Citations

AbstractBackgroundAlzheimer disease (AD) related cognitive decline occurs at relatively young ages in individuals with Down syndrome (DS, early‐mid 50s) and in those with autosomal dominant mutations (ADAD, 40‐50s). Both groups show similar patterns of amyloid accumulation. We examined if brain volumes are similarly affected by AD pathology in individuals with DS and ADAD.MethodData for cognitively stable and declining participants was obtained from the Alzheimer Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS) and the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN). Stability/decline was identified based on cognitive testing and interview of individuals and caregivers by trained assessors. Cognitively stable family members without DS/ADAD mutations were recruited as controls from both studies. Participants underwent MRI and amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scans from which brain volumes and amyloid (centiloids) were derived, respectively. Participants from DIAN had Pittsburgh Compound‐B (PIB) scans, ABC‐DS had PIB or florbetapir. Nonlinear cross‐sectional associations between regional brain volumes and estimated years to onset of cognitive decline (EYO, negative values before onset, positive after) and centiloid were evaluated using generalized additive models while controlling for sex and random effects of family. EYO was set to 52 for all participants with DS and based on parental decline/mutation type for participants with ADAD. EYO for controls was based on the EYO of their family member.ResultData from 239 participants with DS (47 declining), and 340 participants with ADAD (122 declining), and 263 familial controls were included. Higher EYO and centiloid values were associated with lower brain volumes in almost all regions. At earlier EYOs, individuals with DS typically had smaller regional volumes than ADAD or sibling controls, with volume declining linearly across the EYO range. By contrast, ADAD mutation carriers had similar volumes to non‐carriers at early EYOs, with volumes diverging as early as 10 years before decline. Brain volumes and centiloid values were inversely related in ADAD and DSAD. Volume in key cortical regions were similar by the expected year of onset in both groups.ConclusionADAD and DSAD demonstrated different temporal patterns of regional neurodegeneration prior to cognitive change despite being similarly affected by early onset amyloid.

Background Iatrogenic cervical artery dissection (CeAD) results from various procedures including interventional angiographic procedures and diagnostic angiography. Iatrogenic CeAD is rare, resulting in limited literature on management and outcomes. This observational cohort study investigates approaches and outcomes of iatrogenic CeAD after endovascular interventions. Methods We conducted a retrospective review for patients who underwent endovascular intervention with resulting iatrogenic CeAD at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, from 1998 to 2021. Pertinent patient factors were extracted and descriptive statistics generated. Results Between 1998 and 2021, 21,191 patients underwent catheter-based cerebral angiography. Thirty-two had iatrogenic CeADs (23 women; median age 59 [range 40.5–92.9]). Common comorbidities included hypertension (62.5%), smoking (56.3%), and hyperlipidemia (46.9%). Nine (28.1%) had dissection with diagnostic angiograms, 6 (18.8%) endovascular thrombectomy, 15 (46.9%) intracranial aneurysm treatment/coiling, and 2 (6.3%) intracranial angioplasty with/without stenting. All dissections were diagnosed by cerebral angiography during the same session as initial interventions. Four (12.5%) underwent hyperacute stenting. Thirty (93.7%) were placed on antithrombotic therapy with aspirin alone (34.4%) or dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel (37.5%). Median duration of acute treatment was three months. Follow-up imaging showed excellent radiological course. Conclusions Iatrogenic CeAD with endovascular interventions is rare and typically benign. Most are managed medically without complications or long-term negative outcomes. Oral single or dual-antiplatelet therapies are preferred compared to previous studies which emphasize intravenous anticoagulation. The duration of acute therapy varied from three months to lifelong. Key factors influencing clinical decision-making may include occlusion rate, pseudoaneurysm formation, intracranial extension, distal collateral circulation, and resultant ischemia.

