FDA Approval Summary: Revised Indication and Dosing Regimen for Ponatinib Based on the Results of the OPTIC Trial.

On December 18, 2020, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a supplemental application for ponatinib extending the indication in patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) to patients with resistance or intolerance of at least 2 prior kinase inhibitors. Ponatinib was initially approved in December 2012 but was briefly voluntarily withdrawn due to serious safety concerns including the risk of arterial occlusive events (AOE). It returned to the market in December 2013 with an indication limited to patients with T315I mutation or for whom no other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy was indicated with revised warnings and precautions. A post-marketing requirement was issued to identify the optimal safe and effective dose for CP-CML. Thus, the OPTIC trial was performed, which randomized patients to 1 of 3 doses, 45 mg, 30 mg, or 15 mg, with a dose reduction to 15 mg on achievement of MR2 (BCR-ABLIS ≤1%). Patients enrolled were treated with at least 2 prior TKIs or had a T315I mutation. Patients with a history of clinically significant, uncontrolled, or active cardiovascular disease were excluded. Efficacy was established on an interim analysis based on the rate of MR2 at 12 months in the modified intent-to-treat population of 261 patients, with 88, 86, and 87 patients in the 45, 30, and 15 mg cohorts, respectively. With a median follow-up of 28 months, the rate of achievement of MR2 at 12 months was 42%, 28%, and 24% in the respective cohorts. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in prior evaluations of ponatinib with notable adverse reactions including pancreatitis, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, liver dysfunction, and AOE. Of patients treated at the 45/15 mg dose, AOEs were seen in 13%, with a higher rate being observed in patients age 65 or older compared to younger patients. A readjudication of AOEs seen on the prior pivotal phase 2 study resulted in a rate of 26%. Overall, the results supported a modification of the recommended dose for patients with CP-CML to 45 mg until the achievement of MR2 followed by a reduction to 15 mg. The expansion of the indication to patients with exposure to 2 prior TKIs was approved given data showing that ponatinib could be successfully used for the treatment of this population with appropriate monitoring and screening for risk factors.

Factors Affecting Neurological Presentation and Severity in Pediatric Off-Highway Vehicle Accidents in Texas.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to evaluate the characteristics of off-highway vehicle (OHV) crashes correlated with neurological injury and accident severity in the pediatric population in El Paso, Texas. METHODS: A retrospective review of 213 patients who were victims of an OHV crash attended at a regional Level I trauma center from 2012 to 2020 was performed. OHVs were defined as vehicles designated for use outside public roads. Neurological outcomes included any traumatic brain injury (TBI) or a brain hemorrhage/hematoma. Severe injury was defined as a Glasgow Coma Scale less than 8, a length of stay longer than 7 days, a Pediatric Trauma Score lower than 8, and requiring pediatric intensive care unit admission. Bivariate and multivariate analyses by logistic regression models were conducted to determine the factors related to the neurological outcomes and accident severity. RESULTS: Of 213 OHV crash patients, 104 (48.8%) had TBI and 22 (10.3%) had brain hemorrhages or hematomas. Risk analyses demonstrated that children younger than age 6 years and occupants of recreational OHVs have a significantly higher risk of severe injuries. Off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles were risk factors for TBI, whereas helmets were a protective factor. CONCLUSIONS: OHVs are associated with both TBIs and severe injuries. Stricter laws requiring helmets and forbidding children younger than 6 to ride are required, as modifying these factors could reduce the incidence of OHV crashes and their complications.

FDA Supplemental Approval Summary: Lenvatinib for the Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

On August 16, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved lenvatinib (Lenvima, Eisai Inc.) for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Approval was based on an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (REFLECT; NCT01761266) conducted in 954 patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable HCC. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive lenvatinib (12 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight ≥60 kg and 8 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight <60 kg) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until radiological disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib was noninferior but not statistically superior to sorafenib for overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, [HR] 0.92; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.79-1.06), with median OS of 13.6 and 12.3 months in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. REFLECT also demonstrated statistically significant improvements in investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77]; p < 0.001), corresponding to median PFS of 7.4 and 3.7 months and overall response rate of 24.1% vs 9.2% per modified RECIST for HCC (mRECIST) in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Consistent results were observed by an independent review facility per RECISTv1.1 and per mRECIST. The most common adverse reactions observed in the lenvatinib-treated patients (≥20%) in decreasing frequency were hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite, arthralgia/myalgia, decreased weight, abdominal pain, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, dysphonia, hemorrhagic events, hypothyroidism, and nausea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's review of data from a single trial, REFLECT, that supported the approval of lenvatinib, as a single agent, for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). REFLECT was an open-label, noninferiority trial that randomized 954 patients with HCC who were ineligible for liver-directed therapy with no prior systemic therapy for HCC to lenvatinib or sorafenib. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib-treated patients had similar survival, more responses, and longer time to progression than those receiving sorafenib. Serious side effects were more common among lenvatinib-treated patients. Lenvatinib is an effective treatment for patients with previously untreated HCC.

