Citations

OBJECTIVE The nature of the volume-outcome relationship in cases with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains unclear, with considerable interhospital variation in patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to understand the state of the volume-outcome relationship at different levels of trauma centers in the United States. METHODS The authors queried the National Trauma Data Bank for the years 2007–2014 for patients with severe TBI. Case volumes for each level of trauma center organized into quintiles (Q1–Q5) served as the primary predictor. Analyzed outcomes included in-hospital mortality, total hospital length of stay (LOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Multivariable regression models were performed for in-hospital mortality, overall complications, and total hospital and ICU LOSs to adjust for possible confounders. The analysis was stratified by level designation of the trauma center. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.001 to avoid a type I error due to a large sample size. RESULTS A total of 122,445 patients were included. Adjusted analysis did not demonstrate a significant relationship between increasing hospital volume of severe TBI cases and in-hospital mortality, complications, and nonhome hospital discharge disposition among level I–IV trauma centers. However, among level II trauma centers, hospital LOS was longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted mean difference [MD] for Q5: 2.83 days, 95% CI 1.40–4.26 days, p < 0.001, reference = Q1). For level III and IV trauma centers, both hospital LOS and ICU LOS were longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted MD for Q5: LOS 4.6 days, 95% CI 2.3–7.0 days, p < 0.001; ICU LOS 3.2 days, 95% CI 1.6–4.8 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Higher volumes of severe TBI cases at a lower level of trauma center may be associated with a longer LOS. These results may assist policymakers with target interventions for resource allocation and point to the need for careful prehospital decision-making in patients with severe TBI.

Background: Despite treatment advances, multiple myeloma (MM) remains a condition with high unmet medical need as patients (pts) relapse and become resistant to therapy. MM pts experience a range of serious disease-related symptoms and side effects impacting their functioning and health-related quality of life (HRQL). The median overall survival (OS) has improved with the advent of new treatments in the last two decades, however, the impact of newer combination treatments on pt quality of life remains unknown (Beckner, N et al. Cancer Res. 2011;183:25; Bharat, N et al. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:15(suppl):8039). Venetoclax is a novel, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of BCL-2 activity in MM. In the Phase 3 double-blind, randomized clinical trial (M14-031, BELLINI) progression free survival (PFS) was studied in relapsed/refractory (RR) MM pts receiving venetoclax or placebo in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In addition, patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data focused on physical functioning, pain, and fatigue from BELLINI were evaluated to better understand the overall impact on pt HRQL of adding venetoclax to bortezomib and dexamethasone-based doublet therapy. Methods: The BELLINI Phase 3 study (NCT01794520) enrolled patients ≥18 y old with R/R MM who had received 1-3 prior lines of therapy. The study met its primary endpoint of PFS (HR 0.63, 95% CI=0.44-0.89) but higher risk of death (HR 2.027, 95% CI=1.04-3.95) was observed in the treatment arm compared with placebo, although the OS data are not yet mature (Kumar, S et al. EHA Library. Jun 16 2019;273254:LB2601). The secondary HRQL endpoints included in this study were pain severity, fatigue, physical functioning (PF), and global health status, which were measured using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), PROMIS Fatigue Short Form surveys, and the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Change from baseline to day 1 of each cycle visit (up to 25 cycles or last treatment visit) was assessed for each measure in both the treatment and placebo groups. Summary analyses compared mean and median scores between arms at each cycle. The treatment effect was evaluated in a mixed effect model controlling for the patient's baseline score, total visits (or cycles of treatment), age (<65 or ≥65), prior therapy lines, and prior proteasome inhibitor exposure. The model also included an interaction term examining treatment by visits. Results: The intention-to-treat (ITT) dataset included 194 pts (median age: 66y; 53% with 2 or 3 prior lines of therapy) in the treatment group and 97 pts (median age: 65y; 55% with 2 or 3 prior lines of therapy) in the placebo group (2:1 randomization). There was no clear evidence for an independent effect of treatment on PF (P=0.522). Pain