Citations

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of prior use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) with mortality and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Multicenter, international COVID-19 registry. Subjects: Adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients on antihypertensive agents (AHAs) prior to admission, admitted from March 31, 2020, to March 10, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were compared between three groups: patients on RAASIs only, other AHAs only, and those on both medications. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were performed after controlling for prehospitalization characteristics to estimate the effect of RAASIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization. Of 26,652 patients, 7,975 patients were on AHAs prior to hospitalization. Of these, 1,542 patients (19.3%) were on RAASIs only, 3,765 patients (47.2%) were on other AHAs only, and 2,668 (33.5%) patients were on both medications. Compared with those taking other AHAs only, patients on RAASIs only were younger (mean age 63.3 vs 66.9 yr; p < 0.0001), more often male (58.2% vs 52.4%; p = 0.0001) and more often White (55.1% vs 47.2%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, race, location, and comorbidities, patients on combination of RAASIs and other AHAs had higher in-hospital mortality than those on RAASIs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI [1.19–1.38]; p < 0.0001) and higher mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 1.09; 95% CI [1.03–1.15]; p = 0.0017). Patients on RAASIs only had lower mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.81–0.94]; p = 0.0003). Patients on ACEIs only had higher mortality compared with those on ARBs only (OR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.20–1.56]; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were taking AHAs, prior use of a combination of RAASIs and other AHAs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than the use of RAASIs alone. When compared with ARBs, ACEIs were associated with significantly higher mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Abstract Background Cache Valley virus (CVV) is a mosquito-borne virus that is a rare cause of disease in humans. In the fall of 2020, a patient developed encephalitis 6 weeks following kidney transplantation and receipt of multiple blood transfusions. Methods After ruling out more common etiologies, metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was performed. We reviewed the medical histories of the index kidney recipient, organ donor, and recipients of other organs from the same donor and conducted a blood traceback investigation to evaluate blood transfusion as a possible source of infection in the kidney recipient. We tested patient specimens using reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), the plaque reduction neutralization test, cell culture, and whole-genome sequencing. Results CVV was detected in CSF from the index patient by mNGS, and this result was confirmed by RT-PCR, viral culture, and additional whole-genome sequencing. The organ donor and other organ recipients had no evidence of infection with CVV by molecular or serologic testing. Neutralizing antibodies against CVV were detected in serum from a donor of red blood cells received by the index patient immediately prior to transplant. CVV neutralizing antibodies were also detected in serum from a patient who received the co-component plasma from the same blood donation. Conclusions Our investigation demonstrates probable CVV transmission through blood transfusion. Clinicians should consider arboviral infections in unexplained meningoencephalitis after blood transfusion or organ transplantation. The use of mNGS might facilitate detection of rare, unexpected infections, particularly in immunocompromised patients.

ObjectiveSome patients with rheumatic diseases might be at higher risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to develop a prediction model for COVID‐19 ARDS in this population and to create a simple risk score calculator for use in clinical settings.MethodsData were derived from the COVID‐19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry from March 24, 2020, to May 12, 2021. Seven machine learning classifiers were trained on ARDS outcomes using 83 variables obtained at COVID‐19 diagnosis. Predictive performance was assessed in a US test set and was validated in patients from four countries with independent registries using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. A simple risk score calculator was developed using a regression model incorporating the most influential predictors from the best performing classifier.ResultsThe study included 8633 patients from 74 countries, of whom 523 (6%) had ARDS. Gradient boosting had the highest mean AUC (0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67‐0.88) and was considered the top performing classifier. Ten predictors were identified as key risk factors and were included in a regression model. The regression model that predicted ARDS with 71% (95% CI: 61%‐83%) sensitivity in the test set, and with sensitivities ranging from 61% to 80% in countries with independent registries, was used to develop the risk score calculator.ConclusionWe were able to predict ARDS with good sensitivity using information readily available at COVID‐19 diagnosis. The proposed risk score calculator has the potential to guide risk stratification for treatments, such as monoclonal antibodies, that have potential to reduce COVID‐19 disease progression.

Abstract Context Interpretation of thyroid function tests during pregnancy is limited by the generalizability of reference intervals between cohorts due to inconsistent methodology. Objective (1) To provide an overview of published reference intervals for thyrotropin (TSH) and free thyroxine (FT4) in pregnancy, (2) to assess the consequences of common methodological between-study differences by combining raw data from different cohorts. Methods (1) Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched until December 12, 2021. Studies were assessed in duplicate. (2) The individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed in participating cohorts in the Consortium on Thyroid and Pregnancy. Results (1) Large between-study methodological differences were identified, 11 of 102 included studies were in accordance with current guidelines; (2) 22 cohorts involving 63 198 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Not excluding thyroid peroxidase antibody–positive participants led to a rise in the upper limits of TSH in all cohorts, especially in the first (mean +17.4%; range +1.6 to +30.3%) and second trimester (mean +9.8%; range +0.6 to +32.3%). The use of the 95th percentile led to considerable changes in upper limits, varying from –10.8% to –21.8% for TSH and –1.2% to –13.2% for FT4. All other additional exclusion criteria changed reference interval cut-offs by a maximum of 3.5%. Applying these findings to the 102 studies included in the systematic review, 48 studies could be used in a clinical setting. Conclusion We provide an overview of clinically relevant reference intervals for TSH and FT4 in pregnancy. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that future studies can adopt a simplified study setup without additional exclusion criteria.

