Citations

This article highlights the important role of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in palliative care (PC), emphasizing their contribution to supporting people with eating, drinking, and swallowing difficulties during serious illnesses and at the end of life. The recommendations underscore the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration among SLPs and other PC team members, the importance of patient and caregiver education, and the application of patient-centered, comfort-focused approaches to dysphagia intervention. Drawing on current research and expert insights, this article explores the use of SLP services in PC, as well as the challenges in supporting people with eating and drinking difficulties in advanced stages of illness, embedded with practical tips for clinicians.

Background. Liver transplantation (LT) is the standard treatment for liver failure secondary to alcohol-associated liver disease, but limited literature and best practices exist for post-LT treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD). This study explores current AUD management practices and providers’ perceived barriers to effective post-LT AUD management. Methods. A 45-item survey on post-LT AUD treatment practices was distributed to members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, the Association of Consult/Liaison Psychiatry Transplant Special Interest Group, and both the American Society of Transplantation’s Liver and Intestine Community of Practice and Psychosocial and Ethics Community of Practice discussion boards, between December 2021 and April 2022. Univariate analysis of categorical variables was performed using the chi-square test. Data were analyzed using center volume tertiles, country region, and provider professional activity. Results. Two hundred thirty-two respondents from 70 LT centers across all 11 United Network for Organ Sharing regions completed the survey. Half of the them were attending physicians and 16.4% were nurse coordinators. Most centers (84%) aimed for alcohol abstinence for all post-LT patients. Perceived barriers to AUD treatment efficacy included ongoing desire to drink (18%), denial about alcohol misuse (14.9%), and lack of posttransplant support (14%). Additionally, 62.1% of centers had no policy for prescribing medication-assisted therapy to treat AUD, and 32.7% of centers reported no center-level changes in AUD care. Providers identified primary needs as hiring additional mental health professionals (30.8%), dedicating specific staff to AUD care (24.7%), and standardizing psychiatric/psychological care in transplant clinics (17.2%). Conclusions. Despite the increasing volume of LT for alcohol-associated liver disease, significant perceived barriers to effective AUD treatment remain.

Objective To assess Advanced Bionics (AB) HiRes Ultra and Ultra 3D initial version (V1) cochlear implant electrode failures over time at four large cochlear implant programs. Study Design Retrospective cohort. Setting Four tertiary referral centers. Patients Patients receiving AB HiRes Ultra and Ultra 3D initial version (V1) devices as of December 31, 2022. Main Outcome Measures Failure rate, revision surgery, speech recognition scores. Results Over a span of 7 years, 205 (42.6%) of 483 implanted V1 devices have failed. Device failure rate varied across institutions from 32 to 67%. Of the 205 detected failures, 163 (79%) have undergone revision surgery, with 94% of revisions being performed with Advanced Bionics devices. Average time from implantation to diagnosis of device failure was 2.7 ± 1.2 years. Most patients (89.8%) with available testing were matched or exceeded their best prefailure speech performance after implant revision. After revision, patients had an average CNC score improvement of 24.7 percentage points over their most recent pre-revision scores and demonstrated average datalogging of 12.7 ± 4.1 h/d at most recent evaluation. Conclusions Comparison of patients across multiple high-volume implant centers confirms the presence of ongoing device failures. There is variability across institutions in the rate of revision surgery once a patient is diagnosed with a V1 device failure, as well as in the rate of device failure detection. Inter-institutional variability in failure rates may be explained by the variation in the routine use of electrical field imaging. Reimplantation with a new device typically results in a return to prefailure peak performance. Professional Practice Gap & Educational Need To our knowledge, a comparison of AB HiRes (V1) device failures across multiple institutions has not been conducted. Learning Objective To identify device failure rate across multiple institutions with different testing protocols. Desired Result Providers will have an improved understanding of the trajectory of device failures for HiRes (V1) devices over time. Level of Evidence Level IV—Historical cohort or case-controlled studies. Indicate IRB or IACUC IRB #230017; IRB #22-000183; IRB #STU-032018-085; IRB #H-49479.

Importance High-quality evidence regarding suppressive valacyclovir treatment in herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO) is necessary to guide care. Objective To determine whether suppressive valacyclovir compared with placebo delays the occurrence of new or worsening stromal keratitis (SK), endothelial keratitis (EK), iritis, or dendriform epithelial keratitis (DEK) during 12 months of treatment and if treatment benefit persisted at 18 months (secondary end point). Design, Setting, and Participants The Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS) was a randomized clinical trial conducted in 95 sites from November 2017 to June 2024. Immunocompetent, nonpregnant adults with a history of an HZO rash, documented active keratitis or iritis within 1 year, and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 or greater were eligible. After determined to be eligible, participants were randomized in 4 strata: age at onset (<60 years vs ≥60 years) and disease duration (<6 months vs ≥6 months). Interventions A total of 12 months of double-masked daily valacyclovir, 1000 mg, or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was time to first occurrence within 12 months of new or worsening SK, EK, iritis, or DEK. Results A total of 527 participants (median [IQR] age, 60 [50-68] years; 266 female [50.5%]; 266 in the valacyclovir group; 261 in the placebo group) were randomized in 4 strata; 481 completed 12 months, and 460 completed 18 months. Data were analyzed by intention to treat. At 12 months, primary end points occurred in 86 participants (33%) assigned to placebo and 74 (28%) assigned to valacyclovir, and at 18 months in 104 participants (40%) assigned to placebo and 86 (32%) assigned to valacyclovir. The hazard ratio (HR) of the primary end point at 12 months was 0.77 for participants taking valacyclovir vs placebo (HR, 0.77; adjusted 95% CI, 0.56-1.05; P = .09) and 0.73 at the secondary end point at 18 months (HR, 0.73; adjusted 95% CI, 0.55-0.97; P = .03). There was a reduction of multiple other secondary end points at 12 months (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.95; P = .02) and 18 months (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.95; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance Although the primary outcome did not show a benefit of suppressive valacyclovir treatment, secondary study outcomes showed treatment superiority at the 18-month end point and reduced number of multiple episodes of keratitis or iritis at both 12 and 18 months. These results support consideration of 1 year of suppressive valacyclovir treatment for HZO. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03134196

Objectives While extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) may be an efficacious adjunctive treatment option for musculoskeletal injuries, current research is limited by significant heterogeneity within treatment protocols. This study aims to establish international expert consensus recommendations on ESWT terminology, parameters, procedural considerations, contraindications and side effects in the application of ESWT to sports injuries. Methods A systematic literature search was performed on the use of ESWT for musculoskeletal and sports medicine injuries to identify potential panellists, followed by the development of a steering committee-led questionnaire. A three-stage, modified Delphi questionnaire was provided to a panel of 41 international clinical and research experts across 13 countries. Panellists had the opportunity to suggest edits to existing statements or recommend additional statements in Round 1. Consensus was defined as≥75% agreement. Results All 41 panellists completed Rounds 1, 2 and 3. Consensus was reached on 69/118 statements (58.5%), including recommendations on terminology and fundamental concepts, indications for use, procedural aspects for tendinopathy and bone pathologies, treatment correlations with imaging, periprocedural and postprocedural considerations, absolute and relative contraindications and potential side effects. Of the 49 statements that did not reach consensus, 17/49 (34.7%) were related to procedural aspects of bone pathology. Conclusion This international panel presents recommendations on ESWT terminology, indications and treatment considerations to guide ESWT use and decision-making by sports medicine clinicians. While our panel supported the use of ESWT in the treatment of bone pathologies, certain procedural aspects of ESWT specific to these injuries did not reach consensus and require further investigation.

Cognitive impairment involves alterations to one's cognitive status that affects everyday life. Individuals with CKD, and particularly kidney failure, experience higher rates of cognitive impairment (20%–70%) compared with the general population. The highest prevalence is described in kidney failure such that dialysis-dependent patients have twice the prevalence of age-matched controls. In the past 5 years, the number of investigations examining the “kidney-brain axis,” mechanisms of CKD-related cognitive impairment, and potential therapeutics have exponentially increased. This review article summarizes recent literature on direct and indirect effects of CKD-associated cognitive impairment with emphasis on uremic toxins; brain injury mechanisms; overlap between CKD-associated cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease, and other neurodegenerative diseases. Reviewed therapeutic interventions include AST-120 (indoxyl sulfate absorbent), CH-223191 (aryl hydrocarbon receptor antagonist), triarylmethane-34 (Kca3.1-specific inhibitor), anakinra (IL-1R inhibitor), marimastat, exercise, supplements, and kidney transplantation. Special focus is placed on translational studies examining uremic toxin–associated pathogenic processes, including brain oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and blood-brain barrier dysfunction through in vitro and in vivo models of CKD-associated brain injury. Finally, future research directions are suggested, including targeting of cellular senescence abundance with senotherapeutics and capitalizing on anti-inflammatory effects of regenerative, cell-based therapeutics ( e.g ., mesenchymal stem cells and extracellular vesicles), and use of aged murine models. Collectively, CKD-associated cognitive impairment represents a prevalent condition for which remaining knowledge gaps exist, and scientific advancements are needed to preserve cognitive function and improve the lives of individuals with CKD.

