Citations

Abstract We conducted this systematic review to evaluate outcomes of thrombolysis followed by anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone in pediatric patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). This systematic review addresses mortality, VTE resolution, recurrence, bleeding, and organ-specific outcomes in 5 PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcomes) questions on thrombolysis across pulmonary embolism (PE), extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT), right atrial thrombosis (RAT), cerebral sinus venous thrombosis (CSVT), and renal vein thrombosis (RVT). Meta-analysis reported risk ratios or differences (95% confidence intervals [CIs]), and absolute effects per 1000 patients. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE (Grading of recommendation, assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines. Thirteen nonrandomized studies were included and no randomized clinical trials addressed these questions. Thrombolysis might be associated with a higher risk of major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, or unspecified bleeding with risk differences of 0.09 (95% CI, −0.06 to 0.23), 0.06 (95% CI, −0.11 to 0.22), and 0.09 (95% CI, −0.04 to 0.23), respectively. In PE with hemodynamic compromise, thrombolysis might be associated with a lower risk of mortality but conclusions on PE progression were uncertain in submassive PE. In DVT, thrombolysis may have little to no effect on mortality or thrombus resolution but might be associated with lower risk of postthrombotic syndrome. In RAT, thrombolysis might have little to no effect on thrombus resolution but a higher risk of major bleeding and mortality. For CSVT and RVT, the evidence was very limited. These findings were based on very-low-certainty evidence because of confounding and imprecision from small sample sizes. This systematic review highlights key challenges in developing recommendations for thrombolysis in children with VTE.

Objectives: Esophageal cancer (EC) often presents with dysphagia due to tumor obstruction. Esophageal stenting has the potential of palliating dysphagia, improving nutrition, preventing aspiration, and improving quality of life (QoL) but may be associated with risks. The present systematic review and guidelines are intended to assist treatment decision-making when considering stent placement in patients with EC based on the available evidence. Methods: Using the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing and study design framework, the evidence was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included prospective phase II-III trials and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2010 and December 3, 2024 in the Ovid Medline database. These references were assessed by American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) methodology. RAND-UCLA consensus methodology was used to rate the appropriateness of the use of stents. Results: ARS AUC recommendations include (1) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate in patients with early-stage EC in whom upfront surgery is planned; (2) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate in patients with locally-advanced EC in whom neoadjuvant/perioperative therapy and esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiation is planned; (3) esophageal stenting may be appropriate in the setting of metastatic EC, especially in patients with short life expectancy with limited treatment options; (4) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate for benign stricture following curative-intent therapy; (5) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate for locally recurrent tumor in the setting of prior radiation; and (6) esophageal stenting is usually appropriate for management of tracheoesophageal fistula before curative-intent treatment. Conclusions: This ARS AUC summary provides guidelines for the use of esophageal stents in patients with EC provides based on available evidence.

OBJECTIVE In many individuals, type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains poorly controlled despite taking multiple glucose-lowering therapies. Several studies have demonstrated that endogenous hypercortisolism is prevalent among these individuals. We tested whether cortisol-directed therapy improves their glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this prospective, multicenter, double-blind study, 136 individuals with T2D (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 7.5%–11.5% [58–102 mmol/mol] on multiple medications) and hypercortisolism (by dexamethasone suppression test) were randomized 2:1 to the glucocorticoid receptor antagonist mifepristone (300–900 mg once daily; n = 91) or placebo (n = 45) for 24 weeks, with stratification by presence/absence of an adrenal imaging abnormality. The primary end point was the change in HbA1c. Secondary end points included changes in glucose-lowering medications, weight, and waist circumference and safety. RESULTS Mean baseline HbA1c in the study cohort was 8.55% (69.9 mmol/mol). At 24 weeks, the least squares mean (LSM) difference from placebo in HbA1c was −1.32% (95% CI −1.81 to −0.83; P < 0.001). Participants receiving mifepristone experienced reductions in body weight and waist circumference (placebo-adjusted LSM differences of −5.12 kg [95% CI −8.20 to −2.03] and −5.1 cm [−8.23 to −1.99], respectively). Of participants on mifepristone, 46% discontinued therapy, compared with 18% on placebo. Adverse events with mifepristone (>10% of participants) included hypokalemia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, headache, peripheral edema, diarrhea, and dizziness, consistent with mifepristone’s known tolerability profile. Increases in blood pressure also occurred. CONCLUSIONS In individuals with inadequately controlled T2D and hypercortisolism, cortisol-directed medical therapy with mifepristone reduced HbA1c, with a manageable tolerability profile.

Importance Trimodal therapy (TMT) is included as an alternative to radical cystectomy (RC) for definitive management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) in current clinical guidelines. Moreover, a 2023 retrospective analysis reported similar oncologic outcomes between these treatments among patients deemed fit for RC. Data regarding the comparative value of these treatments are lacking. Objective To evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of TMT and RC for treatment of MIBC. Design, Setting, and Participants This economic evaluation compared cost-effectiveness of treatments using a health transition state microsimulation model of patients with bladder cancer treated between 2005 and 2017 with 5- and 10-year horizons from a Medicare perspective. Model probabilities were informed by multicenter retrospective analyses published in 2023 comparing TMT with RC. The index patient was aged 71 years, with clinical stage T2-4aN0M0 MIBC, solitary tumor smaller than 7 cm, no or unilateral hydronephrosis, adequate bladder function, and lack of multifocal or extensive carcinoma in situ. Patients unfit for RC, radiation, or cisplatin-based chemotherapy were excluded. Exposures TMT and RC. Main Outcome and Measures Primary outcomes included effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model. Results For the index patient, at 5 years, the average cost was $30 525 higher for TMT than RC. Average QALYs were 3.87 and 3.94 for RC and TMT, respectively. As such, TMT was not cost-effective at 5-year (ICER, $464 291 per QALY) or 10-year (ICER, $308 638 per QALY) time horizons. On 1-way sensitivity analyses, TMT would become cost-effective if (1) TMT costs were less than $17 605; or (2) TMT resulted in an 11.6% improvement in metastasis-free survival relative to RC. Conclusions and Relevance In this economic evaluation study of TMT and RC for treatment of MIBC, TMT was associated with improved quality of life but was not cost-effective relative to RC at 5 and 10 years given higher treatment costs. These findings highlight the importance of developing policy initiatives that help reduce TMT costs and of providing patients with accurate expectations of long-term toxic effects to help guide preference-sensitive care.

AbstractPurposeThe Collaborative care model (CoCM) is the leading model for integrating behavioral health into primary care for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, CoCM requires engagement and ongoing participation. We aimed to assess whether two area‐based measures, the area‐deprivation index (ADI) and rurality, were associated with enrollment, participation, and outcomes with CoCM.MethodsThis was an observational analysis of Mayo Clinic patients eligible for CoCM: adults aged ≥18 years, empaneled in primary care, and with a PHQ‐9 of ≥10. We operationalized ADI as quintiles with Q1 being least deprived and Q5 being most deprived and rurality using RUCA codes with two categories: urban and rural. We evaluated enrollment in CoCM, drop out defined by leaving the program early, the count and type of contacts with the care coordinator, and clinical improvement measured using the PHQ‐9.FindingsWe identified 54,030 individuals with 16,532 (30.6%) residing in rural areas and 11,122 (20.6%) residing in the most deprived ADI quintile (Q5). Living in a rural area was associated with lower enrollment in CoCM (–2.3 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI): –2.5, 2.2]), longer length in CoCM (18.6 days [95% CI: 5.7, 31.5]), more contacts with the care coordinator (1.1 contacts [95% CI: 0.2, 2.0]), and worse response and remission. In contrast, ADI Q5 was only associated with worse response and remission.ConclusionsRurality was associated with lower enrollment, greater engagement, and worse clinical outcomes. More work may be needed to address enrollment barriers for individuals living in rural areas to improve clinical outcomes.

Purpose To establish international expert consensus on surgical techniques, complications, and rehabilitation protocols for lateral extra‐articular procedures (LEAPs) performed adjunctively with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Methods Fifty‐five knee surgeons from 17 countries on 5 continents completed a 3‐round modified Delphi process. In the final round, 16 statements on LEAP techniques and complications were scored on a 5‐point Likert scale; ≥75% “agree/strongly agree” constituted consensus. When appropriate, strength of recommendation was graded. Statements lacking support were revised until consensus or abandonment. Results Six statements achieved unanimous consensus (100%), 2 had strong consensus (90%‐99.9%), and 3 reached consensus (75%‐89.9%); 4 were removed. Key technical recommendations were as follows: (1) in iliotibial band procedures, the graft strip should pass beneath the lateral collateral ligament; (2) an anatomic technique is mandatory for anterolateral ligament reconstruction; and (3) no single LEAP is clinically superior to another. Unanimous agreement indicated that modern LEAPs do not increase lateral compartment osteoarthritis risk, carry a low complication rate, and do not necessitate changes to rehabilitation or return‐to‐play timelines. Conclusions Consensus defined core surgical principles and confirmed the safety of adding LEAPs to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. When an iliotibial band graft is used, it should be routed deep to the lateral collateral ligament and fixed between 0° and 60° of knee flexion under low tension. For anterolateral ligament reconstruction, femoral fixation should be in full extension at a posterior‐proximal point relative to the lateral epicondyle. Although no single LEAP proved superiority, adherence to these principles permits safe, effective surgery without altering standard rehabilitation or return‐to‐sport protocols and without increasing osteoarthritis risk. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.

Purpose To define expert consensus on whether and how lateral extra‐articular procedures (LEAPs) should accompany anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to optimize outcomes in ACL‐deficient knees. Methods Fifty‐five knee surgeons from 17 countries on 5 continents completed a 3‐round modified Delphi process. Twenty‐one statements on patient selection for combined ACL reconstruction (ACLR) + LEAPs were graded on 5‐point Likert scales; ≥75% “agree/strongly agree” signified consensus. Strength of recommendation was ranked, and statements failing the threshold were revised or discarded after discussion. Results One statement achieved unanimous agreement (100%): it is strongly recommended to add a LEAP for active patients ≤25 years receiving hamstring‐autograft ACLR to reduce graft failure. Strong consensus (≥90%) supported LEAPs in primary ACLR when grade 3 pivot shift (97.9%), knee hyperextension (97.9%), skeletally immature status (79.5%), revision ACLR (91.5%), return to pivoting sports (93.2%), active patients ≤25 years using nonhamstring grafts (90.7%), grade 3 Lachman test (90%), and when multiple relative risk factors coexist (statement 36, 97.1%). Consensus (75%‐89.9%) favored LEAPs for chronic symptomatic ACL deficiency (86.1%), posterior tibial slope >12° (85.7%), and a history of contralateral ACL injury (88.9%). Eight statements did not reach consensus regarding small‐diameter autografts, female athletes, imaging signs of anterolateral injury (e.g., Segond fracture, lateral femoral‐notch sign), and concomitant meniscal procedures. One statement on LEAPs with primary ACL repair was withdrawn because the project focused on reconstruction. Conclusions International experts strongly recommend adding a LEAP in young active patients undergoing hamstring‐autograft ACLR and in cases of high‐grade rotational or anterior laxity, knee hyperextension, revision surgery, or returning to pivoting sports. Unresolved issues include small graft size, female athletes, imaging findings of rotational instability, and concurrent meniscal procedures, highlighting priorities for future research. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) has become the standard of care for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but not yet for other subtypes. We previously developed a clinical-grade mRNA-based immune classifier (ImPrint) predicting response to IO that is now being used in I-SPY2.2 as part of the response predictive subtypes. We report the performance of ImPrint in hormone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+HER2–) patients from five IO arms. METHODS A total of 204 HR+HER2– (MammaPrint high-risk) patients from five IO arms (anti–PD-1, anti–PD-L1/poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor combination, anti–PD-1/toll-like receptor 9 dual-IO combination, and anti–PD-1 ± lymphocyte activation gene 3 dual-IO combination) and 191 patients from the chemotherapy-only control arm were included in this analysis. Patients were classified as ImPrint+ (likely sensitive) versus ImPrint– (likely resistant), using pretreatment mRNA. Performance of ImPrint for predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) to IO-containing arms was characterized and compared with tumor grade (III), MammaPrint (ultra) High2 risk (MP2), and estrogen receptor (ER)-low (ER ≤ 10%). RESULTS Overall, the pCR rate across the five IO arms was 33%. 26% of HR+HER2– patients were ImPrint+, and pCR rates with IO were 75% in ImPrint+ versus 17% in ImPrint–, with the highest pCR rate >90% in a dual-IO arm. In the control arm, pCR rates were 33% in ImPrint+ and 8% in ImPrint–. Tumor grade (III), MP2, and ER-low showed pCR rates in IO of 45%, 56%, and 63%, respectively, with lower pCR odds ratios (OR < 7.5) compared with ImPrint (OR = 14.5). CONCLUSION Using an accurate selection strategy, HR+HER2– patients could achieve pCR rates similar to what is seen with best neoadjuvant therapies in TNBC and HER2+ (ie, pCR rate >65%-70%). ImPrint, an Food and Drug Administration IDE-enabled assay, may represent a way to identify HR+HER2– patients for IO that best balances likely benefit versus risk of serious immune-related adverse events.

