Citations

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Pruritus is a frequent and debilitating symptom in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), substantially impairing sleep, mood and quality of life. Peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor (PPAR) agonists are promising second‐line therapies for patients with an inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy of PPAR agonists on pruritus and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) in PBC. Methods We systematically searched for randomised placebo‐controlled trials (RCTs) of PPAR agonists in PBC through December 2025. Eligible studies reported validated pruritus or HRQoL outcomes. Main outcomes were NRS and PBC‐40 total score. Pooled estimates were calculated using random‐effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Five RCTs evaluating bezafibrate, elafibranor and seladelpar ( n = 660; 390 PPAR agonist; 270 placebo) met the inclusion criteria. For pruritus intensity analyses, data were restricted to participants with moderate‐to‐severe baseline symptoms (NRS ≥ 4) when available. PPAR agonists significantly reduced NRS scores at 3 months (MD, −1.39; 95% CI: −2.49 to −0.29), 6 months (MD, −1.17; 95% CI: −1.96 to −0.38) and 12 months (MD, −1.73; 95% CI, −3.00 to −0.46); in individual agent analyses, bezafibrate and seladelpar reached statistical significance at two or more time points. While improvements were also noted in PBC‐40 itch‐domain and 5D‐itch score, an impact on overall HRQoL as reflected by PBC‐40 total score could not be demonstrated, with a lower level of certainty. Conclusions PPAR agonists, notably bezafibrate and seladelpar, reduce pruritus severity in PBC patients with moderate‐to‐severe symptoms and consistently improve itch‐specific outcomes. However, effects on global HRQoL remain uncertain. These findings underscore the incorporation of validated, symptom‐focused endpoints in future PBC trials.

Abstract Background The number of arthroplasty procedures and infection-related complications, including prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) and surgical site infections (SSIs), continues to rise. Although current guidelines recommend cefazolin or cefuroxime as the first-line perioperative prophylactic antibiotic, substitutions with non-cephalosporins remain common, especially among patients with reported β-lactam allergies. These substitutions may increase infection risk and healthcare costs. Evidence comparing outcomes across antibiotic classes remains variable. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing single-agent cephalosporin versus single-agent non-cephalosporin prophylaxis in adults undergoing primary arthroplasty. Cochrane, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from database inception through January 2025. Random-effect or fixed-effect models were used to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analyses stratified results by cephalosporin type, study era, and risk of bias. Results Twenty-three studies (7 randomized controlled trials and 16 observational studies) were included, encompassing 191 527 arthroplasties in the cephalosporin arm and 20 058 in the non-cephalosporin arm. The odds of PJI were lower with cephalosporins (OR 0.59; 95% CI, .46–.75). No overall difference was observed for SSI (OR 0.70; 95% CI, .36–1.36), though post-2013 studies and the cefazolin subgroup demonstrated a significant protective effect. Randomized trial estimates were limited and heterogeneous and did not reach statistical significance. Certainty of evidence was graded as moderate. Conclusions Cephalosporins, particularly cefazolin or cefuroxime, remain the preferred prophylactic agents for primary arthroplasty. This quantitative synthesis reinforces their protective association against prosthetic joint infection and supports adherence to guideline-endorsed prophylaxis.

