Citations

Intronic GGGGCC hexanucleotide repeat expansions in C9orf72 are the most common genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Despite its intronic location, this repeat avidly supports synthesis of pathogenic dipeptide repeat (DPR) proteins via repeat-associated non-AUG (RAN) translation. However, the template RNA species that undergoes RAN translation endogenously remains unclear. Using long-read based 5′ RNA ligase-mediated rapid amplification of cDNA ends (5′ Repeat-RLM-RACE), we identified C9orf72 transcripts initiating within intron 1 in a C9BAC mouse model, patient-derived iNeurons, and iNeuron-derived polysomes. These cryptic m 7 G-capped mRNAs are at least partially polyadenylated and are more abundant than transcripts derived from intron retention or circular intron lariats. In RAN translation reporter assays, intronic template transcripts–even those with short (32 nucleotide) leaders–exhibited robust expression compared to exon–intron and repeat-containing lariat reporters. To assess endogenous repeat-containing lariat RNA contributions to RAN translation, we enhanced endogenous lariat stability by knocking down the lariat debranching enzyme Dbr1. However, this modulation did not impact DPR production in patient-derived iNeurons. These findings identify cryptic, linear, m 7 G-capped intron-initiating C9orf72 mRNAs as an endogenous template for RAN translation and DPR production, with implications for disease pathogenesis and therapeutic development.

AbstractThe American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated “Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis”. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 developed recommendations address diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, the appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management (including radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function), and the judicious use of systemic and topical therapy. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, an immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. An updated guideline is needed as a result of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.

AbstractThe American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published the updated “Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis” as a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 developed recommendations address diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, the appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management (including radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function), and the judicious use of systemic and topical therapy. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. An updated guideline is needed as a result of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.MethodsThis executive summary describes the guideline developed using the 55‐page protocol published as the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual (3rd edition), which summarizes the methodology for assessments of current data, topic prioritization, development of key action statements, application of value judgements, and related procedures. The guideline update group represented the disciplines of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, infectious disease, family medicine, allergy and immunology, advanced practice nursing, and a consumer advocate.Differences from Prior GuidelineThis clinical practice guideline is as an update, and replacement, for an earlier guideline published in 2015 by the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO‐HNSF).1 An update was planned for 5 years after the initial publication date and was further necessitated by new primary studies and systematic reviews that might suggest a need for modifying clinically important recommendations.2 Changes in content and methodology from the prior guideline include the following: New evidence from 14 guidelines, 194 systematic reviews, and 133 RCTs. Emphasis on patient education and counseling with new explanatory tables. Expanded action statement profiles to explicitly state quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, intentional vagueness, and differences of opinion. Enhanced external review process to include public comment and journal peer review. New algorithm to clarify decision making, watchful waiting, action statement relationships. Extension of watchful waiting (without antibiotic therapy) as an initial management strategy to all patients with uncomplicated acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) regardless of severity, not just patients with “mild” illness (prior guideline). Clarified the recommended timeline for the diagnosis, conservative management and antibiotic treatment of ABRS. Change in recommendation to first‐line antibiotic therapy for ABRS amoxicillin, with or without clavulanate, from amoxicillin alone (prior guideline). Addition of aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) as a chronic condition that modifies management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Three new key action statements on managing CRS that focus on the use of biologics (recommend against when patients do not have polyps and educate patients about them when they do) and a recommendation against the empiric use of antibiotics for CRS solely as a third‐party requirement for surgery or imaging.

Left ventricular recovery (LV) in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) supported by a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is uncommon but clinically significant. There is limited understanding on the timing of LV recovery in relation to LVAD implantation. A total of 383 HF patients who underwent LVAD implantation were evaluated for LV functional improvement defined as an absolute increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of greater than or equal to 20% post-LVAD placement. Out of 383 LVAD patients, 39 (10.1%) demonstrated significant LV improvement. Among these, 25 (64%) patients had received LVAD less than or equal to 1 year of HF diagnosis, whereas 14 (36%) patients were implanted greater than 1 year from HF diagnosis. No significant differences in baseline imaging or hemodynamics were found between these two groups. The timing of LVAD implantation and time from LVAD to LVEF improvement was not associated with 5 year outcomes. Survival, free from HF relapse or transplant was 59% in the less than or equal to 1 year and 46% in greater than 1 year HF duration groups ( p = 0.83). Thus, LV functional improvement can occur across a broad spectrum of HF duration, suggesting that the potential for recovery is not limited to those with newly diagnosed disease.

ABSTRACT Background Preparation of the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) using covered stent placement is a common preparatory step for transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) to reduce the risk of disruption associated with dilating calcified RVOT conduits. Aim We present a novel method employing a self‐expanding covered aortic endoprosthesis and discuss its advantages as an alternative strategy. Methods Patients with congenital heart disease undergoing RVOT conduit preparation with the GORE TAG Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis Extender (W.L. Gore & Associates, Newark, DE) followed by TPVR, were prospectively enrolled in a dedicated database. To date, 14 patients have been included. Data on demographics, diagnoses, procedural details, hemodynamic parameters, and outcomes were analyzed. Results Fourteen patients (median age: 35 years [range: 18–79]; 57% female) successfully underwent endograft placement immediately before TPVR. Treated conduits included pulmonary homografts ( n = 8), surgical bioprostheses ( n = 2), Hancock conduit ( n = 1), Contegra conduit ( n = 1), native RVOT ( n = 1), and Melody valve within a surgical bioprosthesis ( n = 1). Most patients presented with mixed stenosis and regurgitation ( n = 9), with the remaining having stenosis ( n = 4) or regurgitation ( n = 1). Valves implanted post‐preparation included the Sapien S3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) ( n = 10) and the Melody valve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) ( n = 5). Significant reductions in RVOT systolic gradient were observed (median 34 mmHg pre‐procedure to 3 mmHg post‐procedure), along with marked conduit expansion (median diameter 13 mm pre‐procedure to 25.5 mm post‐procedure). No complications were reported. Conclusions This study highlights the feasibility of a self‐expanding aortic endoprosthesis for RVOT preparation before TPVR. Further comparative study is warranted. Procedural success was achieved in all cases.

