Citations

Background: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) is a prevalent, disabling condition worldwide. Tuina, a traditional Chinese manual therapy, has shown potential benefits, but evidence remains limited. Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of Tuina therapy in managing CNLBP in a U.S. population. Methods: A prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted at Mayo Clinic Rochester campus (February 2020-April 2024). 204 participants with CNLBP were randomized into 3 groups: Tuina (N = 68), physical therapy (N = 68), or a combination of both (N = 68). Each group received 6 treatments over 2 months. The primary outcome was pain intensity (VAS); secondary outcomes included disability (ODI), quality of life (SF-36), and adverse events. Additionally, participants completed a satisfaction survey at the end of the trial. Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) was used for survey data collection. Data was assessed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the multiple repeated measurements, Kruskal-Wallis tests, while Chi-square tests, and Bonferroni correction in SAS software. Results: 185 subjects completed the study. Significant decreases in VAS, ODI, and SF-36 Overall Physical scores were found from baseline, to post treatment and follow-up in all groups ( P < .05), while there were no significant differences in VAS, ODI, or SF-36 outcomes between the Tuina group and the other 2 groups. There were 4 adverse events observed in the trial, 1 in the Physical therapy group and 3 in the Mixed group. Only 1 transient low back pain after Tuina therapy was observed in the Mixed group but did not require treatment. The high percentage of patients who received the Tuina program was extremely helpful (n = 94/126, 77.0%). The willingness to recommend was significantly higher for Tuina compared to physical therapy (Mixed group [N = 59/62, 95.2%], Tuina group [N = 57/64, 91.9%], and physical therapy group [N = 31/59, 59.6%] ( P < .05). Conclusion: Tuina therapy showed comparable benefits to physical therapy and combined treatment of both in improving pain, function, and quality of life in patients with CNLBP. With high patient satisfaction and a favorable safety profile, Tuina appears to be a safe and acceptable non-invasive treatment option. Further studies are needed to validate these findings in the future.

Abstract BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer rarely metastasises to the brain, thus studies reporting the outcomes of affected patients are lacking. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is now the mainstay of management for patients with brain metastases (BM) from most primary sites, but little evidence of its efficacy in ovarian cancer is available. The current study was undertaken to provide guidance for SRS management using pooled data from multiple institutions. MATERIAL AND METHODS Centers participating in the IRRF (International Radiosurgery Research Foundation) were asked to provide outcome data for patients who had SRS for ovarian cancer brain metastases between 2020 and 2024 and at least one clinical and imaging follow-up after the procedure. Primary endpoints included survival from SRS, local tumor response according to RANO-BM criteria and occurrence of adverse radiation effects (ARE). Cox regression analyses were performed to identify variables impact each endpoint. RESULTS 128 patients had SRS for a total of 532 BM treated. Epithelial histology was the most common (91%). Median age at SRS was 62 years (IQR 56-70). Median KPS was 80% (IQR 80-90%) and 71.9% of patients had neurological symptoms at presentation. Other active systemic metastases were present in 41.4%. The median number of treated BM was 2 (IQR1-3) and the median cumulative treatment volume was 6 cc (IQR 2-12.9). The median margin dose was 18 Gy (IQR 16-20). At last follow-up, 19.5% of patients were still alive. The median overall survival (OS) after SRS was 27 months, and 6-, 12- and 24-month OS was 83.8%, 74.2% and 52.2%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that increasing age at SRS (HR 1.02, p=0.05), active systemic metastases (HR 2, p=0.005) and increasing number of brain metastases (HR 1.05, p=0.04) were associated with worse survival, while repeating SRS (HR 0.4, p=0.002) led to improved survival. Local failure occurred in 12.8% of treated BM. Actuarial progression-free survival (PFS) at 6, 12 and 24 months was 92.3%, 86.6% and 70.3%, respectively. Only prior WBRT (HR 4.36, p=0.03) led to worse local control on multivariate analyses. New remote BM appeared in 49.5% of patients and 14.5% suffered from leptomeningeal dissemination. ARE were seen in 12.1% of BM but were symptomatic in only 3.2%. On multivariate analyses, prior SRS (HR 3.13, p=0.002) was associated with increased risk of ARE. CONCLUSION Ovarian cancer brain metastases can be safely and effectively managed with SRS as the primary treatment modality in most patients.

