Preoperative proteinuria is independently associated with mortality after fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has become a mainstay in treating complex aortic aneurysms, though baseline patient factors predicting long-term outcomes remain poorly understood. Proteinuria is an early marker for chronic kidney disease and associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, but its utility in patients with aortic aneurysms is unknown. We aimed to determine whether preoperative proteinuria impacts long-term survival after FEVAR. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective review of all elective FEVAR was performed. Preoperative proteinuria was assessed by urinalysis: negative (0-29 mg/dL), 1+ (30-100 mg/dL), 2+ (101-299 mg/dL), and 3+ (≥300 mg/dL). The cohort was stratified by patients with proteinuria (≥30 mg/dL) vs those without (<30 mg/dL). Baseline, perioperative, and long-term outcomes were compared. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality, was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and independent predictors with Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Among 181 patients who underwent standard FEVAR from 2012 to 2022 (mean follow-up 33 months), any proteinuria was noted in 30 patients (16.6%). Patients with proteinuria were more likely to be Black (10.0% vs 1.3%) with a lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (52.7 ± 24.7 vs 67.7 ± 20.5 mL/min/1.73 m2), higher Society for Vascular Surgery comorbidity score (10.9 ± 4.3 vs 8.2 ± 4.7) and calcium channel blocker therapy (50.0% vs 29.1%), and larger maximal aneurysm diameter (67.2 ± 16.9 vs 59.8 ± 9.8 mm) (all P < .05). Thirty-day mortality was higher in the proteinuria group (10.0% vs 1.3%; P = .03). Overall survival at 1 and 5 years was significantly lower for those with proteinuria (71.5% vs 92.3% and 29.5% vs 68.1%; log-rank P < .001). On multivariable analysis, preoperative proteinuria was independently associated with over threefold higher hazard of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.66-6.20; P < .001), whereas preoperative eGFR was not predictive (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01; P = .28). Additional significant predictors included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR: 2.04), older age (HR: 1.05), and larger maximal aneurysm diameter (HR: 1.03; all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In our 10-year experience with FEVAR, preoperative proteinuria was observed in 17% of patients and was significantly associated with worse survival. In this cohort, proteinuria was independently associated with all-cause mortality, whereas eGFR was not, suggesting that urinalysis may provide an additional simple metric for risk-stratifying patients before FEVAR.

Resource Utilization and Costs Associated with Approaches to Identify Infants with Early-Onset Sepsis.

Objective. To compare resource utilization and costs associated with 3 alternative screening approaches to identify early-onset sepsis (EOS) in infants born at ≥35 wk of gestational age, as recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in 2018. Study Design. Decision tree-based cost analysis of the 3 AAP-recommended approaches: 1) categorical risk assessment (categorization by chorioamnionitis exposure status), 2) neonatal sepsis calculator (a multivariate prediction model based on perinatal risk factors), and 3) enhanced clinical observation (assessment based on serial clinical examinations). We evaluated resource utilization and direct costs (2022 US dollars) to the health system. Results. Categorical risk assessment led to the greatest neonatal intensive care unit usage (210 d per 1,000 live births) and antibiotic exposure (6.8%) compared with the neonatal sepsis calculator (112 d per 1,000 live births and 3.6%) and enhanced clinical observation (99 d per 1,000 live births and 3.1%). While the per-live birth hospital costs of the 3 approaches were similar-categorical risk assessment cost $1,360, the neonatal sepsis calculator cost $1,317, and enhanced clinical observation cost $1,310-the cost of infants receiving intervention under categorical risk assessment was approximately twice that of the other 2 strategies. Results were robust to variations in data parameters. Conclusion. The neonatal sepsis calculator and enhanced clinical observation approaches may be preferred to categorical risk assessment as they reduce the number of infants receiving intervention and thus antibiotic exposure and associated costs. All 3 approaches have similar costs over all live births, and prior literature has indicated similar health outcomes. Inclusion of downstream effects of antibiotic exposure in the neonatal period should be evaluated within a cost-effectiveness analysis. Highlights: Of the 3 approaches recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2018 to identify early-onset sepsis in infants born at ≥35 weeks, the categorical risk assessment approach leads to about twice as many infants receiving evaluation to rule out early-onset sepsis compared with the neonatal sepsis calculator and enhanced clinical observation approaches.While the hospital costs of the 3 approaches were similar over the entire population of live births, the neonatal sepsis calculator and enhanced clinical observation approaches reduce antibiotic exposure, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and hospital costs associated with interventions as part of the screening approach compared with the categorical risk assessment approach.

