RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy, reliability, and readability of publicly available large language models in answering fundamental questions on hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis and management. METHODS: Twenty questions on liver cancer diagnosis and management were asked in triplicate to ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI), Gemini (Google), and Bing (Microsoft). Responses were assessed by six fellowship-trained physicians from three academic liver transplant centers who actively diagnose and/or treat liver cancer. Responses were categorized as accurate (score 1; all information is true and relevant), inadequate (score 0; all information is true, but does not fully answer the question or provides irrelevant information), or inaccurate (score - 1; any information is false). Means with standard deviations were recorded. Responses were considered as a whole accurate if mean score was > 0 and reliable if mean score was > 0 across all responses for the single question. Responses were also quantified for readability using the Flesch Reading Ease Score and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Readability and accuracy across 60 responses were compared using one-way ANOVAs with Tukey's multiple comparison tests. RESULTS: Of the twenty questions, ChatGPT answered nine (45%), Gemini answered 12 (60%), and Bing answered six (30%) questions accurately; however, only six (30%), eight (40%), and three (15%), respectively, were both accurate and reliable. There were no significant differences in accuracy between any chatbot. ChatGPT responses were the least readable (mean Flesch Reading Ease Score 29; college graduate), followed by Gemini (30; college) and Bing (40; college; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Large language models provide complex responses to basic questions on hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis and management that are seldomly accurate, reliable, or readable.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) face complex treatment decisions and frequently turn to the Internet for treatment information. The content of patient educational websites about mRCC treatment has not been evaluated. This study evaluated the accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about the treatment of mRCC. METHODS: A total of 2,700 Internet queries were performed. Across 3 Internet search engines, 25 links of 36 permutations of mRCC keywords and their synonyms were screened for eligibility. Eligible websites were English-language websites containing information about mRCC treatments. Sponsored, social media, provider-facing, and news websites were excluded. Accuracy of eligible websites was evaluated in 2 domains: (1) Completeness by calculating the percentage of mRCC facts included in websites using an investigator-created checklist based on the NCI's RCC Treatment (PDQ®)-patient version, and (2) Correctness by identifying incorrect statements that were inconsistent with guidelines. Websites containing ≥60% of checklist items had a "passing" completeness score. Incorrect statements were tallied and qualitatively categorized. Readability was evaluated using the Fry and SMOG formulae, which calculate reading grade levels. Quality was evaluated using validated instruments that appraise health information quality: QUEST (scored 0-28), which focuses on online information, and DISCERN (scored 16-80), which focuses on treatment choices. RESULTS: Thirty-nine websites were analyzed. Mean completeness score was 30% (range 0%-69%); only 2 (5%) websites had a passing score. Twelve (31%) websites had ≥1 incorrect statement, such as listing homeopathy or hormone therapy as mRCC treatment options, or including outdated statements. Mean readability levels were 11th and 12th grades for the Fry and SMOG methods, respectively. No website had a reading level lower than 9th grade. Mean QUEST score was 19 (range 9-28); authorship, complementarity, and currency items had the lowest scores. Mean DISCERN score was 56 (range 42-76), with 7 (18%) websites rated "excellent", 22 (56%) rated "good", and 10 (26%) rated fair. CONCLUSIONS: Many websites about mRCC treatment have incomplete, inaccurate, and unreadable information. Quality is highly variable. Efforts to improve accuracy, readability, and quality are needed to ensure that patients with mRCC can make well-informed treatment decisions and avoid harm from misinformation.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Little is known about the shared decision-making (SDM) needs, barriers, and facilitators of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer in the hospital. Understanding this may improve SDM and cancer care quality in this vulnerable population. METHODS: A single-site, mixed-methods study of hospitalized patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer, caregivers, and oncologists was conducted. After discharge, patient ± caregiver semi-structured interviews exploring SDM needs, barriers, and facilitators regarding their most important upcoming cancer-related decision were conducted. Oncologists were surveyed about patient knowledge and SDM needs using closed- and open-ended questions, respectively. Thematic analysis was performed for qualitative data with a focus on themes unique to or amplified by hospitalization. Descriptive statistics and the Chi-squared test were performed for quantitative data. RESULTS: Patients and caregivers reported high SDM needs surrounding treatment and prognostic information, leading to decisional conflict. Eight themes emerged: anticipated cancer treatment decisions, variable control preferences in decision-making, high cancer-related information needs and uncertainty, barriers and facilitators to information gathering during and post hospitalization, and decision-making facilitators. Among 32 oncologists, most (56%) reported patients were poorly informed about treatment and prognosis. Oncologists reported variable expectations about patient knowledge after hospitalization, facilitators to patient decision-making, and patient uncertainty while awaiting an outpatient oncologist appointment. CONCLUSION: Patients newly diagnosed with advanced cancer in the hospital have high SDM needs and experience decisional conflict. This may be due to barriers unique to or exacerbated by hospitalization. Further research is needed to develop strategies to address these barriers and enhance the facilitators identified in this study.
