Citations

ABSTRACTObjectivesThis final post hoc analysis evaluated patient‐reported outcomes from the Phase 3 MAIA study of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (D‐Rd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) after median 64.5‐month follow‐up in transplant‐ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), including patient subgroups.MethodsKey scales from the EORTC QLQ‐C30 (global health status [GHS], physical functioning, pain, and fatigue) were assessed. Scores were evaluated every 3 months for 1 year, then every 6 months until disease progression.ResultsThe intent‐to‐treat population (n = 737) included 46.3% frail, 35.4% 70 to < 75 years old, and 43.6% ≥ 75 years old. D‐Rd‐treated patients showed improvements from baseline that were sustained over 5 years in the intent‐to‐treat population and across subgroups by age, frailty, and bone lesions. Greater proportions of patients treated with D‐Rd versus Rd achieved minimally important changes for improvement at cycle 36 (year ~3) in GHS (odds ratio, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.16–2.91]), physical functioning (1.93 [1.18–3.14]), pain (1.41 [0.90–2.22]), and fatigue (2.00 [1.24–3.23]). Greater proportions of patients with bone lesions improved with D‐Rd versus Rd on GHS and physical functioning.ConclusionsIn transplant‐ineligible patients with NDMM, D‐Rd improved health‐related quality of life over a 5‐year period versus Rd. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02252172

Abstract Background Morbidity from bacteremia may be exacerbated by inadequate initial antibiotic therapy. This concern however may lead to hesitance to de-escalate while awaiting pathogen identification and susceptibility results. We performed a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of a strategy for rapid pathogen and resistance detection directly from positive blood culture bottles (BCBs) using a rapid multiplex PCR (rmPCR) complemented with a rapid phenotypic screen (RPS) for extended-spectrum beta-lactamases and carbapenemases in a setting with moderate to high levels of antimicrobial resistance where routine direct-from-BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing was in place Methods Patients with positive BCBs were randomized to 2 arms: 1) Standard BCB processing (including direct from BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing - control, n=419) with antimicrobial stewardship (AS); or 2) rmPCR/RPS with AS (rmPCR/RPS, n=425). The primary outcome was time from positive blood culture result to prescription of an effective or optimal antibiotic regimen. An effective antibiotic regimen was defined as one active against the detected pathogen(s); an optimal antibiotic regimen was defined as an effective regimen which was also the most narrow spectrum and targeted one, as recommended by institutional guidelines. Mortality was analyzed as a secondary outcome. Results True bacteremia was identified in 658 patients (n=329 in both arms); 597 were monomicrobial (405 with aerobic or facultative anaerobic Gram negatives rods [AGNR]) and 61 polymicrobial (41 harboring AGNR). Time from BCB Gram stain to prescription of an effective antibiotic was 9.9 versus 3.2 hours in the control and rmPCR/RPS groups, respectively (p=0.58) and time from Gram stain to prescription of an optimal antibiotic regimen was 41.6 versus 29.4 hours in the two groups, respectively (p &lt; 0.001). 14-day mortality was 7.6% versus 4.3% (p = 0.069) and 30-day mortality was 11.2% versus 8.8% (p=0.30) in the two groups, respectively. Conclusion Compared to control methods which included direct-from-BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing, an intervention comprising rmPCR/RPS with AS applied to positive blood cultures improved time to optimal therapy but not time to effective therapy or mortality. Disclosures Shawn Vasoo, MBBS, MRCP, D(ABP), D(ABIM) (Inf Dis), FRCPath, bioMerieux: In-kind, for this study|Rosco Diagnostica: In-kind, for this study Robin Patel, MD, a patent on Bordetella pertussis/parapertussis PCR issued, a patent on a device/method for sonication with royalties paid by Samsung to Mayo Clinic, a: See above|MicuRx Pharmaceuticals and BIOFIRE: Grant/Research Support|PhAST, Day Zero Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Sysmex, DEEPULL DIAGNOSTICS, S.L., Netflix, Oxford Nanopore Technologies and CARB-X: Advisor/Consultant|Up-to-Date and the Infectious Diseases Board Review Course.: Honoraria Paul Tambyah, MBBS (S'pore), Diplomate, American Board of Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Moderna: Grant/Research Support|Sanofi-Pasteur: Grant/Research Support

Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is a rare cutaneous soft tissue sarcoma and affects an estimated 1,500 people annually in the United States. DFSP frequently exhibits extensive local infiltration. Initial treatment is through surgical excision, and care should be taken to ensure that negative margins are achieved to minimize recurrence. Although DFSP has a reported high rate of recurrence, metastasis is more uncommon. Fibrosarcomatous DFSP is an aggressive variant with an increased risk for local recurrence and metastasis. If achieving negative margins or resection is not feasible, radiation therapy or systemic treatment are options that may be considered by a multidisciplinary team. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline recommended treatment options available for DFSP.

Purpose In lymphomas, the Deauville score (DS) standardizes 18F-FDG PET treatment response assessments. We assessed interobserver agreement of the DS and developed a quantitative PET-based parameter to minimize subjectivity of response assessments. Methods PET scans performed within the Children’s Oncology Group AHOD0831 study were analyzed. One hundred one scans obtained after the first cycle of chemotherapy (PET1) and 83 obtained after the second cycle (PET2) were eligible for inclusion. Each scan was assigned a DS by 2 nuclear medicine radiologists and a Hodgkin lymphoma index (HLI), defined as the ratio of the tumor’s SUVmax or SUVpeak to the liver’s SUVmean. Cohen κ coefficient measured the rate of agreement of the DS assigned by the 2 radiologists. Receiver operating characteristic curves and the Youden index were used with the consensus DS to identify an optimal HLI cutoff value to distinguish PET-negative from PET-positive images. For each HLI cutoff value, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated. Results Interobserver agreement in DS was moderate (PET1: κ = 0.480, P < 0.001; PET2: κ = 0.428, P < 0.001). On PET1, the optimal cutoff values for HLImax were 1.19 for DS2/DS3 and 1.78 for DS3/DS4, and for HLIpeak were 1.19 for DS2/DS3 and 1.44 for DS3/DS4. On PET2 images, the corresponding values were 1.18, 1.58, 0.94, and 1.26. The most accurate predictor was HLImax on PET2 when scans were dichotomized as DS1–DS3 versus DS4–DS5 (accuracy, 92.8%; sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 91.8%). Conclusion The HLI provides an objective, quantitative measure of disease response and thus may improve interreader agreement for lymphoma response assessments.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. Through a modified‐Delphi approach and guideline‐development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or a related dementia (ADRD) are two decades old. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. An expert workgroup conducted a review of 7374 publications (133 met inclusion criteria) and developed recommendations as steps in an evaluation process. This summary briefly reviews core recommendations and details specialist recommendations of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use the recommendations in this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations appropriate for specialty practice settings, forming key elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. As part of the modified Delphi approach and guideline development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. The workgroup provided a summary of validated instruments to measure symptoms in daily life (including cognition, mood and behavior, and daily function) and to test for signs of cognitive impairment in the office. This article distills this information to provide a resource to support clinicians in the implementation of this approach in clinical practice. The companion articles provide context for primary care and specialty clinicians with regard to how to fit these instruments into the workflow and actions to take when integration of performance on these instruments with clinical profile and clinician judgment support potential cognitive impairment.

Abstract Semaglutide (Smg), a GLP‐1 receptor agonist (GLP‐1RA), shows renal protective effects in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, the exact underlying mechanism remains elusive. This study employs transcriptome sequencing and identifies β ‐Klotho (KLB) as the critical target responsible for the role of Smg in kidney protection. Smg treatment alleviates diabetic kidney injury by inhibiting ferroptosis in patients, animal models, and HK‐2 cells. Notably, Smg treatment significantly increases the mRNA expression of KLB through the activation of the cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) signaling pathway, specifically through the phosphorylation of protein kinase A (PKA) and cAMP‐response element‐binding protein (CREB). Subsequently, the adenosine monophosphate‐activated protein kinase (AMPK) signaling pathway is activated, reprograming the key metabolic processes of ferroptosis such as iron metabolism, fatty acid synthesis, and the antioxidant response against lipid peroxidation. Suppression of ferroptosis by Smg further attenuates renal inflammation and fibrosis. This work highlights the potential of GLP‐1RAs and KLB targeting as promising therapeutic approaches for DKD management.