Use of Wastewater Metrics to Track COVID-19 in the US.

Importance: Widespread use of at-home COVID-19 tests hampers determination of community COVID-19 incidence. Objective: To examine the association of county-level wastewater metrics with high case and hospitalization rates nationwide both before and after widespread use of at-home tests. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational cohort study with a time series analysis was conducted from January to September 2022 in 268 US counties in 22 states participating in the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Wastewater Surveillance System. Participants included the populations of those US counties. Exposures: County level of circulating SARS-CoV-2 as determined by metrics based on viral wastewater concentration relative to the county maximum (ie, wastewater percentile) and 15-day percentage change in SARS-CoV-2 (ie, percentage change). Main Outcomes and Measures: High county incidence of COVID-19 as evidenced by dichotomized reported cases (current cases ≥200 per 100 000 population) and hospitalization (≥10 per 100 000 population lagged by 2 weeks) rates, stratified by calendar quarter. Results: In the first quarter of 2022, use of the wastewater percentile detected high reported case (area under the curve [AUC], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.96) and hospitalization (AUC, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.88) rates. The percentage change metric performed poorly, with AUCs ranging from 0.51 (95% CI, 0.50-0.53) to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.59) for reported new cases, and from 0.50 (95% CI, 0.48-0.52) to 0.55 (95% CI, 0.53-0.57) for hospitalizations across the first 3 quarters of 2022. The Youden index for detecting high case rates was wastewater percentile of 51% (sensitivity, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.80-0.84; specificity, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95). A model inclusive of both metrics performed no better than using wastewater percentile alone. The performance of wastewater percentile declined over time for cases in the second quarter (AUC, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.86) and third quarter (AUC, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.70-0.75) of 2022. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, nationwide, county wastewater levels relative to the county maximum were associated with high COVID-19 case and hospitalization rates in the first quarter of 2022, but there was increasing dissociation between wastewater and clinical metrics in subsequent quarters, which may reflect increasing underreporting of cases, reduced testing, and possibly lower virulence of infection due to vaccines and treatments. This study offers a strategy to operationalize county wastewater percentile to improve the accurate assessment of community SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence when reliability of conventional surveillance data is declining.

Healthcare costs and use before and after opioid overdose in Veterans Health Administration patients with opioid use disorder.

AIMS: To compare healthcare costs and use between United States (US) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who experienced an opioid overdose (OD cohort) and patients with OUD who did not experience an opioid overdose (non-OD cohort). DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of administrative and clinical data. SETTING: The largest integrated national health-care system is the US Veterans Health Administration's healthcare systems. PARTICIPANTS: We included VHA patients diagnosed with OUD from October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. We identified the index date of overdose for patients who had an overdose. Our control group, which included patients with OUD who did not have an overdose, was randomly assigned an index date. A total of 66 513 patients with OUD were included for analysis (OD cohort: n = 1413; non-OD cohort: n = 65 100). MEASUREMENTS: Monthly adjusted healthcare-related costs and use in the year before and after the index date. We used generalized estimating equation models to compare patients with an opioid overdose and controls in a difference-in-differences framework. FINDINGS: Compared with the non-OD cohort, an opioid overdose was associated with an increase of $16 890 [95% confidence interval (CI) = $15 611-18 169; P < 0.001] in healthcare costs for an estimated $23.9 million in direct costs to VHA (95% CI = $22.1 million, $25.7 million) within the 30 days following overdose after adjusting for baseline characteristics. Inpatient costs ($13 515; 95% CI = $12 378-14 652; P < 0.001) reflected most of this increase. Inpatient days (+6.15 days; 95% CI, = 5.33-6.97; P < 0.001), inpatient admissions (+1.01 admissions; 95% CI = 0.93-1.10; P < 0.001) and outpatient visits (+1.59 visits; 95% CI = 1.34-1.84; P < 0.001) also increased in the month after opioid overdose. Within the overdose cohort, healthcare costs and use remained higher in the year after overdose compared with pre-overdose trends. CONCLUSIONS: The US Veterans Health Administration patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who have experienced an opioid overdose have increased healthcare costs and use that remain significantly higher in the month and continuing through the year after overdose than OUD patients who have not experienced an overdose.

