Citations

AbstractObjectivesTo provide a clinical disease state review of recent relevant literature and to generate expert consensus statements regarding the breadth of pediatric thyroid cancer diagnosis and care, with an emphasis on thyroid surgery. To generate expert statements to educate pediatric practitioners on the state‐of‐the‐art practices and the value of surgical experience in the management of this unusual and challenging disease in children.MethodsA literature search was conducted and statements were constructed and subjected to a modified Delphi process to measure the consensus of the expert author panel. The wording of statements, voting tabulation, and statistical analysis were overseen by a Delphi expert (J.J.S.).ResultsTwenty‐five consensus statements were created and subjected to a modified Delphi analysis to measure the strength of consensus of the expert author panel. All statements reached a level of consensus, and the majority of statements reached the highest level of consensus.ConclusionPediatric thyroid cancer has many unique nuances, such as bulky cervical adenopathy on presentation, an increased incidence of diffuse sclerosing variant, and a longer potential lifespan to endure potential complications from treatment. Complications can be a burden to parents and patients alike. We suggest that optimal outcomes and decreased morbidity will come from the use of advanced imaging, diagnostic testing, and neural monitoring of patients treated at high‐volume centers by high‐volume surgeons.

Introduction: Triptans, the most commonly prescribed acute treatments for migraine attacks are, per FDA labeling, contraindicated in cardiovascular (CV) disease patients and have warnings and precautions for those with CV risk factors. Methods: Headache specialists, cardiologists, and health economics and outcomes researchers convened to identify diagnostic codes for: (1) CV diseases contraindicating triptans based on FDA labeling; (2) conditions comprising “other significant underlying CV disease”; and (3) CV risk factors included as warnings and precautions for triptans. A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of commercially insured adult US migraine patients in the 2017 Optum ® Clinformatics ® Data Mart (CDM) and the 2017 IBM ® Watson Health MarketScan ® Commercial Claims database was used to estimate the proportion of migraine patients with CV contraindications and warnings and precautions to triptans. Results: Of the 56,662 migraine patients analyzed from Optum CDM, 13.5% had ≥1 CV disease as specified in triptan labeling and an additional 8.5% had ≥1 “other CV disease” judged by the panel to constitute a “significant underlying CV disease” (total: 22.0% migraine patients). Of 176 724 migraine patients analyzed from MarketScan, 12.2% had ≥1 CV disease as specified in the labeling and an additional 8.0% had ≥1 “other significant underlying CV disease” (total: 20.2% of migraine patients). An additional 25.4% and 25.1% of migraine patients had ≥2 CV risk factors in Optum CDM and MarketScan. In total, 47.4% and 45.3% of migraine patients in both databases had a CV disease specified as a contraindication, an “other CV disease” endorsed as significant, or ≥2 CV risk factors identified as warnings and precautions to triptans. Conclusions: Analyses of more than 230,000 people with migraine showed that ≥20% of commercially insured US migraine patients have a CV condition that specifically contraindicates triptan treatment, and an additional 25% have ≥2 CV risk factors identified as warnings and precautions to triptans.

Background Triptans are the most commonly used acute treatment for migraine. This study evaluated real-world treatment patterns following an initial triptan prescription to understand refill rates and use of non-triptan medications for the acute treatment of migraine. Methods Commercially-insured adult patients over 18 years of age with a triptan prescription between 1/1/2013 to 31/12/2013 were identified from the Optum Clinformatics™ Data Mart database, with date of the first triptan fill designated as index date. Inclusion was limited to those with no fills for a triptan in the 12 months prior to index date (i.e. new users or initiators of triptans) and continuous enrollment in the 12 months pre- and 24 months post-index date. Fills for index triptan, non-index triptan, and other acute treatments for migraine were assessed for up to 24 months post-index. Results Among 10,509 patients, 50.8% did not refill the initial triptan within 12 months and 43.6% did not refill within 24 months. In the 12 months post-index, 90.5% of patients used only one type of triptan, 8.4% used two different triptans, and 1.0% used three or more triptans. Among patients with and without a triptan refill, use of opioids (39% vs. 42%), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (22% vs. 22%), and butalbital-containing products (9% vs. 10%) were similar. Conclusion More than half of those who newly initiated a triptan did not refill their initial prescription, and less than 1 in 10 used two or more triptans within 12 months. High rates of non-triptan acute medication use were found over 12 and 24 months of follow-up, most commonly opioids.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of ubrogepant on patient‐reported functional disability, satisfaction with study medication, and global impression of change. Background Ubrogepant is a small‐molecule, oral calcitonin gene‐related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. In 2 phase 3 trials (ACHIEVE I and II), ubrogepant demonstrated efficacy vs placebo on the 2 co‐primary endpoints of headache pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome migraine‐associated symptom at 2 hours post dose for the 50 and 100 mg doses. Patient‐reported outcomes, such as functional disability, satisfaction, and patient global impression of change, can provide additional evidence of the efficacy of an acute treatment for migraine on clinically meaningful and patient‐relevant outcomes. Methods ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II were multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, single‐attack trials in adults (18‐75 years) with migraine. In ACHIEVE I, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 50 or 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 25 or 50 mg to treat a migraine attack with moderate or severe headache pain. Participants rated ability to perform daily activities on the Functional Disability Scale, before dosing and at 1, 2, 4, and 8 hours after the initial dose; satisfaction with study medication at 2 and 24 hours; and impression of overall change in migraine on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale at 2 hours. In prespecified analyses for each trial, each outcome was compared between each ubrogepant dose group and the relevant placebo group. Data were pooled from the ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups of the 2 trials in a post hoc analysis. Results In ACHIEVE I, 559 participants were randomized to placebo, 556 to ubrogepant 50 mg, and 557 to ubrogepant 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, 563 were randomized to placebo, 561 to ubrogepant 25 mg, and 562 to ubrogepant 50 mg. At 2 hours post dose, significantly higher proportions of ubrogepant‐treated participants vs placebo‐treated participants reported being able to function normally (ACHIEVE I: ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.6% [171/421], P = .0012 vs placebo; ubrogepant 100 mg, 42.9% [192/448], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 29.8% [136/456]; ACHIEVE II: ubrogepant 25 mg, 42.6% [185/434], P = .0015 vs placebo; ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.5% [188/464], P = .0118 vs placebo; placebo, 34.2% [156/456]; pooled 50 mg, 40.6% [359/885], vs pooled placebo, 32.0% [292/912]; P < .0001), were satisfied/extremely satisfied with study medication (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 36.3% [147/405], P < .0001 vs placebo; 100 mg, 35.8% [149/416], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 24.1% [104/432]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 35.1% [141/402], P = .0018 vs placebo; 50 mg, 37.8% [163/431], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 24.8% [106/427]; pooled ubrogepant 50 mg, 37.1% [310/836], vs pooled placebo, 24.5% [210/859]; P < .0001), and indicated that their migraine was much/very much better on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 34.4% [103/299], P = .0006 vs placebo; 100 mg, 34.3% [102/297], P = .0009 vs placebo; placebo, 22.0% [69/313]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 34.1% [124/364], P < .0001 vs placebo; 50 mg, 33.4% [131/392], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 20.7% [78/376]; pooled 50 mg, 33.9% [234/691], vs pooled placebo, 21.3% [147/689]; P < .0001). Conclusions A significantly higher proportion of participants treated with ubrogepant were able to function normally, were satisfied with the study medication, and reported clinically meaningful improvement compared with those receiving placebo. The results reinforce the potential benefits of ubrogepant on patient‐centered outcomes in the acute treatment of migraine.