ABSTRACT Background As head and neck cancer survival rates improve, there is growing demand for quality survivorship care and tools to predict patient adherence; this study aims to evaluate an advanced practice provider ( APP )‐led survivorship clinic and assess these key metrics. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 213 head and neck cancer patients treated with curative radiation therapy between 2016 and 2023, to assess follow‐up adherence in an advanced practice provider–led survivorship clinic. Results With a median follow‐up of 2.4 years, follow‐up care metrics identified high completion percentages (> 90%) for lung cancer screening, smoking cessation, thyroid screening, dental evaluation, xerostomia, dysphagia, and dysgeusia. The HOUsing ‐based SocioEconomic Status ( HOUSES ) index at diagnosis showed a significant adherence difference (median percentile, 78% vs. 55%, adherent vs. nonadherent; p = 0.03). Conclusions High adherence rates with guideline‐defined care metrics are achievable in an advanced practice provider‐led head and neck cancer survivorship clinic. The HOUSES index may assist in predicting nonadherence; however, further studies are needed.

Abstract Background Insulin resistance leads to changes in lipid and lipoprotein metabolism prior to developing prediabetes, including an increase in the concentration of large very-low-density lipoprotein particles (LVLDL-p), the mean size of VLDL (VLDL-s), and the concentration of small low-density lipoprotein particles (sLDL-p). Conversely, there is a decrease in the concentration of large high-density lipoprotein particles (LHDL-p), mean size of HDL (HDL-s), and mean size of LDL (LDL-s). Clinically validated studies show that proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) can measure these six parameters and derive a lipoprotein insulin resistance (LP-IR) score, ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater risk for insulin resistance. The reference method for calculating LP-IR relies on a proprietary NMR spectrometer, spectral deconvolution method, and algorithm. This study seeks to determine if lipoprotein subfraction parameters measured from a commercially available NMR system can produce LP-IR scores comparable to the reference method. Methods Serum lipoprotein NMR spectra were collected using a Bruker Ascend 600 MHz magnet, Bruker Avance NEO 500 spectrometer, and the Numares AXINON lipoFIT System to report the six LP-IR score parameters between January 2023 and January 2025 (Cohort A, n = 2,474). During the same period, LP-IR score and parameters were collected using the Vantera Clinical Analyzer (400 MHz) with the LipoProfile LP4 method (Cohort B, n = 2,959). Linear regression of decile-matched data for each parameter yielded adjustment equations to align lipoFIT values with the LipoProfile method. LP-IR scores were then calculated for both adjusted and unadjusted values using a previously published LP-IR scoring algorithm. Finally, LP-IR scores were compared for sera with measures from both instruments was (Cohort C, n = 108). Results The median concentrations of sLDL-p, LDL-s, VLDL-s, HDL-S matched between Cohort A and B (&lt;1% difference). Significant differences were noted for LVLDL-p and LHDL-p, with percent differences of 21.5% and 23.5%, respectively. Despite closely matching medians, the distributions varied greatly, with a mean interquartile range (IQR) percent difference across measures of 31.2% (Table 1). After distribution matching, all parameter median and mean IQR percent differences fell to &lt;5% and &lt;10%, respectively, between Cohort A and Cohort B. In Cohort C the LP-IR score matched well (y=1.1x-15, r=0.92; 95%CI 0.88, 0.94). Following distribution matching adjustment of lipoFIT values for Cohort C, new calculated LP-IR scores matched with reduced bias (y=0.94x-1.2) while correlation was slightly reduced (r=0.88 [0.83, 0.92]). By comparison, adjustments made via scaling lipoFIT values proportionally by the ratio of the medians between Cohort A and Cohort B yielded calculated LP-IR scores in Cohort C that maintained a similar bias prior to adjustments (y=1.2x-21), highlighting the ability of distribution matching to reduce bias. Conclusion Adjustments to measured lipoprotein parameters from a commercially available NMR spectrometer can be achieved via distribution matching. These adjustments greatly reduce the bias between a commercially available method and algorithm compared to the reference method, allowing for wider adoption of LP-IR score reporting.