ABSTRACT Objectives Systematic evidence reviews (SERs) produced by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Evidence‐based Practice Center (EPC) Program use contextual questions to provide context and background information on the topic. There is currently no standardized approach to address contextual questions in systematic reviews. This study explored the use of publicly available large language models (LLMs) in addressing contextual questions. Study Design Using a set of 20 published and 5 yet to be published SERs, we selected one contextual question per report and used it as a prompt to elicit answers from an LLM (ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, or Perplexity). Two independent reviewers rated the results using a priori established evaluation criteria ( https://osf.io/4k3cu/ ), comparing the response in the SER to LLM‐generated responses. The study was guided by six research questions addressing feasibility, validity of content, validity of structure, mistakes, congruence between responses, and incremental validity of using LLMs to address contextual questions. Results Using minimal prompt engineering produced relevant responses and documented the feasibility of LLM‐generated answers to contextual questions. Responses differed in content and format and are not reproducible (e.g., LLMs update regularly), but LLMs were able to produce articulate, clinically plausible, and well‐structured responses. We detected few factual errors, contradictions, and no instance of suspected bias, but citations supporting LLM‐generated responses could often not be produced or could not be verified (‘confabulations’). Congruence with human generated responses varied, with LLM‐generated responses providing more background on the topic and SERs providing more nuanced answers in response to the contextual question. Results regarding incremental validity were mixed and may depend on the tool. Conclusion LLMs are potentially helpful in addressing contextual questions in systematic reviews but human expertise remains essential for using the generated information in a meaningful way.

Abstract Background The ability of large language models (LLMs) to work collaboratively and screen studies in a systematic review (SR) is under-explored. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in automating the process of screening in systematic reviews. Methods This is an observational study which included labeled data (title and abstracts) for five SRs. Originally, two reviewers screened the citations independently for eligibility. A third reviewer cross-checked each citation for quality assurance. GPT-4, Claude-3-Sonnet, and Gemini-Pro-1.0 were used using zero-shot chain-of-thought prompting. Collaborative approaches included (i): conflict resolution using benefit of the doubt, (ii) majority voting using an independent third LLM and (iii) conflict resolution using an informed third LLM. Performance was assessed using accuracy, precision for exclusion, and recall for inclusion. Work saved over samples (WSS) was computed to estimate the reduction in manual human effort. Results A total of 11300 articles were included in this study. The individual models, GPT-4, Claude-3-Sonnet, and Gemini-Pro-1.0 exhibited a high precision for exclusion, achieving 99.7%, 99.7%, and 99.2% and high recall for inclusion achieving 95.5%, 96.6% and 85.7%, respectively. However, the collaborative approach utilizing the two best-performing models (GPT-4 and Claude-3S) achieved an average precision of 99.9% and a recall of 98.5% (across all collaborative approaches). Furthermore, the proposed collaborative approach resulted in an average WSS of 63.5%, compared to the average WSS of 45.2% for individual models. Conversational LLM interactions showed a consistent pattern of results. Limitations This study was limited due to reliance on proprietary models, and evaluation on oncology datasets. Conclusion Evidence shows that collaborative LLMs enable efficient, high-performing screening in systematic reviews, supporting continuous evidence updates. Primary funding source NIH (U24CA265879-01-1) and Carolyn-Ann-Kennedy-Bacon Fund.

Objectives To describe the incidence, presentation and long-term health outcomes of suicidal thoughts and behaviours (STBs) in children aged 12 years or under. Methods This population-based study included children identified through the Rochester Epidemiology Project who presented between 2005 and 2023 with STBs across primary, secondary and tertiary care centres in Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA. Information related to the patient and family characteristics, presentation, prior history and outcomes was manually extracted by two independent researchers. Patients were excluded if the index visit note could not be located, the patient had no suicidal ideation, attempts, intent or plan, was older than 12 years 11 months at the index date, less than 2 years old or was a duplicate entry. Results The average annual population was 28,035 children, of which 637 presented with STBs (mean (SD) age, 10.6 (1.7) years; 51.2% girls, 76.3% White, average follow-up 7 years). The majority of the cases presented to the emergency department (ED) 491 (77.1%). The annual incidence per 100,000 person-years tripled from 68.8 in 2005 to 208.6 in 2023. Overall, 105 patients (16.5%) presented with a suicidal attempt. There were no cases of death by suicide. A prior psychiatric diagnosis was present in 454 (71.3%). STB events were preceded by a precipitating event in 471 (73.9%), the most common of which was an argument with a parent, followed by a bullying event and family distress. A specific suicide plan was reported by 328 (51.5%) with laceration reported most frequently, followed by hanging and overdose. Significant predictors of a suicide attempt were previous use of mood stabilisers (OR 3.21; 95% CI 1.24 to 7.97) and having a specific plan (OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.72 to 4.41). Children who had suicidal attempts had more subsequent ED visits (3.50 vs 2.58; p=0.009) and hospitalisations for psychiatric reasons (1.90 vs 1.30; p=0.003) and psychiatric hospitalisation days (12.70 vs 9.04; p=0.048). Subsequent suicide attempts occurred in 31% of the cohort during follow-up. Conclusion STBs in preadolescent children are rare but are increasing in incidence. Such children have significant psychological diagnoses, use of mental health services, and subsequent suicide attempts. Novel age-appropriate interventions are needed.