Asunto(s)
Toma de Decisiones Conjunta , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Neoplasias/psicología , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Adulto , Cuidadores/psicología , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Participación del Paciente/métodos , Investigación Cualitativa , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Oncólogos/psicología , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Relaciones Médico-PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is commonly used in plastic and reconstructive surgery. With the abundance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting P-values for ADM outcomes, this study used the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to evaluate the statistical stability of the outcomes in ADM RCTs. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Medline, and Cochrane databases were reviewed for ADM RCTs (2003-present) reporting a dichotomous, categorical outcome. FI and rFI (event reversals influencing outcome significance) and FQ (standardized fragility) were calculated and reported as median. Subgroup analysis was performed based on intervention types. RESULTS: Among the 127 studies screened, 56 RCTs with 579 outcomes were included. The median FI stood at 4 (3-5) and FQ was 0.04 (0.03-0.07). Only 101 outcomes were statistically significant with a median FI of 3 (1-6) and FQ of 0.04 (0.02-0.08). The nonsignificant outcomes had a median FI of 4 (3-5) and FQ of 0.04 (0.03-0.07). Notably, 26% of the outcomes had several patients lost to follow up equal to or surpassing the FI. Based on the intervention type, the median FIs showed minor fluctuations but remained low. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes from ADM-related RCTs were statistically fragile. Slight outcome reversals or maintenance of patient follow-up can alter the significance of results. Therefore, future researchers are recommended to jointly report FI, FQ, and P-values to offer a comprehensive view of the robustness in ADM literature.
Asunto(s)
Dermis Acelular , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Procedimientos de Cirugía Plástica/métodosRESUMEN
Objective: To understand the quality of informational Graves' disease (GD) videos on YouTube for treatment decision-making quality and inclusion of American Thyroid Association (ATA) treatment guidelines. Study Design: Cross-sectional cohort. Setting: Informational YouTube videos with subject matter "Graves' Disease treatment." Method: The top 50 videos based on our query were assessed using the DISCERN instrument. This validated algorithm discretely rates treatment-related information from excellent (≥4.5) to very poor (<1.9). Videos were also screened for ATA guideline inclusion. Descriptive statistics were used for cohort characterization. Univariate and multivariate linear regressions characterized factors associated with DISCERN scores. Significance was set at P < .05. Results: The videos featured 57,513.43 views (SD = 162,579.25), 1054.70 likes (SD = 2329.77), and 168.80 comments (SD = 292.97). Most were patient education (52%) or patient experience (24%). A minority (40%) were made by thyroid specialists (endocrinologists, endocrine surgeons, or otolaryngologists). Under half did not mention all 3 treatment modalities (44%), and 54% did not mention any ATA recommendations. Overall, videos displayed poor reliability (mean = 2.26, SD = 0.67), treatment information quality (mean = 2.29, SD = 0.75), and overall video quality (mean = 2.47, SD = 1.07). Physician videos were associated with lower likes, views, and comments (P < .001) but higher DISCERN reliability (P = .015) and overall score (P = .019). Longer videos (P = .015), patient accounts (P = .013), and patient experience (P = .002) were associated with lower scores. Conclusion: The most available GD treatment content on YouTube varies significantly in the quality of medical information. This may contribute to suboptimal disease understanding, especially for patients highly engaged with online health information sources.