FDA Approval Summary: Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab for the Treatment of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Previously Treated with Sorafenib.

On March 10, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab for the treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. The recommended approved dosage was nivolumab 1 mg/kg i.v. plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks for four cycles, followed by nivolumab 240 mg i.v. every 2 weeks. The approval was based on data from cohort 4 of CheckMate 040, which randomized patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic HCC previously treated with or who were intolerant to sorafenib to receive one of three different dosing regimens of nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab. Investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) was the primary endpoint, and ORR assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) was an exploratory endpoint. BICR-assessed ORR and duration of response (DoR) form the primary basis of the FDA's regulatory decision, and BICR-assessed ORR was comparable in all three arms at 31%-32% with 95% confidence interval [CI] 18%-47%. The DoR ranged from 17.5 to 22.2 months across the three arms, with overlapping 95% CIs. Adverse events (AEs) were generally consistent with the known AE profiles of nivolumab and ipilimumab, and no new safety events were identified. This article summarizes the FDA review of the data supporting the approval of nivolumab and ipilimumab for the treatment of HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy is another option for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who experience radiographic progression during or after sorafenib or sorafenib intolerance. No new toxicities were identified, but, as expected, increased toxicity was observed with the addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab as compared with nivolumab alone, which is also approved for the same indication. Whether to administer nivolumab as a single agent or in combination with ipilimumab is expected to be a joint decision between the oncologist and patient, taking into consideration the potential for a higher likelihood of response and the potentially higher rate of toxicity with the combination.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab and Durvalumab in Combination with Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval to atezolizumab and durvalumab in March of 2019 and 2020, respectively, for use in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer. These approvals were based on data from two randomized controlled trials, IMpower133 (atezolizumab) and CASPIAN (durvalumab). Both trials demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS) with anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibodies when added to platinum-based chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy alone. In IMpower133, patients receiving atezolizumab with etoposide and carboplatin demonstrated improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.91; p = .0069), with median OS of 12.3 months compared with 10.3 months in patients receiving etoposide and carboplatin. In CASPIAN, patients receiving durvalumab with etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin also demonstrated improved OS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91; p = .0047) with median OS of 13.0 months compared with 10.3 months in patients receiving etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin. The safety profiles of both drugs were generally consistent with known toxicities of immune-checkpoint inhibitor therapies. This review summarizes the FDA perspective and data supporting the approval of these two agents. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Effective therapeutic options for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) are limited, and there has been modest improvement in the overall survival (OS) of patients with SCLC over the past 3 decades. The approvals of atezolizumab and of durvalumab in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of patients with extensive stage SCLC represent the first approved therapies with OS benefit for this patient population since the approval of etoposide in combination with other approved chemotherapeutic agents. Additionally, the efficacy results from IMpower133 and CASPIAN lay the groundwork for possible further evaluation in other treatment settings in this disease.

FDA Benefit-Risk Assessment of Osimertinib for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Harboring Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor T790M Mutation.

On March 30, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved osimertinib for the treatment of patients with metastatic, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) T790M mutation-positive, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as detected by an FDA-approved test, whose disease has progressed following EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Approval was based on demonstration of a statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) when comparing osimertinib with chemotherapy in an international, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial (AURA3). In this confirmatory trial, which enrolled 419 patients, the PFS hazard ratio for osimertinib compared with chemotherapy per investigator assessment was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.23-0.41), p < .001, with median PFS of 10.1 months in the osimertinib arm and 4.4 months in the chemotherapy arm. Supportive efficacy data included PFS per blinded independent review committee demonstrating similar PFS results and an improved confirmed objective response rate per investigator assessment of 65% and 29%, with estimated median durations of response of 11.0 months and 4.2 months, in the osimertinib and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Patients received osimertinib 80 mg once daily and had a median duration of exposure of 8 months. The toxicity profile of osimertinib compared favorably with the profile of other approved EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy. The most common adverse drug reactions (>20%) in patients treated with osimertinib were diarrhea, rash, dry skin, nail toxicity, and fatigue. Herein, we review the benefit-risk assessment of osimertinib that led to regular approval, for patients with metastatic NSCLC harboring EGFR TKI whose disease has progressed on or after EGFR TKI therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Osimertinib administered to metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring an EGFR T790M mutation, who have progressed on or following EGFR TKI therapy, demonstrated a substantial improvement over platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as well as durable intracranial responses. The ability to test for the T790M mutation in plasma using the FDA-approved cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2 (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) identifies patients with NSCLC tumors not amenable to biopsy. Since a 40% false-negative rate has been observed with the circulating tumor DNA test, re-evaluation of the feasibility of tissue biopsy is recommended to identify patients with a false-negative plasma test result who may benefit from osimertinib.