This guideline has been updated. This ASCO Living Guideline is reviewed on an eight-week cycle. Please see the online dynamic version for the latest updates. Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating clinician and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information ( Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 ). Updates are published regularly and can be found at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines .

Objective: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the agreement rate on judgments made using the Murad tool by different systematic review teams. Introduction: Evaluating the methodological quality of case reports and case series is challenging but some tools do exist for this purpose. We leveraged the presence of studies that have been evaluated by different systematic review teams to assess the inter-consensus agreement among different teams on Murad tool domains. Methods: Using a back-citation method, we identified systematic reviews that used the Murad tool and retrieved all the included primary studies. We selected studies that were assessed by more than 1 systematic review team. We calculated observed agreement and Gwet’s agreement coefficient on judgments made about each signaling question. Results: We identified 982 systematic reviews that cited the Murad tool and collectively cited 59,080 references. The final data comprised of 81 duplicated case reports and series assessed by more than 1 systematic review team. Overall, the signaling questions had very high observed agreement with 5 of the 8 questions having agreement over 75%. The signaling questions with the highest agreement addressed the adequacy of the ascertainment of the exposure (coefficient 0.959), ascertainment of the outcome (coefficient 0.829), presence of a dose-response gradient (perfect agreement), and clarity of reporting (coefficient 0.755). Conclusion: The current study demonstrates overall high agreement among different systematic review teams that used the Murad tool for appraisal of the same case series and case reports. Leveraging duplicated studies across systematic reviews is a feasible way to retrospectively assess the reliability of the tool.

Objective Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is a clinicoradiological diagnosis that can be associated with SLE. The clinical presentation, risk factors and outcomes of PRES in patients with SLE remain insufficiently described. Methods We conducted a multicentre cohort study at the Mayo Clinic and performed a systematic literature review (SLR) of patients with incident PRES and SLE. We described the clinical features, treatments and outcomes. Across both the cohort study and SLR, we assessed neurological sequelae, recurrence and survival. Within the cohort study, we examined PRES risk factors and discontinuation of antiseizure medications (ASMs). We used logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with neurological sequelae and Cox regression to assess predictors of recurrence. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated the rates of recurrence, survival and ASMs discontinuation. Results 550 cases (53 from the cohort study) were included, of whom 92% were female. Across both cohort and SLR, the most common symptom was seizure, occurring in 80%. PRES was the first manifestation of SLE in 13% of cases. In the adjusted analysis, older age was associated with neurological sequelae (OR 1.63 per 10-year increase; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.39). After 5 years of follow-up, 11.5% (95% CI 2.3 to 19.9%) of patients had a recurrent PRES episode. 30-day and 180-day survival following PRES was observed in 96.3% (95% CI 93.5 to 99.1%) and 93.7% (95% CI 89.8 to 97.7%) patients, respectively. In the Mayo Clinic cohort, 81% of PRES cases were attributed to hypertension in the context of lupus nephritis (LN), and by the fifth year of follow-up, 78.1% (95% CI 58.7 to 88.4%) of patients had discontinued ASMs. Conclusions In this cohort, most of the incident PRES episodes were preceded by hypertension and occurred in patients with LN. Although short-term and long-term prognoses are favourable, older patients more frequently experienced neurological sequelae.