686 Background: Blue-light cystoscopy (BLC) is an established procedure for use in the diagnosis and surveillance of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). It is associated with improved detection rates compared to white light cystoscopy (WLC); however, limited data is available regarding its role in upstaging and/or upgrading when used alongside WLC. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence and features of patients undergoing upstaging and/or risk-group migration with the implementation of BLC. Methods: Using data from the prospective multi-institutional Cysview Registry (2014-2024), patients with NMIBC who underwent transurethral resection or biopsy of bladder tumors were identified. The patients in whom malignant lesions were exclusively detected by BLC, as well as those experiencing an upward change in risk category (as defined by the American Urological Association [AUA] classification) based on BLC findings, were documented. The clinical features of these patients were subsequently reviewed. Results: In this study, 2,854 patients were enrolled, who collectively underwent 4,158 resections and provided 6,432 separate pathology samples. A total of 201 (7%) patients had at least one malignant lesion detected exclusively by BLC while having negative WLC. These lesions (total 335) included carcinoma in-situ (CIS) in 145 (43%), low-grade Ta in 53 (16%), high-grade Ta in 95 (28%), high-grade T1 in 37 (11%), and high-grade T2 in 5 (1%). In patients with multifocal disease, BLC resulted in AUA risk-group upward migration in 66 (2.3%) patients.Theclinical features of these two groups are presented in the table. Taken together, the total rate of upgrading or upstaging using BLC was 9.3%, including migration to low-risk in 1.2%, intermediate-risk in 2.1%, and high-risk in 6%. Conclusions: Using BLC during transurethral resection or biopsy of bladder tumors results in risk group migration in over 9% of patients with NMIBC. This impacts patient management, including the administration of intravesical therapy when it was not initially planned, an extension in the duration of therapy, or the decision to proceed with radical cystectomy. Clinical features of patients with malignant lesions detected by BLC only (A) and those with risk group migration (B). Clinical features A B Age, median (IQR), year 71 (63-76) 71 (61-77) Gender, n (%) Male Female 140 (74)49 (26) 54 (82)12 (18) History of smoking, n (%) 117 (62) 40 (61) Primary occurrence, n (%) 65 (34) 14 (21) History on intravesical therapy, n (%) 92 (49) 40 (61) Urine cytology * , n (%) Positive Suspicious Atypical Negative/NA 33 (17)21 (10)41 (20)106 (53) 13 (20)7 (11)10 (15)36 (54) IQR: interquartile range; NA: not available. *Detected by either voided urine or bladder wash.

424 Background: Advances in prostate cancer (PC) care have led to a 98% 10-year survival rate. Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) is the primary method of follow-up after definitive radiotherapy (RT), with benign PSA ‘bounce’ occurring in up to 30% of patients, causing uncertainty and anxiety. Distinguishing between PSA bounce and biochemical recurrence (BCR) remains challenging. The Phoenix Criteria is the standard definition of BCR since 2006, defined as PSA nadir + 2 ng/dl, but does not consider patient specific information. Our study aims to explore factors associated with bounce and BCR and develop a predictive tool to differentiate between these two events. Methods: PC patients who received RT at our institution between 2006 and 2022 were identified, including only patients with a PSA increase during follow-up. Exclusion criteria included palliative RT, prostatectomy, or insufficient follow-up information. Patients’ clinical data was collected, and PSA increase was classified as bounce or BCR. Variables were compared using Kruskal Wallis or Chi-square. Multivariate logistic regression was performed in the subset of patients with absolute PSA value >2 (n= 581). Results: Of 1783 patients reviewed due to PSA rise after treatment, 694 met the inclusion criteria. There were 213 (30.7%) with PSA bounce and 481 (69.3%) with recurrence. Prior to meeting the Phoenix Criteria, 20 (4.2%) had biopsy-proven recurrence and 18 (3.7%) imaging-proven recurrence. The median delta PSA was 0.8 ng/mL for bounce vs 5 ng/mL for recurrence (p<0.001). The median time from treatment to event was 14.4 months for bounce vs 45.3 months for BCR (p<0.001). Recurrence was significantly associated (p<0.001) with older age at diagnosis, N1 stage, higher risk category, Gleason score, and higher baseline PSA. In the subgroup of patients without ADT, recurrence was associated with a lower median first PSA post-RT (1.9 vs. 2.4, p=0.046) and a lower median nadir before event (0.6 vs. 1.8, p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression achieved an accuracy of 0.94, with a sensitivity of 0.83, specificity of 0.98, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97. Conclusions: Our results highlight significant differences in clinical factors between bounce and recurrence in post-RT patients. The multivariate logistic regression differentiated the events with 94% accuracy for patients with a rising PSA value >2 subgroup. We highlight the possible improvement that could be accomplished by personalizing a PSA threshold for recurrence versus the Phoenix definition. This tool offers patients and providers a highly specific tool to differentiate between PSA recurrence and bounce, and may reduce stress and unnecessary testing, or help diagnosis recurrence faster. Next steps include prospective validation of the model to assess the impact on clinical practice costs, patient experience, and cancer outcomes.