Population-Wide Screening for Chronic Kidney Disease : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have the potential to alter the natural history of chronic kidney disease (CKD), and they should be included in cost-effectiveness analyses of screening for CKD. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of adding population-wide screening for CKD. DESIGN: Markov cohort model. DATA SOURCES: NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data, cohort studies, and randomized clinical trials, including the DAPA-CKD (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease) trial. TARGET POPULATION: Adults. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Screening for albuminuria with and without adding SGLT2 inhibitors to the current standard of care for CKD. OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), all discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: One-time CKD screening at age 55 years had an ICER of $86 300 per QALY gained by increasing costs from $249 800 to $259 000 and increasing QALYs from 12.61 to 12.72; this was accompanied by a decrease in the incidence of kidney failure requiring dialysis or kidney transplant of 0.29 percentage points and an increase in life expectancy from 17.29 to 17.45 years. Other options were also cost-effective. During ages 35 to 75 years, screening once prevented dialysis or transplant in 398 000 people and screening every 10 years until age 75 years cost less than $100 000 per QALY gained. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: When SGLT2 inhibitors were 30% less effective, screening every 10 years during ages 35 to 75 years cost between $145 400 and $182 600 per QALY gained, and price reductions would be required for screening to be cost-effective. LIMITATION: The efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors was derived from a single randomized controlled trial. CONCLUSION: Screening adults for albuminuria to identify CKD could be cost-effective in the United States. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Veterans Affairs Office of Academic Affiliations, and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Putting Evidence Into Practice: An Update on the US Preventive Services Task Force Methods for Developing Recommendations for Preventive Services.

PURPOSE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is an independent body that makes evidence-based recommendations regarding preventive services to improve health for people nationwide. Here, we summarize current USPSTF methods, describe how methods are evolving to address preventive health equity, and define evidence gaps for future research. METHODS: We summarize current USPSTF methods as well as ongoing methods development. RESULTS: The USPSTF prioritizes topics on the basis of disease burden, extent of new evidence, and whether the service can be provided in primary care and going forward will increasingly consider health equity. Analytic frameworks specify the key questions and linkages connecting the preventive service to health outcomes. Contextual questions provide information on natural history, current practice, health outcomes in high-risk groups, and health equity. The USPSTF assigns a level of certainty to the estimate of net benefit of a preventive service (high, moderate, or low). The magnitude of net benefit is also judged (substantial, moderate, small, or zero/negative). The USPSTF uses these assessments to assign a letter grade from A (recommend) to D (recommend against). I statements are issued when evidence is insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: The USPSTF will continue to evolve its methods for simulation modeling and to use evidence to address conditions for which there are limited data for population groups who bear a disproportionate burden of disease. Additional pilot work is underway to better understand the relations of the social constructs of race, ethnicity, and gender with health outcomes to inform the development of a USPSTF health equity framework.

Use of wastewater metrics to track COVID-19 in the U.S.: a national time-series analysis over the first three quarters of 2022.

Background: Widespread use of at-home COVID-19 tests hampers determination of community COVID-19 incidence. Using nationwide data available through the US National Wastewater Surveillance System, we examined the performance of two wastewater metrics in predicting high case and hospitalizations rates both before and after widespread use of at-home tests. Methods: We performed area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (AUC) for two wastewater metrics-viral concentration relative to the peak of January 2022 ("wastewater percentile") and 15-day percent change in SARS-CoV-2 ("percent change"). Dichotomized reported cases (≥ 200 or <200 cases per 100,000) and new hospitalizations (≥ 10 or <10 per 100,000) were our dependent variables, stratified by calendar quarter. Using logistic regression, we assessed the performance of combining wastewater metrics. Results: Among 268 counties across 22 states, wastewater percentile detected high reported case and hospitalizations rates in the first quarter of 2022 (AUC 0.95 and 0.86 respectively) whereas the percent change did not (AUC 0.54 and 0.49 respectively). A wastewater percentile of 51% maximized sensitivity (0.93) and specificity (0.82) for detecting high case rates. A model inclusive of both metrics performed no better than using wastewater percentile alone. The predictive capability of wastewater percentile declined over time (AUC 0.84 and 0.72 for cases for second and third quarters of 2022). Conclusion: Nationwide, county wastewater levels above 51% relative to the historic peak predicted high COVID rates and hospitalization in the first quarter of 2022, but performed less well in subsequent quarters. Decline over time in predictive performance of this metric likely reflects underreporting of cases, reduced testing, and possibly lower virulence of infection due to vaccines and treatments.

Cost-effectiveness of office-based buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder.