Background: Positioning the pharyngeal flap base high along the posterior pharyngeal wall is essential for optimizing speech outcomes. Objective data on where to place the flap base are lacking. Further, adenoid tissue can restrict cephalad positioning of the flap. This study aimed to improve the design of the pharyngeal flap by measuring the distance from the first cervical vertebrae (C1) to the palatal plane, and the adenoid depth in children undergoing evaluation for velopharyngeal insufficiency. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the velopharynx and measured the distance between C1 and the palatal plane, and the adenoid depth at the level of the palatal plane in millimeters. Results: Thirty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at the time of MRI was 7.4 years (range: 3.9–11.9 y). The anterior tubercle of C1 was below the palatal plane in 97% (n = 33) of patients. On average, this landmark was 10.5 mm (SD = 5.0) below the palatal plane. Adenoid tissue was present at the level of the palatal plane in 91% (n = 31) of patients. Conclusions: Positioning the pharyngeal flap base at C1 is too low to aid with velopharyngeal closure. Further, adenoid tissue is frequently present at the level of velopharyngeal closure, limiting superior positioning of the pharyngeal flap base. When this occurs, surgeons should consider adenoidectomy before pharyngeal flap surgery. Preoperative MRI may be beneficial for planning pharyngeal flap positioning relative to C1 and assessing adenoid tissue at the palatal plane.

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo build consensus from different stakeholders on the content and digital interactivity of a shared decision making (SDM) tool to guide patient‐clinician collaborative conversations about treatment for bipolar depression.Patients and MethodsThis study was conducted between September 2022 and September 2023. In the first phase, we conducted a narrative review on pharmacological, neuromodulatory, and psychotherapeutic treatments available for bipolar depression. For each option, we assessed treatment effectiveness, side effects, need for clinical monitoring, clinical considerations, and cost. In the second phase, committees comprised of mental health clinicians and people with lived experience with bipolar disorder from a national mood disorders advocacy group identified key features and content to be included in the SDM tool. A thematic analysis of these data then contributed to populate the SDM tool.ResultsTwenty‐one evidence‐based treatment options identified from the narrative review were presented to the four convened committees (clinical, lived experience, peer council, and integrated steering committees) in five meetings. After discussions and thematic analysis, 12 outcomes of interest for each of the therapeutic interventions were delineated for inclusion in a web‐based SDM tool. A detailed description of the development process and SDM tool is provided.ConclusionThis is the first partnership between clinicians and persons with bipolar disorder lived experience charged with the development of a patient‐centered SDM tool to integrate clinical evidence with real‐world clinical practice and patient preferences for use during clinical encounters. Human‐centered design and testing in real clinical encounters will now contribute to refining the instrument and readying it for rigorous evaluation and implementation in practice.