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of irrigation with bacitracin-containing solution is common among surgeons, as it was widely thought to have antibacterial properties and prevent postoperative infection. Current literature, however, suggests that antibiotic-containing irrigation confers little added benefit. On January 31, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration instituted a ban on bacitracin-containing irrigation for operative use. This study aimed to determine whether bacitracin has a beneficial effect on postoperative infection rates by analyzing infection rates before and after the Food and Drug Administration ban on bacitracin irrigation. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective chart review was conducted. Eligible patients underwent implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy from October 1, 2016, to July 31, 2022. Procedure date, reconstruction type, patient comorbidities, use of bacitracin irrigation, postoperative infection, and secondary outcomes were collected. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 188 female patients were included in the study. Bacitracin use did not protect against infection in univariate or multivariable analysis. Age greater than 50 years was associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection ( P = 0.0366). The presence of comorbidities, smoker status, neoadjuvant therapy treatment before surgery, implant placement, and laterality were all not significantly associated with postoperative infection development. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate a lack of association between bacitracin use and postoperative infection. Additional research into the optimal antibiotic for perioperative irrigation is needed, as bacitracin is not encouraged for use.
Asunto(s)
Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Mamoplastia , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Bacitracina/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias de la Mama/complicaciones , Mastectomía/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Mamoplastia/métodos , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: With burgeoning popularity of artificial intelligence-based chatbots, oropharyngeal cancer patients now have access to a novel source of medical information. Because chatbot information is not reviewed by experts, we sought to evaluate an artificial intelligence-based chatbot's oropharyngeal cancer-related information for accuracy. METHODS: Fifteen oropharyngeal cancer-related questions were developed and input into ChatGPT version 3.5. Four physician-graders independently assessed accuracy, comprehensiveness, and similarity to a physician response using 5-point Likert scales. Responses graded lower than three were then critiqued by physician-graders. Critiques were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Readability of responses was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level (FKRGL) scales. RESULTS: Average accuracy, comprehensiveness, and similarity to a physician response scores were 3.88 (SD = 0.99), 3.80 (SD = 1.14), and 3.67 (SD = 1.08), respectively. Posttreatment-related questions were most accurate, comprehensive, and similar to a physician response, followed by treatment-related, then diagnosis-related questions. Posttreatment-related questions scored significantly higher than diagnosis-related questions in all three domains (p < 0.01). Two themes of the physician critiques were identified: suboptimal education value and potential to misinform patients. The mean FRE and FKRGL scores both indicated greater than an 11th grade readability level-higher than the 6th grade level recommended for patients. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT responses may not educate patients to an appropriate degree, could outright misinform them, and read at a more difficult grade level than is recommended for patient material. As oropharyngeal cancer patients represent a vulnerable population facing complex, life-altering diagnoses, and treatments, they should be cautious when consuming chatbot-generated medical information. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:2252-2257, 2024.