scores across multiple measures showed a similar trend, with a statistically non-significant improvement of unadjusted average "Worst Pain" scores for the venetoclax group (P=0.289; Figure B). Non-inferiority in pain results were replicated by the pain subscale of the QLQ-30 (P=0.778), the BPI pain severity index (P=0.418), and the related BPI pain interference subscale score (P=0.603). Fatigue scores likewise demonstrated no significant differences between treatment arms whether using PROMIS Cancer Fatigue t-scores (P=0.442), raw scores (P=0.568), or the 3-item QLQ-C30 subscale (P=0.959), although there was a positive trend across cycle summary scores for the treatment group compared with the placebo group. Unadjusted QLQ-C30 PF subscale scores showed declines from baseline that were generally worse in the placebo group across 25 treatment cycles, although differences were smaller and non-significant in the adjusted model (Figure A). Conclusions: Comparable HRQL in pain severity, fatigue, and PF was observed in RRMM pts receiving venetoclax in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone compared to pts receiving bortezomib and dexamethasone. The summary scores showed outcomes that were comparable or slightly improved for those randomized to the venetoclax combination. Results of concurrent measures of the same or associated concepts reinforced confidence in these results. Additional analyses of subgroups are ongoing (eg, t(11;14), BCL-2 expression status) and may provide further insights surrounding HRQL in these populations. Figure Disclosures Gasparetto: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Popat:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cavo:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; novartis: Honoraria; sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; bms: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. de la Rubia:Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Hungria:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Salwender:Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; AbbVie: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations. Suzuki:Ono: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Maciel:Amgen: Other: funding for travel, teaching, participation in advisory boards; Janssen: Other: funding for travel, teaching, participation in advisory boards. Moreau:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Harrison:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: investigator on studies, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jia:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Karve:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock/stock options. Ma:Genentech: Employment, Other: stock options; AbbVie: Other: Alliance Partner. Devine:Genentech: Employment, Other: stock options; AbbVie: Other: Alliance Partner. Benjamin:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock/stock options.

AbstractNerve growth factor (NGF ) can influence mast cell development and function in murine rodents by interacting with its receptors on mast cells. We now report the identification of mRNA transcripts of full-length tyrosine kinase-containing trkA, trkB, and trkC neurotrophin receptor genes in HMC-1 human mast cell leukemia cells. Although HMC-1 cells lacked p75 mRNA, they expressed transcripts for the exon-lacking splice variant of trkA (trkAI), truncated trkB (trkB.T1), and truncated trkC. By flow cytometry, HMC-1 cells exhibited expression of TrkA, TrkB, and TrkC receptor proteins containing full-length tyrosine kinase domains. NGF stimulation of HMC-1 cells induced tyrosine phosphorylation of TrkA protein, increased expression of the early response genes c-fos and NGF1-A, and activation of ERK-mitogen–activated protein (MAP) kinase, results which indicate that TrkA receptors in HMC-1 cells are fully functional. Highly purified populations of human lung mast cells expressed mRNAs for trkA, trkB and trkC, whereas preparations of human umbilical cord blood-derived mast cells expressed mRNAs for trkA and trkC, but not trkB. Moreover, preparations of human umbilical cord blood-derived immature mast cells not only expressed mRNA transcript and protein for TrkA, but exhibited significantly higher numbers of chymase-positive cells after the addition of NGF to their culture medium for 3 weeks. In addition, HMC-1 cells expressed mRNAs for NGF, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF ), and neurotrophin-3 (NT-3), the cognate ligands for TrkA, TrkB, and TrkC, whereas NGF and BDNF transcripts were detectable in human umbilical cord blood mast cell preparations. Taken together, our findings show that human mast cells express a functional TrkA receptor tyrosine kinase and indicate that NGF may be able to promote certain aspects of mast cell development and/or maturation in humans. Our studies also raise the possibility that human mast cells may represent a potential source for neurotrophins.