AIM: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of office-based buprenorphine treatment (OBBT) in the U.S. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a model-based analysis of buprenorphine treatment provided in a primary care setting for the U.S. population with OUD. INTERVENTION: Buprenorphine treatment provided in a primary care setting. MEASUREMENTS: Fatal and nonfatal overdoses and deaths over five years, discounted lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs. FINDINGS: For a cohort of 100,000 untreated individuals who enter OBBT, approximately 9350 overdoses would be averted over five years; of these, approximately 900 would have been fatal. OBBT compared to no treatment would yield 1.07 incremental lifetime QALYs per person at an incremental cost of $17,000 per QALY gained when using a healthcare perspective. If OBBT is half as effective and twice as expensive as assumed in the base case, the incremental cost when using a healthcare perspective is $25,500 per QALY gained. Using a limited societal perspective that additionally includes patient costs and criminal justice costs, OBBT is cost-saving compared to no treatment even under pessimistic assumptions about efficacy and cost. CONCLUSIONS: Expansion of OBBT would be highly cost-effective compared to no treatment when considered from a healthcare perspective, and cost-saving when reduced criminal justice costs are included. Given the continuing opioid crisis in the U.S., expansion of this care option should be a high priority.

Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Treatments of Adults in the Acute Phase of Major Depressive Disorder: A Living Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians.

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this guideline from the American College of Physicians (ACP) is to present updated clinical recommendations on nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions as initial and second-line treatments during the acute phase of a major depressive disorder (MDD) episode, based on the best available evidence on the comparative benefits and harms, consideration of patient values and preferences, and cost. METHODS: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on an updated systematic review of the evidence. AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The audience for this guideline includes clinicians caring for adult patients in the acute phase of MDD in ambulatory care. The patient population includes adults in the acute phase of MDD. RECOMMENDATION 1A: ACP recommends monotherapy with either cognitive behavioral therapy or a second-generation antidepressant as initial treatment in patients in the acute phase of moderate to severe major depressive disorder (strong recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 1B: ACP suggests combination therapy with cognitive behavioral therapy and a second-generation antidepressant as initial treatment in patients in the acute phase of moderate to severe major depressive disorder (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). The informed decision on the options of monotherapy with cognitive behavioral therapy versus second-generation antidepressants or combination therapy should be personalized and based on discussion of potential treatment benefits, harms, adverse effect profiles, cost, feasibility, patients' specific symptoms (such as insomnia, hypersomnia, or fluctuation in appetite), comorbidities, concomitant medication use, and patient preferences. RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP suggests monotherapy with cognitive behavioral therapy as initial treatment in patients in the acute phase of mild major depressive disorder (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP suggests one of the following options for patients in the acute phase of moderate to severe major depressive disorder who did not respond to initial treatment with an adequate dose of a second-generation antidepressant: • Switching to or augmenting with cognitive behavioral therapy (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence) • Switching to a different second-generation antidepressant or augmenting with a second pharmacologic treatment (see Clinical Considerations) (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence) The informed decision on the options should be personalized and based on discussion of potential treatment benefits, harms, adverse effect profiles, cost, feasibility, patients' specific symptoms (such as insomnia, hypersomnia, or fluctuation in appetite), comorbidities, concomitant medication use, and patient preferences.

A framework for synthesizing intervention evidence from multiple sources into a single certainty of evidence rating: Methodological developments from a US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Committee.

Despite research investment and a growing body of diverse evidence there has been no comprehensive review and grading of evidence for public health emergency preparedness and response practices comparable to those in medicine and other public health fields. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened an ad hoc committee to develop and use methods for grading and synthesizing diverse types of evidence to create a single certainty of intervention-related evidence to support recommendations for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Research. A 13-step consensus building method was used. Experts were first canvassed in public meetings, and a comprehensive review of existing methods was undertaken. Although aspects of existing review methodologies and evidence grading systems were relevant, none adequately covered all requirements for this specific context. Starting with a desire to synthesize diverse sources of evidence not usually included in systematic reviews and using GRADE for assessing certainty and confidence in quantitative and qualitative evidence as the foundation, we developed a mixed-methods synthesis review and grading methodology that drew on (and in some cases adapted) those elements of existing frameworks and methods that were most applicable. Four topics were selected as test cases. The process was operationalized with a suite of method-specific reviews of diverse evidence types for each topic. Further consensus building was undertaken through stakeholder engagement and feedback The NASEM committee's GRADE adaption for mixed-methods reviews will further evolve over time and has yet to be endorsed by the GRADE working group.