ObjectiveFailure to recognize symptoms of non‐human papillomavirus‐associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV(−)OPSCC) at presentation can delay diagnosis and treatment. We aim to identify patient factors and provider practice patterns that delay presentation and care in HPV(−)OPSCC.MethodsRetrospective review at a tertiary care center. Patients with HPV(−)OPSCC receiving treatment from 2006 to 2016. Patients were excluded if their date of symptom onset or diagnosis was unknown after thorough review of the electronic medical record or their tissue was not tested for HPV or p16. Clinical data, workup, and care timelines were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable linear regressions were performed to determine associations between patient and provider factors and delays in care.ResultsOf 70 included patients, 52 (74%) were male and mean age was 60.5 (SD = 9.0). Median time to diagnosis was 69 days (IQR = 32–127 days), with a median latency of 30 days (IQR = 12–61 days) from symptom onset to first presentation and 19.5 days (IQR = 4–46 days) from the first presentation to diagnosis. Most patients visited at least 2 providers (n = 52, 74%) before diagnosis. Evaluation by 3 or more providers prior to diagnosis was associated with significant delays in diagnosis of nearly a year (357.7 days, p < 0.001) and being treated or prescribed analgesia prior to diagnosis was significantly associated with delays in diagnosis (p = 0.004) on univariate regression analysis.ConclusionsDelays in care related to evaluations by multiple providers and misdiagnosis prolonged time to diagnosis in HPV(−)OPSCC. Improved patient and provider education is necessary to expedite the diagnosis of HPV(−)OPSCC.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, 133:1394–1401, 2023

Abstract Introduction The aim of this study was to develop a conditional normative model for Rey's Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) that accounts for practice effects. Methods In our normative sample, robust conditional norms were derived from 1001 cognitively unimpaired (CU) adults ages 50 to 89 who completed the AVLT up to eight times. Linear mixed‐effects models adjusted for baseline performance, prior test exposures, time, demographics, and interaction terms. In our preliminary validation, mean performance on conditional and typical normative scores across two to four completed follow‐up tests in preclinical Alzheimer's disease participants at baseline with positive amyloid and tau positron emission ( n = 27 CU amyloid [A]+tau[T]+) was compared to biomarker negative individuals ( n = 269 CU A–T–). Results AVLT performance using typical norms did not differ across A+T+ and A–T– groups. Conditional norms z‐scores were lower in the A+T+ relative to the A–T– group for 30‐minute recall ( P = .033) and sum of trials ( P = .030). Discussion Conditional normative methods that account for practice effects show promise for identifying longitudinal cognitive decline.

Objectives Pancreas transplant is the only treatment that establishes normal glucose levels for patients diagnosed with diabetes. We analyzed the outcome of pancreas transplant alone (PTA) versus standard of care in the United States from 2008 to 2018. We also developed an economic model to analyze the cost-effectiveness of pancreas transplant versus continuing standard of care. Methods We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database and analyzed PTA recipient survival. Using those results, we developed a Markov model that followed a cohort of 40-year-old patients with type 1 diabetes over a 10-year time horizon. The primary outcomes were (i) the survival benefit of a pancreas transplant, (ii) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and (iii) total costs. Results We found no difference in survival advantage of PTA compared with standard of care (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–2.14). However, pancreas transplant ($172,823, 6.87 QALY) was cost-saving compared with standard of care ($232,897, 6.04 QALY) for type 1 diabetes. Pancreas transplantation was cost-effective in 95% of 10,000 simulations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, using a $100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Conclusions Although there is no difference in survival for PTA compared with standard of care, PTA is a cost-saving therapy for type 1 diabetes.

The Microbes and Social Equity working group was formed in 2020 to foster conversations on research, education, and policy related to how microorganisms connect to personal, societal, and environmental health, and to provide space and guidance for action. In 2021, we designed our first virtual symposium to convene researchers already working in these areas for more guided discussions. The symposium organizing team had never planned a research event of this scale or style, and this perspective piece details that process and our reflections. The goals were to (1) convene interdisciplinary audiences around topics involving microbiomes and health, (2) stimulate conversation around a selected list of paramount research topics, and (3) leverage the disciplinary and professional diversity of the group to create meaningful agendas and actionable items for attendees to continue to engage with after the meeting. Sixteen co-written documents were created during the symposium which contained ideas and resources, or identified barriers and solutions to creating equity in ways which would promote beneficial microbial interactions. The most remarked-upon aspect was the working time in the breakout rooms built into the schedule. MSE members agreed that in future symposia, providing interactive workshops, training, or collaborative working time would provide useful content, a novel conference activity, and allow attendees to accomplish other work-oriented goals simultaneously.