Abstract Triplet regimens combining an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor (PI), and a steroid are used to treat newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Although ixazomib (Ix), an oral PI with single agent activity, can be combined with lenalidomide (LEN), patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MM are often LEN-refractory. Pomalidomide (POM) has single agent activity in LEN-refractory disease, and both POM and Ix also show activity in poor cytogenetic risk pts. Methods: Primary objectives: 1) determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Ix in combination with standard dose POM and dexamethasone (DEX), and 2) evaluate the anti-tumor activity of the triplet. The treatment regimen included two dose levels (3 mg and 4 mg) of Ix on days 1, 8, 15; POM 4 mg days 1-21; and DEX 40 mg days 1, 8, 15, 22, of a 28 day cycle. Eligibility: R/R MM after >1 prior therapy, LEN-refractory, and ≤ grade(gr) 1 peripheral neuropathy (PN). Pts were treated until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Design: Phase I study utilizing a standard 3+3 design; dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) defined during cycle 1. Results: 32 pts treated, 31 evaluable for toxicity and response. Pts received a median 4 cycles (range 1-13); median follow-up is 5.5 months (range 1.8-21.1). Six pts treated on DL1, 25 treated on DL2, the MTD/Phase II dose (P2D). Median age: 62 years (range 38-84); median time from diagnosis: 3.7 years (range 1.0-8.9); median number prior therapies: 3 (range 1-5); prior transplant: n = 23 (74%); double (LEN/Bortezomib[BOR]) or triple (LEN/BOR/Carfilzomib[CFZ]) refractory: 19 (61%). Phase I: DL1 expanded to n=6 after 1/3 pts experienced DLT (gr3 lung infection); no further DLT seen on DL 1 or 2. Adverse events (AEs) related to POM and/or Ix: ANC decrease Gr1/2 n=11 (35%), Gr3/4 n=10 (32%), platelet decrease Gr1/2 n=9 (29%), lymphocyte decrease Gr1/2 n=8 (26%), Gr3/4 n=11 (35%), PN Gr1/2 n=9 (29%), no Gr3/4. Response: Phase I and II, n=31 pts treated. ORR: 45% (6 VGPR, 8 PR); Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR): 81% (6 VGPR, 8 PR, 3 MR, 8 SD). In the pts with high risk cytogenetics (7[23%] 1q, 3[10%] 17p, 2[6%] t(4;14)) an ORR of 58% (3 VGPR, 4 PR) was seen, and the CBR was 83%. In the double or triple refractory pts, an ORR of 26% and CBR of 79% (1 VGPR, 4 PR, 3 MR, 7 SD) were observed. Conclusions: Ix/POM/DEX is a well-tolerated oral combination therapy, and responses were seen even at DL1 and in high risk patients, including those with poor-risk cytogenetics or advanced refractory disease. Disclosures Kapoor: Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lonial:Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Nathwani:Carevive Systems, Inc.: Research Funding. Forman:Mustang Therpapeutics: Other: Construct licensed by City of Hope. Berdeja:Abbvie, Acetylon, Amgen, Bluebird, BMS, Calithera, Celgene, Constellation, Curis, Epizyme, Janssen, Karyopharm, Kesios, Novartis, Onyx, Takeda, Tragara: Research Funding.

Objective Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently, but not universally, accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence‐based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow‐up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged 18 and over and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss. Purpose The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence‐based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. Methods Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation’s Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition , the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key action statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated. Results The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss (KAS 1); clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy (KAS 7); and clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiological rehabilitation and other supportive measures (KAS 13). These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendation against the following: clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 3); clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 5); and clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 11). The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings (KAS 2); in patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 4); clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining a magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response (KAS 6); clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms (KAS 10); and clinicians should obtain follow‐up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment (KAS 12). These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry, as well as method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options: clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset (KAS 8); clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 9a); and clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (KAS 9b). Differences from Prior Guideline Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that over 90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the key action statements (KASs) from the original guideline: KAS 1: When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2: The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3: The word routine is added to clarify that this statement addresses a nontargeted head computed tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans such as a temporal bone computed tomography scan to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4: The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5: New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6: Audiometric follow‐up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, or, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7: The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8: The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9: Changed to KAS 9a and 9b; hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9a) or for salvage therapy (9b). The timing is within 2 weeks of onset for initial therapy and within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss for salvage therapy. KAS 10: Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11: Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12: Follow‐up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13: This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in the same