Objective: To evaluate treatment trends and compare outcomes following fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA). Background: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized as a less invasive alternative to OSR for treatment of TAAAs. Methods: We studied patients who underwent elective FB-EVAR or OSR of TAAAs (2008-2020), since the initiation of an Advanced Endovascular Aortic Program. Primary endpoints were early major adverse events (MAE) and early and late all-cause mortality. Propensity score overlap weighting analysis was performed to adjust for measured confounders between groups. Results: There were 357 (70.8%) patients treated by FB-EVAR and 147 (29.2%) with OSR. The use of FB-EVAR increased from 16.7% in 2008 to >80% since 2017 ( P <0.001). Incidences of early MAEs were 25.8% and 49.0%, respectively; early mortality rates for FB-EVAR and OSR were 2.5% and 6.8%, respectively. In the weighted cohort, FB-EVAR patients had decreased early MAEs (weight-adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.41; P <0.001) and mortality (aOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.73; P =0.005) versus OSR patients. Five-year survival estimates were 52.2% (95% CI, 45.2-60.4%) and 78.0% (95% CI, 70.6-86.2%), respectively. In the weighted cohort, there was no significant difference in late survival between groups (weight-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.74-2.39; P =0.34). Conclusions: This study confirmed the change in practice from OSR to FB-EVAR for treatment of TAAAs over the past decade. Incidences of early MAEs and mortality were lower with FB-EVAR, with no significant difference in late survival in the weighted cohort.

Clonus is a disabling symptom of upper motor neuron dysfunction in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). We report immediate termination of mechanically evoked clonus by epidural lumbosacral spinal cord stimulation (ES) in a 58-year-old man with secondary progressive MS. This observation was captured during training using video and skin surface electromyography of soleus muscle activity. ES immediately reduced mechanically evoked clonus duration and cycle count compared to trials without stimulation, as determined by a Kruskal–Wallis test ( p < 0.05, n = 2–3 trials), and reverted to baseline status when stimulation was off.

Abstract The initial method of detection (MOD) refers to the first imaging examination, physical symptom, or clinical sign that prompts further investigation and ultimately leads to a new breast cancer diagnosis. The MOD is assigned at the patient level and falls into 1 of 3 categories: screening in asymptomatic patients, detection by patients or health care providers, or neither of the above. The MOD should be assigned prospectively by the radiologist when interpreting an examination with a final BI-RADS category of 4 or 5, before image-guided biopsy and breast cancer diagnosis. The MOD is not assigned to examinations classified as BI-RADS category 0, 1, 2, 3, or 6, nor is it assigned in the setting of an active breast cancer diagnosis. This Clinical Practice article addresses frequently asked questions and challenging clinical scenarios compiled by the American College of Radiology’s Screening and Emerging Technology Committee to guide consistent MOD assignment. For example, if a patient presents with a lump but is ultimately found to have a suspicious finding requiring biopsy in the contralateral breast, the MOD should reflect the reason for presentation, the patient-detected symptom (Pat), even if the cancer itself is asymptomatic. By increasing awareness of MOD and standardizing MOD reporting practices, radiologists can contribute to improved data collection. While MOD is not currently tracked in U.S. cancer registries, its systematic collection may offer valuable insights into screening effectiveness, technology performance, and disparities in cancer detection. Standardized MOD reporting has the potential to strengthen early detection efforts and improve outcomes across diverse clinical settings.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe Pediatric Oncology Group P9262 Phase 2 study of single‐agent paclitaxel demonstrated one complete response (CR), one partial response (PR), and four with stable disease (SD) among 15 patients with recurrent Wilms tumor (WT). Based on this activity, paclitaxel‐containing regimens have been used as salvage therapy for treatment‐refractory WT. We conducted a multi‐institutional retrospective study to further characterize the clinical activity of paclitaxel‐containing regimens in recurrent WT.MethodsTwelve institutions submitted anonymized data from patients with relapsed WT treated with paclitaxel. Response after one or two cycles of a paclitaxel‐containing regimen was reported according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.ResultsTwenty‐eight patients with a median age at diagnosis of 5.5 years (range: 3 months to 31.9 years) were reported. Twenty had non‐anaplastic WT; eight had diffuse anaplasia (DA). Stage at diagnosis was I (n = 1), II (n = 1), III (n = 11), IV (n = 14), and V (n = 1). Patients received a mean of 8.5 anticancer drugs (range: 6–12) before paclitaxel, including eight who received high‐dose therapy/stem cell transplant. Paclitaxel (n = 13) or nab‐paclitaxel (n = 15) were predominantly administered in combination with other agents, most commonly doxorubicin and/or gemcitabine. Eleven of 26 patients with measurable disease had a partial response (7 = non‐anaplastic; 4 = DA), four had stable disease, and 11 had progressive disease. Two patients without measurable disease maintained a complete response for 12 and 16 months. The mean duration without progression was 7.6 months (range: 1–35 months).ConclusionsPaclitaxel‐containing regimens appear to be active against heavily pretreated WT with either non‐anaplastic or DA histology. Prospective studies are warranted to formally evaluate the efficacy of paclitaxel‐based therapies.