive severity. A particular metric—the learning ratio (LR)—outperformed other learning slope calculations across analysesCONCLUSIONSLearning slopes appear to be sensitive to early‐onset dementias, even when controlling for the effect of total learning and cognitive severity. The LR may be the learning measure of choice for such analyses.Highlights Learning is impaired in amyloid‐positive EOAD, beyond cognitive severity scores alone. Amyloid‐positive EOAD participants perform worse on learning slopes than amyloid‐negative participants. Learning ratio appears to be the learning metric of choice for EOAD participants.

Abstract: Background and Aims The BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines are efficacious in patients with inflammatory bowel disease; but there is a lack of data examining if holding immunosuppressive therapy around vaccination improves immune response. We studied the effect of holding IBD medications around the time of vaccination on antibody response and breakthrough COVID-19 infection. Methods Partnership to Report Effectiveness of Vaccination in populations Excluded from iNitial Trials of COVID is a prospective cohort of individuals with IBD receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Quantitative measurement of anti-receptor binding domain IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was performed 8 weeks after completing a vaccination series. Results A total of 1854 patients were included; 59% were on anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] [10% of these on combination therapy], 11% on vedolizumab, and 14% on ustekinumab; 11% of participants held therapy before or after vaccine administration for at least 2 weeks. Antibody levels were similar in participants continuing versus holding anti-TNF monotherapy before or after the second vaccine [BNT162b2: 10 μg/mL vs 8.9 μg/mL; mRNA-1273: 17.5 μg/mL vs 14.5 μg/mL]. Comparable results were seen in those on combination therapy. Antibody titres in those on ustekinumab or vedolizumab were higher compared with anti-TNF users, but there was no significant difference if the drug was held or continued [BNT162b2: 22.5 μg/mL vs 23 μg/mL; mRNA-1273: 88 μg/mL vs 51 μg/mL]. Holding therapy was not associated with decreased rate of COVID-19 infection compared with those not holding therapy [BNT162b2: 28% vs 29%; mRNA-1273: 19% vs 31%]. Conclusion We recommend continuing IBD medications while receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccination without interruption.