Objective Sudden hearing loss is a frightening symptom that often prompts an urgent or emergent visit to a health care provider. It is frequently but not universally accompanied by tinnitus and/or vertigo. Sudden sensorineural hearing loss affects 5 to 27 per 100,000 people annually, with about 66,000 new cases per year in the United States. This guideline update provides evidence‐based recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and follow‐up of patients who present with sudden hearing loss. It focuses on sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adult patients aged ≥18 years and primarily on those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Prompt recognition and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss may improve hearing recovery and patient quality of life. The guideline update is intended for all clinicians who diagnose or manage adult patients who present with sudden hearing loss. Purpose The purpose of this guideline update is to provide clinicians with evidence‐based recommendations in evaluating patients with sudden hearing loss and sudden sensorineural hearing loss, with particular emphasis on managing idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group recognized that patients enter the health care system with sudden hearing loss as a nonspecific primary complaint. Therefore, the initial recommendations of this guideline update address distinguishing sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss at the time of presentation with hearing loss. They also clarify the need to identify rare, nonidiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to help separate those patients from those with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss, who are the target population for the therapeutic interventions that make up the bulk of the guideline update. By focusing on opportunities for quality improvement, this guideline should improve diagnostic accuracy, facilitate prompt intervention, decrease variations in management, reduce unnecessary tests and imaging procedures, and improve hearing and rehabilitative outcomes for affected patients. Methods Consistent with the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's “Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition” (Rosenfeld et al. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg . 2013;148[1]:S1‐S55), the guideline update group was convened with representation from the disciplines of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, otology, neurotology, family medicine, audiology, emergency medicine, neurology, radiology, advanced practice nursing, and consumer advocacy. A systematic review of the literature was performed, and the prior clinical practice guideline on sudden hearing loss was reviewed in detail. Key Action Statements (KASs) were updated with new literature, and evidence profiles were brought up to the current standard. Research needs identified in the original clinical practice guideline and data addressing them were reviewed. Current research needs were identified and delineated. Results The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following: (KAS 1) Clinicians should distinguish sensorineural hearing loss from conductive hearing loss when a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss. (KAS 7) Clinicians should educate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss about the natural history of the condition, the benefits and risks of medical interventions, and the limitations of existing evidence regarding efficacy. (KAS 13) Clinicians should counsel patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus about the possible benefits of audiologic rehabilitation and other supportive measures. These strong recommendations were modified from the initial clinical practice guideline for clarity and timing of intervention. The guideline update group made strong recommendations against the following: (KAS 3) Clinicians should not order routine computed tomography of the head in the initial evaluation of a patient with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 5) Clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory tests in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 11) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antivirals, thrombolytics, vasodilators, or vasoactive substances to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following: (KAS 2) Clinicians should assess patients with presumptive sudden sensorineural hearing loss through history and physical examination for bilateral sudden hearing loss, recurrent episodes of sudden hearing loss, and/or focal neurologic findings. (KAS 4) In patients with sudden hearing loss, clinicians should obtain, or refer to a clinician who can obtain, audiometry as soon as possible (within 14 days of symptom onset) to confirm the diagnosis of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 6) Clinicians should evaluate patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss for retrocochlear pathology by obtaining magnetic resonance imaging or auditory brainstem response. (KAS 10) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, intratympanic steroid therapy when patients have incomplete recovery from sudden sensorineural hearing loss 2 to 6 weeks after onset of symptoms. (KAS 12) Clinicians should obtain follow‐up audiometric evaluation for patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss at the conclusion of treatment and within 6 months of completion of treatment. These recommendations were clarified in terms of timing of intervention and audiometry and method of retrocochlear workup. The guideline update group offered the following KASs as options : (KAS 8) Clinicians may offer corticosteroids as initial therapy to patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss within 2 weeks of symptom onset. (KAS 9a) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy within 2 weeks of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. (KAS 9b) Clinicians may offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with steroid therapy as salvage therapy within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Differences from Prior Guideline Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, and differences of opinion Included 10 clinical practice guidelines, 29 new systematic reviews, and 36 new randomized controlled trials Highlights the urgency of evaluation and initiation of treatment, if treatment is offered, by emphasizing the time from symptom occurrence Clarification of terminology by changing potentially unclear statements; use of the term sudden