Analytical frameworks in colorectal cancer guidelines: development of methods for systematic reviews, their application and practical guidance for their use.

OBJECTIVES: Analytical frameworks are graphical representation of the key questions answered by a systematic review and can support the development of guideline recommendations. Our objectives were to a) conduct a systematic review to identify, describe and compare all analytical frameworks published as part of a systematic and guideline development process related to colorectal cancer (CRC), and b) to use this case study to develop guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews of analytical frameworks. METHODS: We developed a search strategy to identify eligible studies in Medline and Embase from 1996 until December 2020. We also manually searched guideline databases and websites to identify all guidelines and systematic reviews in CRC that used an analytical framework. We assessed the quality of the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. The systematic review was registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration CRD42020172117. RESULTS: We screened 34,505 records and identified 1,166 guidelines and 3,127 systematic reviews on CRC of which five met our inclusion criteria. These five publications included four analytical frameworks in colorectal cancer (one update). We also describe our methodological approach to systematic reviews for analytical frameworks and underlying concepts for developing analytical framework using a bottom-up or top-down approach. CONCLUSION: Few guidelines and systematic reviews are utilizing analytical frameworks in the development of recommendations. Development of analytical frameworks should begin with a systematic search for existing analytical frameworks and follow a structured conceptual approach for their development to support guideline recommendations. Our methods may be helpful in achieving these objectives.

Cost-effectiveness of computed tomography versus ultrasound-based surveillance following endovascular aortic repair of intact infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: While Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines recommend computed tomography angiography (CTA) or ultrasound for surveillance following infrarenal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), there is a lack of consensus regarding optimal timing and modalities. We hypothesized that ultrasound-based approaches would be more cost-effective and developed a cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate the lifetime costs and outcomes of various strategies. METHODS: We developed a decision tree with nested Markov models to compare five surveillance strategies: yearly CTA, yearly CDU, yearly CEU, CTA at first year followed by CDU, and CTA at first year followed by CEU. The model accounted for differential sensitivity, specificity, and risk of acute kidney injury after CTA, and was implemented on a monthly cycle with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and 3% annual discounting. RESULTS: Under base case assumptions, the CTA-CDU strategy was cost effective with a lifetime cost of $77950 for 7.74 QALYs. In sensitivity analysis, the CTA-CDU approach remained cost-effective when CEU specificity was less than 95%, and risk of acute kidney injury following CTA was less than 20%. At diagnostic sensitivities below 75% for CEU and 55% for CDU, a yearly CTA strategy maximized QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: A hybrid strategy in which CTA is performed in the first year and CDU is performed annually thereafter is the most cost-effective strategy for infrarenal EVAR surveillance in patients with less than a 20% risk of contrast-induced nephropathy. If the sensitivity of CEU and CDU are at the lower end of plausible estimates, a yearly CTA strategy is reasonable. Further research should aim to identify patients who may benefit from alternative surveillance strategies.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Non-diabetic Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: In the USA, chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects 1 in 7 adults and costs $100 billion annually. The DAPA-CKD trial found dapagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, to be effective in reducing CKD progression and mortality in patients with diabetic and non-diabetic CKD. Currently, SGLT2 inhibitors are not considered standard of care for patients with non-diabetic CKD. OBJECTIVE: Determine the cost-effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin to standard management of patients with non-diabetic CKD. DESIGN: Markov model with lifetime time horizon and US healthcare sector perspective. PATIENTS: Patients with non-diabetic CKD INTERVENTION: Dapagliflozin plus standard care versus standard care only. MAIN MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), all discounted at 3% annually; total incidence of kidney failure on kidney replacement therapy; average years on kidney replacement therapy. KEY RESULTS: Adding dapagliflozin to standard care improved life expectancy by 2 years, increased discounted QALYS (from 6.75 to 8.06), and reduced the total incidence of kidney failure on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) (from 17.4 to 11.0%) and average years on KRT (from 0.77 to 0.43) over the lifetime of the cohort. Dapagliflozin plus standard care was more effective than standard care alone while increasing lifetime costs (from $245,900 to $324,8900, or $60,000 per QALY gained). Results were robust to variations in assumptions about dapagliflozin's efficacy over time and by CKD stage, added costs of kidney replacement therapy, and expected population annual CKD progression rates and sensitive to the cost of dapagliflozin. The net 1-year budgetary implication of treating all US patients with non-diabetic CKD could be up to $21 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin improved life expectancy and reduced progression of CKD, the proportion of patients requiring kidney replacement therapy, and time on kidney replacement therapy in patients with non-diabetic CKD. Use of dapagliflozin meets conventional criteria for cost-effectiveness.

