Citations

Background Bleomycin-induced chromosomal breaks (CB) and sister chromatid exchange (SCE) in peripheral blood lymphocytes have been shown to be sensitive cytological markers for susceptibility to DNA damage in patients with various types of cancer and in healthy controls. Factors such as age, sex, smoking, and alcohol consumption could affect the values of some of these biomarkers and should be considered as covariates when analyzing cytogenetic biomarkers because these factors can affect the frequency of CB and SCE. Methods We propose a statistical method using negative binomial (NB) distribution to evaluate the numbers of CB and SCE. In order to determine the best model to represent the frequency of CB and SCE, we compared the NB model with the widely used Poisson model and log-transformed normal model by using generalized linear models. To demonstrate the better fit of the NB model, we analyzed three different data sets from studies conducted at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The first set was a case-control study of lung cancer in a population of African Americans and Mexican Americans (286 cases and 156 con-trols), the second set consisted of 311 head and neck cancer patients, and the third set consisted of 105 Hodgkin's disease patients. Results For CB, the estimates of the variability for Hodgkin's disease, head and neck, and lung cancers were 487.24, 502.82, and 520.15, respectively. For SCE, the esti-mates of the variability for Hodgkin's disease was 9777.01. For CB, the dispersion estimates under the three models (Poisson, NB, and Normal) for Hodgkin's disease, head and neck, and lung cancers were: 12.30, 1.20, 0.85; 8.94, 1.05, 0.22; and 10.10, 1.05, 0.25, respectively. For SCE (Hodgkin's disease only), the dispersion estimates under the three models (Poisson, NB, and Normal) were 30.91, 1.11, 0.10, respec-tively. Conclusions Our results demonstrate that the NB model provides a better interpretation and fit for the frequency of CB and SCE in different cancer types. Therefore, we recom-mend it as a model for the analysis of cytogenetic biomarkers.

Abstract This review aims to update recent advancements in the management and treatment of olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB) based on discussions and topics highlighted during the 2024 North American Skull Base Society session “Literature Review: What's New in Olfactory Neuroblastoma?” A systematic review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, focusing on relevant studies published between January 2022 and June 2024. Data were organized into themes: prognostication and staging, surgical concepts, biomarkers/genomics, imaging, syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone release and hyponatremia, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Out of 289 initial records, 46 studies met eligibility criteria. Key findings include the proposed integration of Hyams grading and dural infiltration with traditional staging for better prognostic accuracy, a shift toward less invasive surgical techniques while maintaining clear resection margins, and the identification of biomarkers for improved diagnosis and targeted therapy. Advanced imaging modalities like DOTA-peptide tomography (positron emission tomography–computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging) were highlighted for their diagnostic value. Variability in induction chemotherapy outcomes underscores the need for personalized treatment plans, and new radiotherapy techniques offer promising results with improving morbidity. Recent advancements in ONB management have enhanced prognostic accuracy, molecular diagnostics, imaging techniques, and treatment outcomes. Continuous research is necessary to optimize these strategies and further improve patient survival and quality of life.

Ultrasound‐guided nerve blocks (USGNBs) are increasingly used in the emergency department (ED) as a safe and effective part of multimodal pain management. Their use has been shown to reduce reliance on opioids and procedural sedation, improve pain scores, and enhance functional outcomes for patients. Additionally, USGNBs in the ED have a complication rate of 0.4%, markedly lower than procedural sedation (4–11%), and they significantly reduce opioid requirements, which is critical considering the current opioid epidemic and the risks of persistent opioid use and overdose. Despite these benefits, relevant concerns about medicolegal liability, informed consent, evolving standards of care, may still influence the adoption of USGNBs in clinical practice. To address these issues, this review examines the legal risks associated with USGNBs by drawing on current clinical literature, closed claims data, and case law. We highlight common adverse events such as peripheral nerve injury and local anesthetic systemic toxicity and assess their legal implications. Potential legal risk including liability related to alternatives like opioid use and procedural sedation, are discussed. While the risk of litigation remains low when best practices are followed, failing to offer a USGNB when clearly indicated may increasingly be viewed as a liability if preventable complications occur. This article aims to provide a practical, interdisciplinary framework, including legal risk assessment, training, credentialing, and risk mitigation, to help clinicians, educators, and hospital administrators safely and confidently integrate USGNBs into ED practice.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Vaginal Cancer outline the recommended diagnostic workup, staging considerations, and treatment options for this rare malignancy. Because vaginal cancer is uncommon and shares many biologic and clinical characteristics with cervical cancer, several management recommendations, particularly systemic therapy, are extrapolated from evidence and practices established for cervical cancer. This guideline excerpt summarizes key components of management, including diagnostic evaluation and workup, principles of staging, pathology considerations, radiation therapy principles, and primary treatment recommendations for both early-stage and advanced disease. It also details approaches to manage relapses, including locoregional recurrence and distant metastases, and provides an in-depth overview of systemic therapy recommendations for vaginal cancer.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, Pancreatic, and Prostate are intended to serve as a resource for health care providers to identify individuals who may benefit from cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling and testing; help guide decisions related to genetic testing; and facilitate a multidisciplinary approach in the comprehensive care of individuals at increased risk for hereditary breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. The current guidelines focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants associated with increased risk of these cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s most recent recommendations regarding screening for prostate cancer and pancreas cancer, as well as testing criteria for nonepithelial ovarian cancer.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Hodgkin lymphoma provide expert, multidisciplinary recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma. The panel convenes annually to update recommendations based on a review of recently published clinical trials. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Hodgkin Lymphoma focuses on the management of newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in adults aged 18 to 60 years.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of minimally invasive surgery in the US, disparities in its use persist. One unexplored contributor is geographic access to robotic surgical systems. This study evaluates the geospatial association between: (1) Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and open surgery rates, (2) availability of robotic systems and open surgery, and (3) open surgery rates in demographically similar areas with differing robotic access. STUDY DESIGN: Data from 6 sources were linked at the ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) level to identify hospitals and to extract procedure modality, presence of robotic systems, and area characteristics. Regression analysis assessed the association between SVI and open surgery rates. Open rates were then compared between hospitals with and without robotic systems. Propensity score matching was used to compare open rates across matched ZCTAs by robotic access and SVI levels. RESULTS: Higher social vulnerability was associated with increased open surgery rates (estimate = 0.20; p < 0.01), with rates ranging from 18.3% in low-vulnerability areas to 32.7% in high-vulnerability areas. Among 3,446 eligible ZCTAs, 57% had at least 1 robotic system. ZCTAs without robotic systems had higher open surgery rates (42.9 vs 19.4 per 100 procedures; relative rate = 2.21; p < 0.01). This association remained significant after matching (relative rate = 1.66; p < 0.01), for the low-mid- and high-SVI strata, and 3 of the 5 procedures examined. CONCLUSIONS: When correcting for geographic variation, the availability of robotic surgery was associated with a decrease in open surgery rates.

