Citations

Despite ongoing efforts to employ structure-based methods to discover targeted protein degraders (TPD), the prevailing strategy remains synthesizing a focused set of heterobifunctional compounds and screening them for target protein degradation.

Abstract Objective: Patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) are prone to Multidrug-Resistant Organism (MDRO) colonization and infections, thus at risk for worse outcomes during critical illness. Understanding the prevalence and predictors of MDRO infections is essential to optimize interventions and treatments. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: The study evaluated the prevalence of MDRO isolation among adults with OUD admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) between January 1, 2018, and July 31, 2023. It included adults admitted to an ICU with bacterial infections and positive cultures obtained within 48 hours of admission. Demographics, clinical traits, and MDRO isolation rates were analyzed using descriptive statistics, univariate methods, and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression. Results: MDRO isolation occurred in 178 of 790 patients (22.5%), with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as the most frequently isolated organism. LASSO regression identified housing insecurity (OR: 1.79, 95% CI 1.09–2.93, P = .022), no receipt of medications for OUD treatment (OR: 1.56, 95% CI 1.06–2.29, P = .023), positive hepatitis C virus (HCV) status (OR: 2.19, 95% CI 1.19–4.03, P = .012), and intravenous antibiotic use in the prior 90 days (OR: 1.04 per 24 h, 95% CI 1.01–1.07, P = .007) as significant predictors of MDRO isolation. Conclusions: The study highlights a high prevalence of MDRO isolation in critically ill OUD patients admitted for infection-related issues with positive cultures obtained within 48 hours of admission, influenced by factors like housing insecurity, no receipt of medications for OUD treatment, HCV status, and prior antibiotic use.

Introduction Targeted immunomodulators (eg, advanced therapies) effectively achieve symptomatic remission in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, ~25%–50% of patients with IBD achieving symptomatic remission with an advanced therapy may have continued endoscopically/radiologically active bowel inflammation, and it is uncertain whether changing alternative advanced therapies in asymptomatic patients with IBD will reduce bowel inflammation and achieve durable deep remission. Methods and analysis The QUality Outcomes Treating IBD to Target (QUOTIENT) study is an open-label, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial that aims to compare the efficacy and safety of switching to an alternative advanced therapy targeting endoscopic/radiological remission (treat-to-target) versus continuing the initial, or index, advanced therapy, in asymptomatic patients with IBD with moderate-to-severe endoscopic/radiological bowel inflammation. Enrolment is planned for ~250 participants in Canada/USA, randomised 1:1 to switching to alternative advanced therapy or continuing index advanced therapy, and then followed 104 weeks within routine clinical practice. Patient-reported outcomes measure efficacy and quality of life/treatment burden/safety. Primary endpoint is the time from randomisation to treatment failure. Ethics and dissemination The study is conducted in compliance with the protocol, ICH Good Clinical Practice, applicable regulatory requirements and appropriate review boards/independent ethics committees (approval numbers: Pro00077486; Pro00061437; STUDY00002062; 22-004171; i22-01269; IRB22-0890; IRB_00154397; 2000032384; SHIRB#2022.095-2; STUDY00007146; MMC#2024-18; REB#125290; 17784; Pro00142214; 20240660-01H), with documented written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, scientific presentations, and publicly available Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) websites, including lay summaries. The Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation Education, Support, and Advocacy Department, and our patient advocacy stakeholder, will develop educational and marketing resources to communicate findings to a broad audience (>250 000 patients/caregivers/healthcare professionals). Trial registration number NCT05230173 .

Background: Cognitive change is an important factor in understanding dementia. Estimating effects of exposures on cognitive change requires choosing an analytical timescale, typically time on study or current age. There is limited consensus regarding timescale choice in epidemiologic cognitive aging research. Methods: Using a coordinated analytic approach in 10 cohorts of older adults, we evaluated whether estimated effects of two exposures on memory change differed depending on timescale (time on study or current age). We modeled effects of apolipoprotein-E (APOE) ε4 genotype (a time-invariant exposure) and diabetes (a potentially time-varying/acquired exposure evaluated at baseline) using mixed-effects models with linear and nonlinear time specifications for both timescales. Results: Among APOE ε4 carriers, model-estimated memory scores at baseline (time on study timescale) or at each cohort’s median baseline age (current age timescale) were lower, and the average rate of decline was faster than among APOE ε4 noncarriers. Model-estimated memory scores at baseline or at median baseline age were generally similar across baseline diabetes status, with variability across cohorts in the diabetes-memory change association. In some cohorts, trends in diabetes-memory change associations differed in direction across timescales. Conclusions: Timescale was largely inconsequential for estimated effects of APOE genotype, but yielded differences in estimated diabetes effects, raising questions about the appropriate scale. The current age scale may be problematic because diabetes was measured heterogeneously in age across individuals, a common issue in aging cohorts. Our work demonstrates approaches to evaluate alternative timescales, including in multicohort analyses, and highlights potential implications for estimated exposure effects on cognitive change.

Summary Introduction Peroral plication of the esophagus (POPE) can reduce sump size and improve symptoms in end-stage achalasia. However, its long-term efficacy and safety are unknown. Methods Patients with end-stage achalasia who underwent POPE at our institution (2016–2024) were identified. Data were abstracted for patient demographics, procedural details, and clinical and radiographic outcomes. Results Twelve patients underwent POPE. The technical success rate was 100%, with mean procedural time of 57 minutes and without adverse events. Symptomatic improvement occurred in 75% of patients (mean follow-up of 15 months), while 86% had radiographic improvement in sump size. Repeat POPE in 6 (50%) patients a mean of 2.6 years after index POPE and a third POPE in four (33%) patients a mean of 3.1 years later was performed, with similar technical success rates and outcomes to the index POPE. Conclusions POPE is a safe and repeatable long-term therapeutic option in end-stage achalasia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rising US healthcare costs and the COVID-19 pandemic put increased pressure on hospitals to reduce patient length of stay (LOS) while maintaining high-quality care. We aimed to determine if implementing a pathway for same-day discharge after elective neuroendovascular procedures to a monitored hotel setting is safe, feasible, and cost-effective. METHODS: We evaluated patient outcomes after elective neuroendovascular procedures and same-day discharge to an on-campus Care Hotel. The study enrolled patients aged ≥18 years from October 1, 2020, to February 28, 2023. Exclusion criteria comprised major comorbidities, additional care necessitating hospitalization, absence of a caregiver, insurer-mandated hospitalization, or patient refusal of the Care Hotel model. Primary outcomes were readmission rate or prolonged LOS, new ischemic or hemorrhagic complications rate, and death rate from vascular causes within 6 months. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and deaths related to causes other than vascular complications within 6 months and changes in modified Rankin Scale score by 1 or more points at last follow-up. Healthcare cost savings associated with same-day discharge were analyzed using a control group. RESULTS: The study included 42 patients discharged to the Care Hotel and 84 controls. The average age was 61 years in the Care Hotel group and 64 years in the control group, and aneurysm treatment was the most frequent neuroendovascular procedure (83.3% and 79.8%, respectively). The readmission and extended LOS rates were 4.8% for the Care Hotel group. The rate of new ischemic or hemorrhagic complications was 4.8%. Cost analysis estimated savings of $7730.12 per procedure. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the Care Hotel model is a safe, feasible, and cost-effective option for carefully selected patients undergoing elective neuroendovascular interventions. Adherence to discharge readiness criteria and meticulous patient selection are critical to minimizing complications and readmissions.