Background. The spirometric response to standard-of-care (SOC) immunosuppressive therapy for the management of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) has been sparsely reported in the literature. Data from a Medicare-approved Registry were analyzed to characterize the effectiveness/durability of a wide range of SOC interventions to manage the decline of lung function and to validate the study spirometric criteria for initiation of rescue therapy. Methods. Lung transplant recipients with refractory BOS at 21 US collaborating centers were enrolled in the Registry. Data included both nonspirometric (eg, demographic, Immunosuppressive Regimens for management of BOS) and spirometric parameters (ie, forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV 1 ] measurements and derived indices). The utility of study FEV 1 criteria for treatment (ie, statistically significant rate of FEV 1 decline >30 mL/mo) was evaluated by comparing the spirometric course between participants who met or did not meet this criterion. Results. Only 21% of participants treated with SOC therapy had >50% decrease (76 ± 25% decrease) in the rate of FEV 1 decline. Although 51% of participants had a partial response (rate of FEV 1 decline decreased on average 71%), 49% of participants had a substantial increase (mean increase 224%). The FEV 1 criterion for treatment was able to identify 19% of participants (48/258) who achieved durable stabilization (ie, nonsignificant rate of FEV 1 <30 mL/mo) with SOC therapy. Conclusions. Patients with BOS have a widely variable response to SOC therapy. Our findings support the use of FEV 1 rate of decline to assess response to SOC therapy and to ensure appropriate assignment of participants with refractory BOS to rescue therapy treatment cohorts.

Of the thousands of genes and substrates identified in KRAS-mutant signaling networks in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), more than 200 are transcription factors, implying extensive and complex transcriptional regulation. However, we observed that genetic suppression of the transcription factor MYC alone was sufficient to phenocopy the effect of KRAS suppression in signaling, growth, and metabolic processes in PDAC cells. We determined the gene transcription changes caused by acute suppression of MYC function in KRAS -mutant PDAC cell lines and performed dependency map and pathway analyses on the affected gene sets. The expression of 1685 genes was increased upon suppression of MYC, and this gene set may comprise the bulk of the MYC-regulated genes essential for PDAC growth. In contrast, the 1325 genes whose expression was inhibited may comprise a compensatory response to oncogenic stress, mediated in part by the GTPase RHO. MYC-dependent transcriptional activity was largely ERK dependent, and almost one-third of ERK-regulated genes were also regulated by MYC in PDAC cells. Furthermore, chemical proteomic profiling revealed MYC-regulated protein kinases that can be targeted therapeutically. Together, these data provide a molecular portrait of MYC-dependent signaling that encompasses potentially exploitable mechanisms for treating PDAC.

Abstract Objectives γ‐Aminobutyric acid B receptor (GABA B R)‐IgG (immunoglobulin G) is an intermediate‐risk paraneoplastic autoantibody often associated with seizures. We aimed to assess the clinical and oncological features of GABA B R‐IgG autoimmune encephalitis (AE) and evaluate the performance of antibody testing. Methods Patients testing positive for GABA B R‐IgG in serum/cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at Mayo Clinic Neuroimmunology Laboratory were identified. Archived sera were retested by cell‐based assay (CBA) at 1:100 and 1:200 dilutions. A live‐cell flow cytometry–based assay (LCFBA) was developed and validated using archived sera and CSF. True positivity included patients with classic presentations of GABA B R‐IgG AE or oncological explanations for antibody presence. Results Eighty‐six patients (median age 63 years; 43 female) presented with classic presentations of GABA B R‐IgG AE: encephalopathy with prominent seizures ( n = 55), status epilepticus ( n = 23), and rapidly progressive dementia ( n = 8). In addition, 44 patients (33%) had a false‐positive result for GABA B R‐IgG characterized by non‐specific symptoms/alternate diagnoses. Malignancy was identified in 78% of true‐positive patients, predominantly small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC). Testing serum at 1:100 dilution on CBA and using tissue immunofluorescence assay (IFA) in serum and CSF improved the identification of true‐positive patients ( p < 0.001). CBA at 1:100 dilution performed better than conventional CBA (at 1:10 dilution, p < 0.001) and tissue IFA ( p = 0.031). An in‐house LCFBA showed 100% sensitivity and specificity in CSF, performing similarly to conventional CBA ( p = 0.125) in CSF, but better than tissue IFA ( p = 0.031). Furthermore, serum LCFBA performed better than conventional CBA ( p = 0.022) and tissue IFA ( p = 0.006). LCFBA had the highest diagnostic accuracy and was closely followed by CBA at 1:100 dilution. Significance GABA B R‐IgG AE often presents as encephalopathy with seizures or status epilepticus in the context of an underlying SCLC. Multimodal evaluation using tissue IFA and fixed CBA at higher dilutions improves detection of true cases. LCFBA performs very well as a diagnostic test with very high sensitivity and specificity.