Introduction Globally, the use of telestroke programmes for acute care is expanding. Currently, a standardised set of variables for enabling reliable international comparisons of telestroke programmes does not exist. The aim of the study was to establish a consensus-based, minimum dataset for acute telestroke to enable the reliable comparison of programmes, clinical management and patient outcomes. Methods An initial scoping review of variables was conducted, supplemented by reaching out to colleagues leading some of these programmes in different countries. An international expert panel of clinicians, researchers and managers ( n = 20) from the Australasia Pacific region, USA, UK and Europe was convened. A modified-Delphi technique was used to achieve consensus via online questionnaires, teleconferences and email. Results Overall, 533 variables were initially identified and harmonised into 159 variables for the expert panel to review. The final dataset included 110 variables covering three themes (service configuration, consultations, patient information) and 12 categories: (1) details about telestroke network/programme ( n = 12), (2) details about initiating hospital ( n = 10), (3) telestroke consultation ( n = 17), (4) patient characteristics ( n = 7), (5) presentation to hospital ( n = 5), (6) general clinical care within first 24 hours ( n = 10), (7) thrombolysis treatment ( n = 10), (8) endovascular treatment ( n = 13), (9) neurosurgery treatment ( n = 8), (10) processes of care beyond 24 hours ( n = 7), (11) discharge information ( n = 5), (12) post-discharge and follow-up data ( n = 6). Discussion The acute telestroke minimum dataset provides a recommended set of variables to systematically evaluate acute telestroke programmes in different countries. Adoption is recommended for new and existing services.

Introduction: Risk of lobar and non-lobar intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) varies among blacks, whites and Hispanics. We sought to determine whether these differences could be due to variability in the effects of Apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon (ε) alleles, the most potent genetic risk factor for ICH. Methods: Primary ICH cases and controls were collected from US and European sites contributing to the International Stroke Genetic Consortium (ISGC). We meta-analyzed the effects of APOE allele status on ICH risk applying a two-stage clustering approach based on race/ethnicity and the contributing study. Models were adjusted for age, sex, history of hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, warfarin, statin and antiplatelet use, smoking and alcohol use. A propensity score analysis was used to model the influence of APOE against the burden of hypertension across races/ethnicities. Results: 13,124 subjects (54.5% male, median age 66 years) were included. In whites, APOE ε2 (odds ratio (OR)=1.85, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.27-2.69, p<0.001) and APOE ε4 (OR=1.94, 95% CI=1.58-2.38, p<0.001) were independently associated with lobar ICH risk, however within self-identified Hispanics and blacks, no associations were found (Figure). After propensity score-matching for hypertension burden, APOE ε4 was associated with lobar ICH risk among whites (OR=1.12, 95% CI=1.08-1.17) and Hispanics (OR=1.07, 95% CI=1.01-1.15, p=0.01), but not blacks (OR=1.02 95% CI=0.98-1.07, p=0.251). APOE ε2 and ε4 did not show an effect on non-lobar ICH risk in any race/ethnicity. Conclusion: APOE ε4 and ε2 alleles affect lobar ICH risk variably by race and ethnicity. Associations are confirmed in whites but can be shown in Hispanics only when the excess burden of hypertension is propensity score-matched. Further studies are needed to explore interactions between APOE alleles and environmental exposures that vary by race and ethnicity in representative populations at risk for ICH.