Asunto(s)
Laringoscopios , Neoplasias Orofaríngeas , Humanos , Inteligencia Artificial , Programas Informáticos , Neoplasias Orofaríngeas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Orofaríngeas/terapia , EscolaridadRESUMEN
Objective: To evaluate the quality of thyroidectomy-related posts on TikTok, the fastest-growing social media platform worldwide. Methods: Videos posted from April 2020 to September 2022 were queried on TikTok using the search terms "thyroidsurgery," "thyroidectomy," and "thyroidremoval." Two reviewers recorded thematic, demographic, and performance data of these posts. The DISCERN instrument was used to evaluate the quality and reliability of the information contained in the videos. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize post-submitter demographics and video content. Simple and multiple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between DISCERN scores and video characteristics. Univariate analysis of variance was performed to compare DISCERN scores between author types. Results: In this study, 228 TikTok videos were included which totaled over 23 million views. On average, each video accumulated more than 6000 "likes," 300 comments, and 70 shares. The average total DISCERN score was 27.46, which is deemed to be of poor overall quality. Upon multiple linear regression, video duration (ß = 4.66, p < .001) and educational subject type (ß = 3.97, p < .001) significantly positively predicted aggregate DISCERN scores, while journey subject type (ß = -3.19, p = .006), and reassurance subject type (ß = -2.52, p = .035) significantly negatively predicted aggregate DISCERN scores. Aggregate DISCERN scores varied significantly (p < .05) between author types. Conclusion: Social media posts on TikTok about thyroidectomy are mostly of poor quality and reliability but vary by authorship, subject type, and video characteristics. Given its widespread popularity, TikTok videos may have an increasing role in shaping patient perception of thyroidectomy and may represent an opportunity to provide education. Lay summary: TikTok posts about thyroidectomy are mostly of poor quality but vary by authorship, subject, and video characteristics. Given its popularity, TikTok videos may have a role in shaping the patient perception of thyroidectomy and may represent an opportunity to provide education. Level of evidence: Level 4.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors have been shown to have limited activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We aimed to determine whether a single dose of lutetium-177 [177Lu]-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 (177Lu-PSMA-617) followed by maintenance pembrolizumab was safe and could induce durable clinical benefit. METHODS: We did an open-label, dose-expansion, phase 1 study at the University of California, San Francisco (San Fransisco, CA, USA). Eligible patients were men aged 18 years or older with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had progression on one or more androgen signalling inhibitors, and at least three PSMA-avid lesions on 68Ga-PSMA-11 positron emission tomography. In part A, patients were enrolled sequentially to one of three schedules in which a single dose of 177Lu-PSMA-617 (7·4 GBq) was given intravenously 28 days before (schedule 1), concomitant with (schedule 2), or 21 days after (schedule 3) the start of maintenance intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks). In part B, 25 patients were enrolled using the recommended phase 2 schedule. The primary endpoint in part A was determination of the recommended phase 2 schedule, and in part B, the objective response rate. The analysis set included all patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or 177Lu-PSMA-617. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03805594. FINDINGS: Between Aug 8, 2019 and May 7, 2022, 43 male patients were enrolled (n=18 part A [six patients per schedule]; n=25 part B), with a median follow-up of 16·5 months (IQR 12·2-21·9). Schedule 1 was selected as the recommended phase 2 schedule for part B, on the basis of safety and feasibility of administration observed in part A. In part B, 14 (56%; 95% CI 35-76) of 25 patients had a confirmed objective response. Two (5%) of 43 patients had a treatment-related adverse event of grade 3 or worse (grade 3 arthritis in schedule 2, grade 3 pneumonitis in schedule 3). One serious adverse event (one death due to aspiration pneumonia) and no treatment-related deaths were observed. INTERPRETATION: A single priming dose of 177Lu-PSMA-617 followed by pembrolizumab maintenance was safe and had encouraging preliminary activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Foundation, National Cancer Institute, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Merck.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Humanos , Masculino , Compuestos Heterocíclicos con 1 Anillo/uso terapéutico , Antígeno Prostático Específico/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Resultado del TratamientoAsunto(s)
Carcinoma Verrugoso , Neoplasias de la Boca , Humanos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/terapia , Neoplasias de la Boca/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Boca/terapia , Carcinoma Verrugoso/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Verrugoso/terapia , InmunoterapiaRESUMEN