sensorineural hearing loss to mean idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss to emphasize that >90% of sudden sensorineural hearing loss is idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss and to avoid confusion in nomenclature for the reader Changes to the KASs from the original guideline: KAS 1—When a patient first presents with sudden hearing loss, conductive hearing loss should be distinguished from sensorineural. KAS 2—The utility of history and physical examination when assessing for modifying factors is emphasized. KAS 3—The word “routine” is added to clarify that this statement addresses nontargeted head computerized tomography scan that is often ordered in the emergency room setting for patients presenting with sudden hearing loss. It does not refer to targeted scans, such as temporal bone computerized tomography scan, to assess for temporal bone pathology. KAS 4—The importance of audiometric confirmation of hearing status as soon as possible and within 14 days of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 5—New studies were added to confirm the lack of benefit of nontargeted laboratory testing in sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 6—Audiometric follow‐up is excluded as a reasonable workup for retrocochlear pathology. Magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography scan if magnetic resonance imaging cannot be done, and, secondarily, auditory brainstem response evaluation are the modalities recommended. A time frame for such testing is not specified, nor is it specified which clinician should be ordering this workup; however, it is implied that it would be the general or subspecialty otolaryngologist. KAS 7—The importance of shared decision making is highlighted, and salient points are emphasized. KAS 8—The option for corticosteroid intervention within 2 weeks of symptom onset is emphasized. KAS 9—Changed to KAS 9A and 9B. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy remains an option but only when combined with steroid therapy for either initial treatment (9A) or salvage therapy (9B). The timing of initial therapy is within 2 weeks of onset, and that of salvage therapy is within 1 month of onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. KAS 10—Intratympanic steroid therapy for salvage is recommended within 2 to 6 weeks following onset of sudden sensorineural hearing loss. The time to treatment is defined and emphasized. KAS 11—Antioxidants were removed from the list of interventions that the clinical practice guideline recommends against using. KAS 12—Follow‐up audiometry at conclusion of treatment and also within 6 months posttreatment is added. KAS 13—This statement on audiologic rehabilitation includes patients who have residual hearing loss and/or tinnitus who may benefit from treatment. Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs Enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making with tools provided to assist in same

Background:Injectable azacitidine (AZA) has been evaluated in a variety of malignancies, including acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), and solid tumors. CC‐486, the oral formulation of AZA, allows extended dosing schedules (>7 days per 28‐day treatment cycle) to increase AZA exposure to malignant cells over the course of the cycle. CC‐486 is under investigation in phase 3 clinical trials as maintenance therapy for patients with AML in first complete remission after induction chemotherapy (NCT01757535) and in lower‐risk MDS with concurrent thrombocytopenia and RBC transfusion dependence (NCT01566695). In these studies, patients receive CC‐486 300 mg QD administered in two 150 mg tablets. A single 300 mg CC‐486 tablet is in development for market approval.Aims:Evaluate the bioequivalence (BE) of a single 300 mg CC‐486 tablet relative to two 150 mg CC‐486 tablets, and the food effect (FE) on the bioavailability of the CC‐486 300 mg tablet.Methods:This was a phase 1, randomized, crossover study (NCT01519011). Adult patients had hematologic malignancies or solid tumors relapsed/refractory to prior therapy for which no standard treatments were available, and ECOG PS scores 0‐2. The BE phase assessed pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of CC‐486 administered as two 150 mg tablets (formulation A) and as one 300 mg tablet (formulation B). Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive each formulation at least 48 hours apart. In the FE phase, patients were randomized to receive formulation B on each of 2 PK study days under fed (high fat, ∼800‐1000 calories) and fasted conditions. PK parameters, including area under the plasma concentration‐time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC∞), maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), time to Cmax (Tmax), terminal half‐life (t1/2), apparent total clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution (Vz/F) were analyzed. BE of formulations A and B, and absence of FE on formulation B, were indicated when the 90% CI of the ratios of geometric means (RGM) based on log‐transformed data for AUC∞ and Cmax between formulations A and B, and between fed and fasted conditions, were within 80%>125%.Results:30 patients were enrolled in the BE phase (median age 68.5 yrs, range 46‐86); 3 patients (10%) had hematologic malignancies and 27 (90%) had solid tumors. Formulations A and B were bioequivalent: the Cmax RGM was 101.5% (90% CI 89.9, 114.7) and AUC∞ RGM was 105.7% (95.0, 117.6). Median Tmax was 1.0 hour for both formulations.57 patients enrolled in the FE phase (median age 62 yrs, 31‐88); all had solid tumors. Despite a lower Cmax under fed condition (RGM 78.9% [90%CI 68.6, 90.7]), overall drug exposure was similar (AUC∞ RGM 108.9% [90%CI 98.5, 120.5]) (Figure A). Consistent with an effect of gastric emptying, median Tmax was reached at 2 hrs and 1 hr post‐dose in fed and fasted states, respectively (Figure B) and mean t1/2 was 0.78 and 0.58 hr postdose. CL/F and Vz/F were comparable in fed and fasted states. Moderate to high intersubject variability was observed for all CC‐486 PK parameters (Figure A).Summary/Conclusion:A single oral CC‐486 300 mg tablet is bioequivalent to two 150 mg tablets. The PK profile for the CC‐486 300 mg tablet under fed and fasted conditions was comparable although Cmax occurred later and was decreased in fed vs. fasted condition. Systemic drug exposure (AUC∞) in fed and fasted states was similar and within the bioequivalence limits. Limited differences in other CC‐486 PK parameters between fed and fasted states are not expected to have a clinical impact.image