Abstract Background In randomized clinical trials (RCTs), anticipating control arm outcomes is important for power calculations and enrollment goals. Unexpected overperformance of the control arm can underpower RCTs. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of control arm overperformance in phase 3 oncology RCTs. Methods The authors conducted a meta‐epidemiological study of two‐arm, superiority‐design, phase 3 oncology RCTs. They reviewed articles/publications and protocols for power calculations, justification, and outcomes. Control arm performance was measured as the ratio of observed control arm outcomes relative to pretrial estimates, and overperformance was defined as a 10% improvement. Results In total, 385 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in 134 RCTs (35%). Of 311 RCTs (81%) that provided a pretrial estimate for control arm performance, 138 RCTs (44%) cited a justification for the estimate. Greater than expected control arm performance was associated with lower odds of meeting the primary end point (adjusted odds ratio, 0.989; 95% confidence interval, 0.981–0.998; p = 0.015). Of 244 RCTs that were evaluable for control arm performance, 104 (43%) exhibited overperformance. RCTs that used OS as a primary end point were more likely to exhibit control arm overperformance compared with RCTs that used other primary end points (56% vs. 33%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.42–4.15; p = .001). Conclusions Control arm overperformance is common in phase 3 oncology RCTs and is associated with trial outcomes, suggesting an effect on study power. Because overperformance appears to be especially prevalent when OS is the primary end point, the effects of postprogression therapies on OS may be underappreciated. Alternative strategies for designing trials should be considered for reliable estimation of treatment effects.

Background: A critical component of conducting systematic reviews or meta-analyses is assessing the methodological quality and bias of included studies. Several methodological quality assessment tools have been developed; however, these tools may not be relevant to observational sports medicine research, which carries numerous unique nuances and biases. Purpose: To develop the Sport Publication Observational Research Tool (SPORT), which evaluates and scores the methodological quality of observational sports medicine research. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: SPORT was developed through a modified Delphi approach involving members from the Herodicus Society and The FORUM. All active members were invited to participate in the process aimed at building consensus on SPORT content and scoring. After finalizing SPORT, a power analysis led to the independent selection of 55 observational clinical sports medicine studies, which were scored twice by 4 reviewers of varying training levels. Interrater and intrarater reliability for SPORT was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The distribution and percentiles for total SPORT score across the 55 studies were calculated. SPORT was also compared with the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS), a commonly utilized quality assessment tool. Results: A total of 51 members participated and achieved 100%, 100%, 98.0%, and 98.0% completion rates for rounds 1 through 4, respectively. The final SPORT included 19 subscores related to methodological quality and bias and achieved 94% consensus approval. Mean SPORT completion time was 6 minutes and 19 seconds per study, which varied significantly by reviewer training level. The subscore "peer review" demonstrated unacceptable reliability and was removed. The remaining 18 subscores exhibited ICC ranges of 0.599 to 0.955 for interrater reliability and 0.530 to 0.936 for intrarater reliability. Total SPORT score demonstrated excellent agreement, for interrater (ICC, 0.967) and intrarater reliability (ICC, 0.966). Median SPORT score across the 55 studies was 20.0 and skewed toward lower scores. There was a moderate significant correlation between SPORT and MINORS ( r [53] = 0.575; P < .001). Conclusion: An objective tool to assess the methodologic quality of observational sports medicine research (SPORT) was successfully developed through a modified Delphi approach with numerous content experts in the field. This tool may be useful in assessing the methodological quality of primary observational sports medicine studies included in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.