Background and Significance: Systemic mastocytosis (SM) is a rare heterogeneous disease characterized by the aberrant accumulation of neoplastic mast cells (MC). In about 95% of adult patients, SM is driven by a gain-of-function mutation (D816V) in exon 17 of KIT. Advanced SM (AdvSM) is a life-threatening form of SM and includes three subtypes: aggressive SM (ASM), SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN), and mast cell leukemia (MCL). Despite improvement in disease control with approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), there is still unmet need for improved tolerability and efficacy in AdvSM treatments. Bezuclastinib, an oral and selective type 1 TKI that potently inhibits KIT D816V, is being studied in patients diagnosed with AdvSM in the Apex study (NCT04996875). Results from the Part 1 dose optimization portion of Apex were presented previously. Part 1 randomized 32 patients 1:1:1:1 to receive bezuclastinib at 50, 100, or 200 mg BID or 400 mg QD. Initial results from the Part 1 dose optimization portion of the Apex trial in patients with AdvSM demonstrated encouraging safety profile and signs of clinical activity, as well as deep reductions across biomarkers of MC burden including bone marrow MC burden, serum tryptase levels, and KIT D816V variant allele fraction (VAF). In addition, 94%, 93%, and 100% of patients demonstrated ≥50% reduction in serum tryptase, KIT D816V VAF, and bone marrow MC burden, respectively. Exposure achieved with 100 mg BID of bezuclastinib original formulation resulted in optimal efficacy and safety outcomes. 150 mg QD of an optimized formulation is expected to deliver bezuclastinib exposures consistent with the 100 mg BID of the original formulation. Part 2 is further evaluating the efficacy and safety of bezuclastinib in patients with AdvSM at the selected Part 2 dose of 150mg QD of the optimized formulation. Study Design and Methods: Apex is a multicenter, Phase 2 open-label study of bezuclastinib in patients with AdvSM as defined per the WHO criteria. Enrollment includes previously treated and treatment-naïve patients. Part 2 is enrolling approximately 65 patients including up to 15 patients without measurable mIWG C-findings. The Part 2 expansion portion of the Apex study is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bezuclastinib in patients with AdvSM, including ASM, SM-AHN, or MCL. Key eligibility criteria include measurable disease (centrally adjudicated) according to modified IWG-MRT-ECNM criteria and clinically acceptable laboratory values including platelet count ≥50,000/µL. The primary efficacy endpoint of Part 2 is overall response rate (ORR = complete response [CR] + complete remission with partial hematologic recovery [CRh] + partial response [PR] + clinical improvement [CI]) per mIWG-MRT-ECNM criteria according to mIWG-MRT-ECNM response criteria and will be confirmed by a Central Response Review Committee. Secondary endpoints include further characterization of safety and tolerability, pure pathologic response, biomarker response (including changes in bone marrow MC burden, serum tryptase level, and KIT D816V mutational burden), duration of response, time to response, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Apex Part 2 is actively enrolling. Study sites are enrolling in North America, Asia-Pacific, and Europe. In addition, a high-risk SM-AHN sub-study assessing the safety and feasibility of the combination of bezuclastinib 150 mg QD and azacitidine may enroll up to 20 patients who are currently receiving or indicated for azacitidine and have biopsy-proven SM with an associated high- or very high-risk myeloid neoplasm. Patients with SM-AHN from Part 1 or Part 2 who have demonstrated AHN progression may enroll in an additional rollover cohort to receive bezuclastinib with concomitant azacitidine or hydroxyurea.

Abstract STUDY QUESTION How should premature/primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) be diagnosed and managed based on the best available evidence from published literature? SUMMARY ANSWER The current guideline provides 145 recommendations on symptoms, diagnosis, causation, sequelae, and treatment of POI. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) presents a significant challenge to women’s health, with far-reaching implications, both physically and emotionally. The potential implications include adverse effects on quality of life; fertility; and bone, cardiovascular, and cognitive health. Although hormone therapy (HT) can mitigate some of these effects, many questions still remain regarding the optimal management of POI. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. Key questions were determined by a group of experts and informed by a scoping survey of women and health care professionals. Literature searches and assessments were then performed. Papers published up to 30 January 2024 and written in English were included in the guideline. An integrity review was conducted for the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on POI included in the guideline. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed within the guideline development group until consensus was reached. Women with lived experience of POI informed the recommendations in general, and particularly on those on provision of care. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the guideline development group and the ESHRE Executive Committee. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE New data indicate a higher prevalence of POI, 3.5%, than was previously thought. This guideline aims to help health care professionals to apply best practice care for women with POI. The recent update of the POI guideline covers 40 clinical questions on diagnosis of the condition, the different sequelae, including bone, cardiovascular, neurological and sexual function, fertility and general well-being, and treatment options, including HT. The list of clinical questions was expanded from the previous iteration of the guideline (2015) based on the scoping survey and appreciation of emerging knowledge of POI. Questions were added on the role of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) in the diagnosis of POI, fertility preservation, muscle health, and specific considerations for HT in iatrogenic POI. Additionally, the topic on complementary treatments was extended with specific focus on non-hormonal treatments and lifestyle management options. Significant changes from the previous 2015 guideline include the recommendations that only one elevated FSH >25 IU is required for diagnosis of POI, and guidance that AMH testing, repeat FSH measurement, and/or AMH may be required where there is diagnostic uncertainty. Recommendations were also updated regarding genetic testing, estrogen doses and regimens, use of the combined oral contraceptive and testosterone therapy. Women with lived experience of POI informed the recommendations on provision of care. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The guideline describes different management options, but it must be acknowledged that for most of these options, supporting evidence is limited for POI. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The guideline provides health care professionals with clear advice on best practice in POI care, based on the best evidence currently available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to guide further studies in POI. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), Centre for Research Excellence in Women's Health in Reproduction Life (CRE-WHiRL), and International Menopause Society (IMS), covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, literature searches, and dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payments. N.P. declared grants from Bayer Pharma (research and consultancy) and NIHR—research POISE; consulting fees from Abbott, Astellas, Bayer, Besins, Lawley, Mithra, Theramex, Viatris; honoraria from Astellas, Bayer, Besins, Gedeon Richter, Theramex, Viatris; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Astellas, Bayer, Theramex, Viatris; President, International Menopause Society, Medical Advisory Committee member, British Menopause Society, Patron Daisy Network. A.J.V. declared grants from Amgen Australia, Australian NHMRC, and Australian MRFF; consulting fees from IQ Fertility; honoraria from the Australasian Menopause Society; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Astellas; Board Member of the International Menopause Society (2020 to current) and Past president of the Australasian Menopause Society (2017–2019); R.A.A. declared grants from Roche (Research support, to institution), and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board of Bayer. M.C. declared grants from NHI; payments or honoraria from Up-to-Date (as editor/reviewer); Board Member of American Society of Reproductive Medicine, and of American Gynecological and Obstetrical Society. M.D. declared (NIHR—HTA Reference Number: NIHR133461; NIHR—HTA Reference Number: NIHR128757; Action Medical Research and Borne: GN2818) consulting fees from a small personal medical practice, support for attending meetings and/or travel from ESHRE, Bayer and UCLH special Trustees; Participation on the Advisory Board of the British Menopause Society, UKSTORE project, the Progress Educational Trust, and the Turner Syndrome Support Society UK; Leadership or fiduciary roles in the British Fertility Society (Trustee), Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Hospital Charity (chair of Trustees), and the Essex Wynter charitable trust (Trustee). C.E. declared being Chair of a SIG from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners Integrative Medicine Specific Interest Group and Program Lead for Next Practice Western Sydney Integrative Health. C.H.G. declared grants from Novo Nordisk Foundation (Nos. NNF15OC0016474 and NNF20OC0060610), sygesikringen danmark (No 2022-0189), and the Independent Research Fund Denmark (Nos. 0134-00406 and 0134-00130B); consulting fees from Novo Nordisk, Merck, and Astra Zeneca. S.K. declared grants from Roche diagnostics. A.K. declared grants from NIH R01 5R01HD101475; consulting fees as Medical Reviewer for Flo and for Healthline; honoraria as Medical Consultant for Summus; support for attending meetings from the Reproductive Scientist Development Program; Society for Reproductive Investigation Council Member and Society for Assisted Reproduction Registry/Validation Chair; R.E.N. declared consulting fees from Astellas, Bayer Pharma, Besins Healthcare, Fidia, Theramex; honoraria from Abbott, Astellas, Exeltis, Fidia, Gedeon Richter, Merck & Co, Novo Nordisk, Shionogi Limited, Theramex, Viatris; payment for expert testimony from Vichy Laboratories; Participation in Data Safety Monitoring Board of Advisory board from Astellas and Bayer Healthcare; President elect of the International Menopause Society (IMS). H.T. declared a grant from NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence for women’s health in reproductive life. A.B. declared being chair of the Daisy Network Charity. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. DISCLAIMER This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, ASRM, CRE-WHiRL, and IMS, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. The collaborating societies make no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically exclude any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE There is limited research on screening for social determinants of health (SDOH) in hospitalized pediatric patients. In this article, we describe patient characteristics related to SDOH screening in the hospital setting and examine relationships with acute care metrics. METHODS This is a retrospective cohort study. From July 2020 to October 2021, a 14-question SDOH screener was administered to families of patients admitted or transferred to the hospital medicine service. Information was collected regarding screen results, demographics, patient comorbidities, patient complexity, and acute care metrics. Unadjusted and multivariable analyses were performed using generalized estimation equation logistic regression models. RESULTS Families in 2454 (65%) patient encounters completed SDOH screening, with ≥1 need identified in 662 (27%) encounters. Families with significant odds for positive screening results in a multivariable analysis included primary language other than English (odds ratio [OR] 4.269, confidence interval [CI] 1.731–10.533) or Spanish (OR 1.419, CI 1.050–1.918), families identifying as “Black” (OR 1.675, CI 1.237–2.266) or Hispanic (OR 1.347, CI 1.057–1.717) or having a child on the complex care registry (OR 1.466, CI 1.120–1.918). A positive screening result was not associated with increased length of stay, readmission, or 2-year emergency department or acute care utilization. CONCLUSIONS In hospitalized pediatric patients, populations at the greatest odds for positive needs include families with primary languages other than English or Spanish, those that identified as certain races or ethnicities, or those having a child on the complex care registry. A positive SDOH screening result in this study was not associated with an increase in length of stay, readmission, or acute care utilization.

Ototoxicity is among the adverse events related to cancer treatment that can have far-reaching consequences and negative impacts on quality-of-life for cancer patients and survivors of all ages. Ototoxicity management (OtoM) comprises the prevention, diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment, including rehabilitation and therapeutic intervention, of individuals who experience hearing loss, tinnitus, or balance/vestibular difficulties following exposures to ototoxic agents, including platinum chemotherapy (cisplatin, carboplatin) and cranial radiation. Despite the well-established physical, socioeconomic, and psychological consequences of hearing and balance dysfunction, there are no widely adopted standards for clinical management of cancer treatment-related ototoxicity. Consensus recommendations and a roadmap are needed to guide development of effective and feasible OtoM programs, direct research efforts, address the needs of caregivers and patients at all stages of cancer care and survivorship. Here we review current evidence and propose near-term to longer-term goals to advance OtoM in five strategic areas: (1) beneficiary awareness, empowerment, and engagement, (2) workforce enhancement, (3) program development, (4) policy, funding, and sustainability, and (5) research and evaluation. The goal is to identify needs and establish a roadmap to guide worldwide adoption of standardized OtoM for cancer treatment and improved outcomes for patients and survivors.

AimTransbronchial cryobiopsies are increasingly used for the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD), but there is a lack of published information on the features of specific ILD in cryobiopsies. Here we attempt to provide pathological guidelines for separating usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (FHP) and connective tissue disease‐associated ILD (CTD–ILD) in cryobiopsies.MethodsWe examined 120 cryobiopsies from patients with multidisciplinary discussion (MDD)‐established CTD–ILD and compared them to a prior series of 121 biopsies from patients with MDD‐established IPF or FHP.ResultsA non‐specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) pattern alone was seen in 36 of 120 (30%) CTD–ILD, three of 83 (3.6%) FHP and two of 38 (5.2%) IPF cases, statistically favouring a diagnosis of CTD–ILD. The combination of NSIP + OP was present in 29 of 120 (24%) CTD–ILD, two of 83 (2.4%) FHP and none of 38 (0%) IPF cases, favouring a diagnosis of CTD–ILD. A UIP pattern, defined as fibroblast foci plus any of patchy old fibrosis/fibrosis with architectural distortion/honeycombing, was identified in 28 of 120 (23%) CTD–ILD, 45 of 83 (54%) FHP and 27 of 38 (71%) IPF cases and supported a diagnosis of FHP or IPF. The number of lymphoid aggregates/mm2 and fibroblast foci/mm2 was not different in IPF, CTD–ILD or FHP cases with a UIP pattern. Interstitial giant cells supported a diagnosis of FHP or CTD–ILD over IPF, but were infrequent.ConclusionsIn the correct clinical/radiological context the pathological findings of NSIP, and particularly NSIP plus OP, favour a diagnosis of CTD–ILD in a cryobiopsy, but CTD–ILD with a UIP pattern, FHP with a UIP pattern and IPF generally cannot be distinguished.