ImportanceMyeloperoxidase is one of the most abundant peroxidase enzymes in activated myeloid cells. Myeloperoxidase inhibitors may have a clinical benefit in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by slowing neurodegeneration via reduced neuroinflammation and oxidative stress.ObjectiveTo determine the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of verdiperstat, a selective myeloperoxidase inhibitor, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsVerdiperstat was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a multicenter, double-blind, perpetual platform design, randomized clinical trial, with sharing of trial infrastructure and placebo data across multiple regimens. The study was conducted at 54 ALS referral centers across the US from July 2020 to April 2022. Adult participants with a diagnosis of clinically possible, probable, laboratory-supported probable, or definite ALS defined by the revised El Escorial criteria were randomized to verdiperstat or regimen-specific placebo. An additional group of participants concurrently randomized to placebo from other regimens was included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive oral verdiperstat, 600 mg, twice daily or matching placebo for a planned placebo-controlled duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in disease severity, as measured by a joint model of ALS Functional Rating Scale–Revised and survival, with the treatment effect quantified by the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression of verdiperstat relative to placebo.ResultsA total of 167 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.4] years; 59 [35.3%] female; 108 [64.6%] male) were randomized to either verdiperstat (126 [75.4%]) or to placebo (41 [25.6%]). Among the participants randomized to the verdiperstat regimen, 130 (78%) completed the trial. The estimated DRR was 0.98 (95% credible interval, 0.77-1.24; posterior probability = 0.57 for slowing of disease progression [DRR &amp;lt;1]). Verdiperstat was estimated to slow progression by 2% vs placebo (95% credible interval, −23% to 24%; posterior probability 0.57). Verdiperstat was overall safe and well tolerated. Common adverse events in the verdiperstat group were nausea, insomnia, and elevated thyrotropin levels.Conclusions and RelevanceResults demonstrate that treatment with verdiperstat was unlikely to alter disease progression in ALS.Trial RegistrationClinical Trial Identifiers: NCT04297683 and NCT04436510

ImportanceAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal disease. The sigma-1 (σ1) receptor emerged as a target for intervention.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of pridopidine, a σ1-receptor agonist, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsPridopidine was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, platform trial. The study was conducted at 54 sites in the US from January 2021 to July 2022 (final follow-up, July 14, 2022). A total of 163 participants with ALS were randomized to receive pridopidine or placebo. An additional 122 concurrently randomized participants were assigned to receive placebo in other regimens and included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized 3:1 to receive oral pridopidine 45 mg twice daily (n = 121) or matching oral placebo (n = 42) for a planned duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in ALS disease severity, analyzed using a bayesian shared parameter model, which has components for function (Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale [ALSFRS-R]) and survival that were linked through an integrated estimate of treatment-dependent disease slowing across these 2 components. This was denoted as the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression on pridopidine relative to placebo. There were 5 key secondary end points: time to 2-point or greater reduction in ALSFRS-R total score among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, rate of decline in slow vital capacity among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, percentage of participants with no worsening in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, time to 1-point or greater change in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, and time to death or permanent assisted ventilation.ResultsAmong 162 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 35% female) who were randomized to receive the pridopidine regimen and included in the primary efficacy analysis, 136 (84%) completed the trial. In the primary analysis comparing pridopidine vs the combined placebo groups, there was no significant difference between pridopidine and placebo in the primary end point (DRR, 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.80-1.21]; probability of DRR &amp;lt;1, 0.55) and no differences were seen in the components of ALSFRS-R or survival. There was no benefit of pridopidine on the secondary end points. In the safety dataset (pridopidine, n = 121; placebo, n = 163), the most common adverse events were falls (28.1% vs 29.3%, respectively) and muscular weakness (24.0% vs 31.7%, respectively).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this 24-week study, pridopidine did not impact the progression of ALS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04297683, NCT04615923