Colonoscopy for Diagnostic Evaluation and Interventions to Prevent Recurrence After Acute Left-Sided Colonic Diverticulitis: A Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians.

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the role of colonoscopy for diagnostic evaluation of colorectal cancer (CRC) after a presumed diagnosis of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and on the role of pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and elective surgical interventions to prevent recurrence after initial treatment of acute complicated and uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis. This guideline is based on the current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences. METHODS: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) based these recommendations on a systematic review on the role of colonoscopy after acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and elective surgical interventions after initial treatment. The systematic review evaluated outcomes rated by the CGC as critical or important. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method. TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with recent episodes of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP suggests that clinicians refer patients for a colonoscopy after an initial episode of complicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis in patients who have not had recent colonoscopy (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP recommends against clinicians using mesalamine to prevent recurrent diverticulitis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP suggests that clinicians discuss elective surgery to prevent recurrent diverticulitis after initial treatment in patients who have either uncomplicated diverticulitis that is persistent or recurs frequently or complicated diverticulitis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). The informed decision whether or not to undergo surgery should be personalized based on a discussion of potential benefits, harms, costs, and patient's preferences.

Diagnosis and Management of Acute Left-Sided Colonic Diverticulitis: A Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians.

DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis in adults. This guideline is based on current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences. METHODS: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) developed this guideline based on a systematic review on the use of computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and on management via hospitalization, antibiotic use, and interventional percutaneous abscess drainage. The systematic review evaluated outcomes that the CGC rated as critical or important. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with suspected or known acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP suggests that clinicians use abdominal CT imaging when there is diagnostic uncertainty in a patient with suspected acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2: ACP suggests that clinicians manage most patients with acute uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis in an outpatient setting (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP suggests that clinicians initially manage select patients with acute uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis without antibiotics (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

USPSTF Approach to Addressing Sex and Gender When Making Recommendations for Clinical Preventive Services.

Clinical preventive service recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) are based on transparent, systematic, and rigorous methods that consider the certainty of the evidence and magnitude of net benefit. These guidelines aim to address the needs of diverse populations. Biological sex and gender identity are sources of diversity that are not often considered in studies of clinical preventive services that inform the recommendations, resulting in challenges when evaluating the evidence and communicating recommendations for persons in specific gender identification categories (man/woman/gender nonbinary/gender nonconforming/transgender). To advance its methods, the USPSTF reviewed its past recommendations that included the use of sex and gender terms, reviewed the approaches of other guideline-making bodies, and pilot tested strategies to address sex and gender diversity. Based on the findings, the USPSTF intends to use an inclusive approach to identify issues related to sex and gender at the start of the guideline development process; assess the applicability, variability, and quality of evidence as a function of sex and gender; ensure clarity in the use of language regarding sex and gender; and identify evidence gaps related to sex and gender. Evidence reviews will identify the limitations of applying findings to diverse groups from underlying studies that used unclear terminology regarding sex and gender. The USPSTF will use gender-neutral language when appropriate to communicate that recommendations are inclusive of people of any gender and will clearly state when recommendations apply to individuals with specific anatomy associated with biological sex (male/female) or to specific categories of gender identity. The USPSTF recognizes limited evidence to inform the preventive care of populations based on gender identity.

Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: An estimated 13% of all US adults (18 years or older) have diabetes, and 34.5% meet criteria for prediabetes. The prevalences of prediabetes and diabetes are higher in older adults. Estimates of the risk of progression from prediabetes to diabetes vary widely, perhaps because of differences in the definition of prediabetes or the heterogeneity of prediabetes. Diabetes is the leading cause of kidney failure and new cases of blindness among adults in the US. It is also associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and was estimated to be the seventh leading cause of death in the US in 2017. Screening asymptomatic adults for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes may allow earlier detection, diagnosis, and treatment, with the ultimate goal of improving health outcomes. Objective: To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adults and preventive interventions for those with prediabetes. Population: Nonpregnant adults aged 35 to 70 years seen in primary care settings who have overweight or obesity (defined as a body mass index ≥25 and ≥30, respectively) and no symptoms of diabetes. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and offering or referring patients with prediabetes to effective preventive interventions has a moderate net benefit. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in adults aged 35 to 70 years who have overweight or obesity. Clinicians should offer or refer patients with prediabetes to effective preventive interventions. (B recommendation).