Cost-Effectiveness of Annual Prostate MRI and Potential MRI-Guided Biopsy After Prostate-Specific Antigen Test Results.

Importance: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and potential MRI-guided biopsy enable enhanced identification of clinically significant prostate cancer. Despite proven efficacy, MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy remain costly, and there is limited evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of this approach in general and for different prostate-specific antigen (PSA) strata. Objective: To examine the cost-effectiveness of integrating annual MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy as part of clinical decision-making for men after being screened for prostate cancer compared with standard biopsy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a decision analytic Markov cohort model, an economic evaluation was conducted projecting outcomes over 10 years for a hypothetical cohort of 65-year-old men in the US with 4 different PSA strata (<2.5 ng/mL, 2.5-4.0 ng/mL, 4.1-10.0 ng/mL, >10 ng/mL) identified by screening through Monte Carlo microsimulation with 10 000 trials. Model inputs for probabilities, costs in 2020 US dollars, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were from the literature and expert consultation. The model was specifically designed to reflect the US health care system, adopting a federal payer perspective (ie, Medicare). Exposures: Magnetic resonance imaging with potential MRI-guided biopsy and standard biopsy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY was estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: For the 3 PSA strata of 2.5 ng/mL or greater, the MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy strategy was cost-effective compared with standard biopsy (PSA 2.5-4.0 ng/mL: base-case ICER, $21 131/QALY; PSA 4.1-10.0 ng/mL: base-case ICER, $12 336/QALY; PSA >10.0 ng/mL: base-case ICER, $6000/QALY). Results varied depending on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy. Results of probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy strategy was cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY in a range between 76% and 81% of simulations for each of the 3 PSA strata of 2.5 ng/mL or more. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic evaluation of a hypothetical cohort suggests that an annual MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy was a cost-effective option from a US federal payer perspective compared with standard biopsy for newly eligible male Medicare beneficiaries with a serum PSA level of 2.5 ng/mL or more.

Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Sensitive to Pembrolizumab: Evidence of the Pathogenicity of the MLH1 Variant 1835del3.

A woman with estrogen/progesterone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative metastatic breast cancer developed progressive disease despite treatment with multiple hormonal and chemotherapeutic modalities. She carried a germline variant of MLH1 (1835del3), also known as c.1835_1837del and v612del, the pathogenicity of which has not been conclusively determined. MLH1 staining was not seen on immunohistochemical staining of her tumor tissue. The patient experienced a >5-year dramatic response to 4 doses of pembrolizumab. Family studies revealed multiple other relatives with the MLH1 1835del3 variant, as well as multiple relatives with colon cancer. The one relative with colon cancer who underwent genetic testing demonstrated the same variant. Laboratory studies revealed that the patient's tumor showed loss of heterozygosity (LOH) in the MLH1 region, high levels of microsatellite instability, and a high tumor mutational burden. LOH in the MLH1 region, along with the remarkable clinical response to pembrolizumab treatment and the presence of the same MLH1 variant in affected relatives, supports the hypothesis that the MLH1 1835del3 variant is pathogenic. Given the patient's family history, this likely represents an uncommon presentation of Lynch syndrome. Physicians should be alert to evaluate patients for targetable genetic variants even in unlikely clinical situations such as the one described here.

Impact of Pharmacist-Led Education on Proper Prophylactic Enoxaparin Dosing in Obese Patients.

Background/Purpose: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cardiovascular complication in middle-aged adults. There is a likelihood a patient may experience VTE when admitted to a hospital. Prophylactic medications such as low-dose unfractionated heparin and enoxaparin are started to prevent VTE. A pharmacist-led health system-wide Grand Rounds promoted prophylactic enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily instead of once daily in patients with a body mass index (BMI) 40 kg/m2 or greater. Methodology: This case-control study was conducted at a Essentia Health - Fargo, in the Upper Midwest. Data of acute care patients were extracted from electronic health records 2 years before and after the pharmacist-led education. Patients in the study were 18 years old or older, hospitalized with a need for prophylactic anticoagulation receiving enoxaparin, and had a BMI 40 kg/m2 or greater. Patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 and recent bleeding were excluded. Groups were compared to determine the effect of pharmacist-led education. The outcome was the number of patients who received enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily compared to once daily. Results: In the control group, 9 out of 15 hospitalizations received enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneous twice daily and in the case group 34 out of 70 hospitalizations received the twice daily dosing. The odds ratio of receiving enoxaparin 40 mg twice daily after the pharmacist-led education compared to before the education was OR = .99, 95% CI = .96, 1.02. Conclusions: There was no difference in enoxaparin 40 mg once daily and twice daily dosing after the pharmacist-led education.

Task type, preference, and occupation affect standing desk utilization in office workers.

BACKGROUND: Adjustable height sit-stand desks are becoming the norm in many workplaces. It is not known how task type, worker preference, and occupation impact utilization of the adjustable height feature. OBJECTIVE: This survey-based study aimed to determine how task type, preference and occupation affect office workers' sitting and standing behaviors at work. METHODS: Office workers (n = 123) from different occupations completed surveys about actual and preferred positions (sit, stand, either/both) during 39 common tasks from 4 different categories, as well as barriers to use. Each position was analyzed by task type, behavior, and occupation. RESULTS: There were differences between actual and preferred behavior for each position, with participants sitting more and standing less than preferred across all task categories. There were differences between task categories with participants sitting less for generative and routine, and standing more for communication tasks. The highest rates of either/both responses were for routine tasks. Engineers reported the lowest standing rates, and also indicated standing more than preferred. Information Tech and Engineering had the highest either/both responses. Finance reported the highest sitting rates. Personal, task-based and workplace limitations were cited as barriers to preferred use. CONCLUSION: Office workers would prefer to stand more at work. Occupation-specific needs and preferences, as well as types of tasks should be considered when providing workplace standing options.

Office-workers maintain decreased workplace sitting time long-term following participation in a sit-stand desk intervention study.

Previous studies report decreased workplace sitting time when standing desk interventions are provided to office workers. It is unclear whether decreased sedentary behaviours are maintained long-term. This was a follow-up to a previous intervention study to investigate whether observed sitting time decreases of 30-50% were sustained 12-24 months later. A secondary aim was to compare overall physical activity between office workers with and without standing desks. Although sitting time increased over the follow-up period, this did not reach significance and reductions in workplace sitting remained significantly lower (23.5% decrease) from baseline values. There were no differences in the physical activity measures between workers with and without access to standing desks, although this was a small sample size and further research is needed. Individuals who are motivated to try standing desks at work can benefit through decreased sitting time long-term, however this may not extend to increased overall physical activity levels. Practitioner summary: Providing standing desk options to office-based employees can have long-lasting impacts with reducing sitting time at work. Office workers who choose to stand at work do not appear to compensate with overall activity level reduction outside of work.Abbreviations: LBP: low back pain; OSPAQ: occupational sitting and physical activity questionnaire; VAS: visual analog scale; ANOVA: analysis of variance; BMI: body mass index; ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient.