AbstractBackgroundFluconazole is the most commonly used antifungal treatment for various forms of coccidioidomycosis. Although we had anecdotally observed a high proportion of patients reporting cutaneous adverse effects associated with fluconazole treatment, this observation was not well described in the medical literature, and we were unsure of the additional effect of the arid desert environment of Arizona.MethodsWe performed a one‐time, voluntary survey of patients with coccidioidomycosis and compared the responses of patients treated with fluconazole with those of untreated patients.ResultsFrom January 1, 2015, to August 22, 2017, 62 fluconazole‐treated and 35 untreated patients with coccidioidomycosis provided consent and were enrolled in the study; demographics were similar between the two groups. Among the 62 fluconazole‐treated patients, daily dosages ranged from 200 mg to 800 mg. However, most (44/62, 71%) took 400 mg daily, the typical dose for the treatment of coccidioidomycosis. The median fluconazole treatment duration at the time of study participation was 6 months. When compared with untreated patients, those taking fluconazole had more moderate to severe dry lips (74.2% [46/62] vs. 23.5% [8/34]; P < 0.001), dry skin (45.8% [27/59] vs. 22.9% [8/35]; P = 0.03), and alopecia (31.1% [19/61] vs. 11.4% [4/35]; P = 0.004).ConclusionsFor the treatment of coccidioidomycosis, patients receiving fluconazole reported significantly more severe cutaneous effects, including dry lips, dry skin, and alopecia, than untreated patients. Our findings identify an association but do not prove causality.
Nipple Discharge: Imaging Variability Among U.S. Radiologists
American Journal of Roentgenology | September 7, 2018 | Volume: 211 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 920-925
e21704 Background: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) have difficult symptom burden (i.e. fatigue, pruritus, night sweats) not resolved by current medical therapies including jak inhibitor therapy. We hypothesize that on-line (at home) yoga might alleviate MPN symptoms and complement medical therapy. Methods: MPN patients, recruited by social media, were asked to complete 60 min/week of online yoga (designed for MPN patients) for 12 weeks and completed online self-report surveys (weeks 0,7,12 and 16) on participation (Qualtrics), disease features, and symptom burden (MPN Symptom Assessment Form; NIH PROMIS measures of pain, anxiety, depression, sleep, and sexual function). Results: Two hundred and forty-four MPN patients completed the eligibility survey, 134 were eligible, 55 completed the informed consent, and 38 MPN patients completed the 12-week intervention. The majority of participants were diagnosed with either PV (n = 16) or ET (n = 16), with MF being less common (n = 6). Approximately 37% (n = 14) of study participants averaged ≥60 min/week of yoga (i.e., demand). Yoga participation averaged 50.8±36.2 min/week. Overall, 68% of participants were satisfied with online yoga and 75% felt that is was helpful for coping with MPN-related symptoms (i.e., acceptability, practicality). Additionally, 75% of participants felt safe from injury while participating in online yoga. Only one adverse event was reported (irritated enlarged spleen). From week 0 to week 12 (n = 38), there were significant improvements in total symptom burden (effect size [ES] in standard deviation units = -0.36, p = 0.004), anxiety (ES = -0.67, p = 0.002), depression (ES = -0.41, p = 0.049), sleep (ES = -0.58, p < 0.001), and fatigue (ES = -0.33, p = 0.04). These improvements remained significant at follow-up week 16 (n = 28) for all outcome measures with a trend for maintained fatigue improvement (ES = -0.34, p = 0.06) (see Table 1). There were no significant differences in outcomes between those that averaged < 60 min/week of yoga compared to those that averaged ≥60 min/week of yoga. Conclusions: A 12-week online yoga intervention is feasible (i.e., accepted, practical) for MPN patients and merits a randomized trial as complementary therapy.
Supportive care and symptom burden in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e21684-e21684
e21684 Background: Pharmacologic therapy stabilizes hematologic counts and splenomegaly in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), however only partial symptom improvement typically occurs. Evidenced-based supportive care interventions are needed, however data is limited in patients with MPNs. Methods: Patients were recruited internationally via social media. Informed consent and online self-report surveys (Qualtrics) were completed capturing patient demographics, disease specific data, supportive care utilization, and symptom burden via MPN-SAF TSS. ANOVA, chi square tests, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests methods were applied. Results: Patients:1087 patient surveys were consented. Of these, 858 had 10 or more responses. There were 338 essential thrombocytosis (ET), 188 myelofibrosis (MF), 315 polycythemia vera (PV), and 17 other. In MF: DIPSS risk categories included low (8%), Int-1 (19%), Int-2 (29%), high (12%), and unknown (32%). Supportive care:The most frequently utilized therapies were aerobic activity in 442 patients (51.5%), massage in 244 (28.4%), yoga in 220(25.6%), nutrition in 216 (25.1%), and strength training in 204 (23.7%). Symptom association: Among all respondents, aerobic activity (p=<0.001), massage (p=<0.001), yoga (p=0.02), and strength training (p=<0.001) was associated with lower symptom burden by the MPN-SAF TSS however, nutrition was not (p=0.10). In ET and PV subgroups, yoga intervention was no longer statistically significant (p=0.35, p=0.14). In the MF subgroup, no intervention was found to be significant in any risk category. Conclusions: Supportive care with aerobic activity, massage, yoga, and strength training is associated with improved symptom burden in patients with MPN. Further studies are needed to understand the benefits of such therapies. [Table: see text]
Assessment of treatment response to immunotherapy in melanoma patients with pathogenic mutations of NRAS, BRAF, CDKN2A and P53.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e21057-e21057
e21057 Background: BRAF, NRAS, CDKN2A and P53 mutations are commonly observed pathogenic mutations in cutaneous melanoma. The influence of mutations such as BRAF, NRAS, CDKN2A and P53 on treatment response in the PD1 inhibitor era has not been well defined. Methods: This study included patients with melanoma with a cutaneous or unknown primary. All patients had genomic profiling with the Mayo Clinic 50-gene solid tumor mutation panel. Treatment response to first line immunotherapy with PD1, CTLA-4, or combination PD1/CTLA-4 inhibitors were assessed by response rate and time-to-progression (TTP) rate at 12 months. Each patient outcome was stratified by non-mutually exclusive gene mutation status into BRAF, NRAS, P53, CDKN2A, or quadruple negative (N4) groups. Results: Genomic profiling was performed on 208 patients, of whom 102 received first line immunotherapy. Most patients received a PD1 inhibitor (n = 62), followed by CTLA-4 inhibitor (n = 34), and combination therapy (n = 6). A trend towards improved outcomes was observed in CDKN2A and BRAF mutated patients with worse outcomes noted in P53, N4, and NRAS patients. The percent without progression at 12 months were BRAF 52.2%, CDKN2A 58.2%, NRAS 30.5%, P53 37.7%, and N4 26.7% (see table below). Response rates were BRAF 46.4%, CDKN2A 38.5%, NRAS 22.2%, P53 40.0%, and N4 33.3%. Conclusions: There is a trend towards improved outcomes with immunotherapy in BRAF and CDKN2A mutated patients while P53, NRAS and N4 patients have inferior outcomes. [Table: see text]
The prognostic impact of proinflammatory markers (NLR, PLR) in biliary cancer.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e15621-e15621
Assessing clinical outcomes following liver transplantation in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and mixed hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma patients: The Mayo Clinic experience.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 5, 2018 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e16114-e16114