Background: Limited information is available for patients with breast cancer (BC) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially among underrepresented racial/ethnic populations. Methods: This is a COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry-based retrospective cohort study of females with active or history of BC and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosed between March 2020 and June 2021 in the US. Primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on a five-level ordinal scale, including none of the following complications, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression model identified characteristics associated with COVID-19 severity. Results: 1383 female patient records with BC and COVID-19 were included in the analysis, the median age was 61 years, and median follow-up was 90 days. Multivariable analysis revealed higher odds of COVID-19 severity for older age (aOR per decade, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.32-1.67]); Black patients (aOR 1.74; 95 CI 1.24-2.45), Asian Americans and Pacific Islander patients (aOR 3.40; 95 CI 1.70-6.79) and Other (aOR 2.97; 95 CI 1.71-5.17) racial/ethnic groups; worse ECOG performance status (ECOG PS ≥2: aOR, 7.78 [95% CI, 4.83-12.5]); pre-existing cardiovascular (aOR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.63-3.15])/pulmonary comorbidities (aOR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.20-2.29]); diabetes mellitus (aOR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.66-3.04]); and active and progressing cancer (aOR, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.89-22.6]). Hispanic ethnicity, timing, and type of anti-cancer therapy modalities were not significantly associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. The total all-cause mortality and hospitalization rate for the entire cohort was 9% and 37%, respectively however, it varied according to the BC disease status. Conclusions: Using one of the largest registries on cancer and COVID-19, we identified patient and BC-related factors associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, underrepresented racial/ethnic patients experienced worse outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Funding: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to Tianyi Sun, Sanjay Mishra, Benjamin French, Jeremy L Warner; P30-CA046592 to Christopher R Friese; P30 CA023100 for Rana R McKay; P30-CA054174 for Pankil K Shah and Dimpy P Shah; KL2 TR002646 for Pankil Shah and the American Cancer Society and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research (MRSG-16-152-01-CCE) and P30-CA054174 for Dimpy P Shah. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH). The funding sources had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit it for publication. Clinical trial number: CCC19 registry is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios de Cohortes , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Importance: Systematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking. Objective: To assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022. Exposure: Treatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up. Results: Of 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19-related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Masculino , Anciano , Femenino , Tromboembolia Venosa/inducido químicamente , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Prueba de COVID-19 , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , SARS-CoV-2 , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Agentes InmunomoduladoresRESUMEN
This JAMA Oncology Patient Page explains FDG PET scans and how they are used in cancer care.
Asunto(s)
Fluorodesoxiglucosa F18 , Neoplasias , Humanos , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Radiofármacos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias/terapiaRESUMEN
Background: Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. Objectives: To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated. Results: Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001). Conclusions: Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation (UCS) is associated with increased resistance to chemotherapy, but outcomes associated with newer therapies approved in this space over the last 5 to 10 years are less well defined. We investigated clinical outcomes and molecular profiling of patients with UCS treated with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and/or Enfortumab vedotin (EV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We undertook a retrospective analysis of UC patients treated with ICI and/or EV. Objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between pure UC (pUC) and UCS using X2 and log-rank tests, respectively. Prevalence of the most commonly detected somatic alterations were also compared between the 2 histologic subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients (40 UCS, 120 pUC) were identified for this analysis. Among 151 patients treated with ICI (38 UCS, 113 pUC), UCS patients had a shorter mPFS (1.9 vs. 4.8 months, P < 0.01) and mOS (9.2 vs. 20.7 months, P < 0.01) compared to pUC. Among 37 patients treated with EV (12 UCS, 25 pUC), UCS patients had a lower ORR (17% vs. 70%, P < 0.01) and shorter mPFS (3.4 vs. 15.8 months, P < 0.01). UCS samples were enriched for CDKN2A, CDKN2B, PIK3CA, while pUC samples were enriched for ERBB2 alterations. CONCLUSION: In this single-center retrospective analysis, patients with UCS had a distinct somatic genomic profile relative to patients with pUC. Patients with UCS also had inferior outcomes to ICIs and EV compared to patients with pUC.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/genética , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
ChatGPT did not reliably provide accurate information to 20 questions about liver cancer surveillance and diagnosis, as assessed by six physicians who actively diagnose and/or treat liver cancer. Answers deemed inaccurate commonly related to questions on specific LI-RADS categories and included contradictory or falsely reassuring, if not wrong, information.