Rodríguez‐Gutiérrez, René

Juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) presents with an aggressive course and high morbidity associated with disease and treatment. JSLE patients have a poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when compared with age-matched patients with other rheumatologic disorders. We aim to summarize the impact of current pharmacological therapies on the HRQoL of JSLE patients. Search strategies were developed across seven databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing interventions to standard therapy, placebo or pre-post cohort comparisons for more than 4 weeks were included. The outcome included self-reported scales compared at baseline and a therapeutic time point. Risk of bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale. A total of 2812 articles were narrowed down to 309 for full-text screening. Four RCTs and one prospective cohort study, with a total of 634 JSLE patients, met the inclusion criteria. Four of the studies had a controlled intervention plus standard therapy compared with standard therapy alone or placebo. Multiple indices were used to evaluate HRQoL. These included the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire, Simple Measure of Impact of Lupus Erythematosus in Youngsters tool, Kids Fatigue Severity Scale and Child Depression Inventory. A single study reported a significant improvement while remaining studies reported no difference or failed to report the statistical analysis. Although HRQoL is significantly impaired in JSLE, evidence regarding its improvement is limited due to the small number of eligible studies, heterogeneity in scales, and HRQoL domains. A universal HRQoL questionnaire for JSLE needs to be established and used in both the research and clinical setting. All studies should adhere to reporting guidelines.

Objectives To improve the trustworthiness of evidence, studies should be prospectively registered and research reports should adhere to existing standards. We aimed to systematically assess the degree to which endocrinology and internal medicine journals endorse study registration and reporting standards for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews (SRs) and observational studies (ObS). Additionally, we evaluated characteristics that predict endorsement of reporting or registration mechanism by these journals. Design Meta-epidemiological study. Setting Journals included in the ‘Endocrinology and Metabolism’ and ‘General and Internal Medicine’ 2017 Journal Citation Reports. Participants Journals with an impact factor of ≥1.0, focused on clinical medicine, and those who publish RCTs, SRs and ObS were included. Primary outcomes Requirement of adherence to reporting guideline and study registration as determined from the journals’ author instructions. Results Of the 170 (82 endocrinology and 88 internal medicine) eligible journals, endorsing of reporting standards was the highest for RCTs, with 35 (43%) of endocrine journals and 55 (63%) of internal medicine journals followed by SRs, with 21 (26%) and 48 (55%), respectively, and lastly, by ObS with 41 (50%) of endocrine journals and 21 (24%) of internal medicine journals. In 78 (46%) journals RCTs were required to be registered and published in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. Only 11 (6%) journals required registration of SRs. Internal medicine journals were more likely to endorse reporting guidelines than endocrine journals except for Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. No other journal characteristic proved to be an independent predictor of reporting standard endorsement for RCTs besides trial registration. Conclusion Our results highlight that study registration requirement and reporting guideline endorsement are suboptimal in internal medicine and endocrine journals. This malpractice may be further enhanced since endorsement does not imply enforcement, impairing the practice of evidence-based medicine.

Abstract Evidence regarding the effects of subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) on adverse pregnancy outcomes and the ability of levothyroxine (LT4) treatment to prevent them is unclear. Available recommendations for the management of SCH during pregnancy are inconsistent. We conducted a nationwide survey among physicians assessing their knowledge of and current practices in the care of SCH in pregnancy and compared these with the most recent American Thyroid Association (ATA) recommendations. In this cross-sectional study, an online survey was sent to active US members of the Endocrine Society. This survey included questions about current practices and clinical scenarios aimed at assessing diagnostic evaluation, initiation of therapy, and follow-up in pregnant women with SCH. In total, 162 physicians completed the survey. ATA guidelines were reviewed by 76%, of whom 53% indicated that these guidelines actually changed their practice. Universal screening was the preferred screening approach (54%), followed by targeted screening (30%). For SCH diagnosis, most respondents (52%) endorsed a TSH level >2.5 mIU/L as a cutoff, whereas 5% endorsed a population-based cutoff as recommended by the ATA. The decision to initiate treatment varied depending on the specific clinical scenario; however, when LT4 was initiated, respondents expected a small/very small reduction in maternofetal complications. In conclusion, despite recently updated guidelines, there is still wide variation in clinical practices regarding the care of women with SCH in pregnancy. Highly reliable randomized trials are required to evaluate the effectiveness of the most uncertain treatment practices on the care of pregnant women with SCH.

AbstractObjectivesLong-term follow-up is important for determining performance characteristics of thyroid fine-needle aspiration (FNA).MethodsHistologic or 3 or more years of clinical follow-up was used to calculate performance characteristics of thyroid FNA before and after implementation of The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (TBSRTC). The impact of noninvasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (NIFTP) classification was also investigated.ResultsFollow-up was obtained for 1,277/1,134 and 1,616/1,393 aspirates/patients (median clinical follow-up, 9.9 and 4.4 years, pre- and post-TBSRTC, respectively). Nondiagnostic, suspicious for follicular neoplasm, and suspicious for malignancy (SFM) diagnoses decreased and benign diagnoses increased post-TBSRTC, while atypical rate remained less than 1%. Negative predictive value for benign nodules and positive predictive value (PPV) for SFM increased significantly. Eleven nodules were reclassified as NIFTP, slightly decreasing PPV/risk of malignancy (ROM).ConclusionsAppropriate ROM for thyroid FNA can be achieved through application of TBSRTC terminology with minimal use of atypical category.