Abstract We developed and cross‑validated an integrated circulating tumor DNA assay incorporating SNVs, indels, CNAs, and SVs to distinguish neurofibromatosis type 1 patients with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors from those with benign plexiform neurofibromas or tumor‑free controls. Among 82 participants, the assay achieved an AUC of 0.904, compared with 0.735 for genome‑wide CNAs. We also detected recurrent disease‑specific driver alterations, relapse up to three months before diagnosis, and early clearance consistent with durable remission.

Objectives: The role of femoral version (FV[MOU1] ) in the pre-arthritic hip pain remains increasingly recognized, including in femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Increased femoral version or decreased femoral version may play a role in hip biomechanics contributing to hip instability or impingement, respectively. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of hip arthroscopy for FAI across different femoral version groups in a multicenter prospective cohort study. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study of 677 FAI patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy was performed. The current study included 603 patients with low-dose CT performed preoperatively for measurement of femoral version from the larger cohort. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 14-45 years with idiopathic FAI. Exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip procedures, associated disorders, or Tönnis 2 or greater osteoarthritis. Femoral version was measured on low-dose computed tomography (CT) utilizing the Yoshioka oblique method and was broken into five subgroups: <5° (decreased FV), 6-15° (normal FV), 16-25° (mildly increased FV), 26-35° (moderately increased FV), 35°+ (severely increased FV). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were measured at a minimum one-year follow-up. The modified Harris hip score (mHHS) was assessed relative to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 8 and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of 74. Additional PROs included the HOOS Pain and Sports/Recreation subscores and the iHOT-12 score. Composite failure was defined as a reoperation for persistent symptoms or a failure to achieve either the mHHS MCID or PASS. Independent t-test (Mann-Whitney U) and ANOVA were utilized to compare groups. Results: Males had statistically lower femoral version than females (14.0° vs 18.0°; p<0.001). In females, 38.0% had mildly increased FV, 17.9% had moderately increased FV, and 3.6% had severely elevated FV. This is compared to 27.6%, 9.2%, and 1.8% in males, respectively (all p<0.001). Decreased FV was present in 7.1% of males, compared to 5.9% of females. Increased or decreased femoral versions appear to have similar outcomes to normal version when evaluated by PROs or outcome states. In fact, mildly increased and moderate increased FV group demonstrated the best outcomes. Changes in HOOS pain and sports subscores were significantly higher for these groups. Severely increased FV, >35°, was only present in 2.8% of patients but did demonstrate a higher rate of composite failure (15.4%) compared to moderately increased FV (3.1%). The decreased FV group had a composite failure of 10.4% compared to normal femoral version, 16-25° (10.2%). Conclusions: In a patient cohort undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI, significant differences in FV between males and females were present. Overall, in a multicenter prospective cohort study, the outcomes of hip arthroscopy for FAI did not seem to differ between increased or decreased femoral versions but were superior in mild to moderately increased FV. Future research with longer-term follow-up is still needed to definitively establish the longevity of outcomes of hip arthroscopy relative to FV.

Abstract Objective To evaluate available evidence for the efficacy and safety of topical analgesics for neuropathic pain and to offer treatment guidance. Methods An expert panel searched PubMed (Medline) and reference lists of published articles for available literature assessing 8 categories of topical analgesics used to treat various neuropathic pain conditions. The panel rated the level of analgesic efficacy evidence for each treatment and considered safety, ease of use, and cost. The degree of consensus on the recommendations among the panelists was measured. Results There was strong evidence and high consensus that capsaicin 8% is effective for diabetic peripheral neuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia and that lidocaine is effective for postherpetic neuralgia. There was strong evidence and moderate consensus that capsaicin 8% could be effective for HIV-induced neuropathy. There was moderate evidence and high consensus that lidocaine is likely effective for diabetic peripheral neuropathy, idiopathic neuropathy, and postsurgical neuropathy and that capsaicin 8% might be effective for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and complex regional pain syndrome. Evidence was weak for other topical medications, though the panel strongly agreed that antidepressants might help with postherpetic neuralgia, complex regional pain syndrome, postsurgical neuropathy, and post-traumatic neuropathy; that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs could help with postsurgical neuropathy; and that gabapentin might benefit vulvodynia. There was less agreement about whether antidepressants might benefit diabetic peripheral neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, and vulvodynia and whether capsaicin 8% could be effective for postsurgical neuropathy. Conclusions Recommendations were based on a survey and grading of existing literature and, when strong evidence was lacking, the collective clinical expertise of panelists.