FDA Approval Summary: Dabrafenib and Trametinib for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers Harboring BRAF V600E Mutations.

On June 22, 2017, the Food and Drug Administration expanded indications for dabrafenib and trametinib to include treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring BRAF V600E mutations. Approval was based on results from an international, multicenter, multicohort, noncomparative, open-label trial, study BRF113928, which sequentially enrolled 93 patients who had received previous systemic treatment for advanced NSCLC (Cohort B, n = 57) or were treatment-naïve (Cohort C, n = 36). All patients received dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily and trametinib 2 mg orally once daily. In Cohort B, overall response rate (ORR) was 63% (95% confidence interval [CI] 49%-76%) with response durations ≥6 months in 64% of responders. In Cohort C, ORR was 61% (95% CI 44%-77%) with response durations ≥6 months in 59% of responders. Results were evaluated in the context of the Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique registry and a chart review of U.S. electronic health records at two academic sites, characterizing treatment outcomes data for patients with metastatic NSCLC with or without BRAF V600E mutations. The treatment effect of dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily was evaluated in 78 patients with previously treated BRAF mutant NSCLC, yielding an ORR of 27% (95% CI 18%-38%), establishing that dabrafenib alone is active, but that the addition of trametinib is necessary to achieve an ORR of >40%. The most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were pyrexia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dry skin, decreased appetite, edema, rash, chills, hemorrhage, cough, and dyspnea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The approvals of dabrafenib and trametinib, administered concurrently, provide a new regimen for the treatment of a rare subset of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and demonstrate how drugs active for treatment of BRAF-mutant tumors in one setting predict efficacy and can provide supportive evidence for approval in another setting. The FDA also approved the first next-generation sequencing oncology panel test for simultaneous assessment of multiple actionable mutations, which will facilitate selection of optimal, personalized therapy. The test was shown to accurately and reliably select patients with NSCLC with the BRAF V600E mutation for whom treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib is the optimal treatment.

Benefit-Risk Summary of Regorafenib for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma That Has Progressed on Sorafenib.

On April 27, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved regorafenib for the treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who had previously been treated with sorafenib. Approval was based on the results of a single, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RESORCE) that demonstrated an improvement in overall survival (OS). Patients were randomly allocated to receive regorafenib160 mg orally once daily or matching placebo for the first 21 days of each 28-day cycle. The trial demonstrated a significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79, p < .0001) with an estimated median OS of 10.6 months in the regorafenib arm and 7.8 months in the placebo arm. A statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) based on modified RECIST for HCC [Semin Liver Dis 2010;30:52-60] (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.56, p < .0001) was also demonstrated; the estimated median PFS was 3.1 and 1.5 months in the regorafenib and placebo arms, respectively. The overall response rate, based on modified RECIST for HCC, was 11% in the regorafenib arm and 4% in the placebo arm. The toxicity profile was consistent with that observed in other indications; the most clinically significant adverse reactions were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, diarrhea, and hypertension. Based on the improvement in survival and acceptable toxicity, a favorable benefit-to-risk evaluation led to approval for treatment of patients with advanced HCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib is the first drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma that has progressed on sorafenib and is expected to become a standard of care for these patients.

Cryopreserved amniotic membrane as transplant allograft: viability and post-transplant outcome.

Amniotic membrane (AM) transplantation is increasingly used in ophthalmological and dermatological surgeries to promote re-epithelialization and wound healing. Biologically active cells in the epithelial and stromal layers deliver growth factors and cytokines with anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, anti-immunogenic and anti-fibrotic properties. In this work, confocal microscopy was used to show that our cryopreservation protocol for AM yielded viable cells in both the stromal and epithelial layers with favorable post-transplant outcome. AM was obtained from Caesarean-section placenta, processed into allograft pieces of different sizes (3 cm × 3 cm, 5 cm × 5 cm, and 10 cm × 10 cm) and cryopreserved in 10 % dimethyl sulfoxide using non-linear controlled rate freezing. Post-thaw cell viability in the entire piece of AM and in the stromal and epithelial cell layers was assessed using a dual fluorescent nuclear dye and compared to hypothermically stored AM, while surveys from surgical end-users provided information on post-transplant patient outcomes. There was no significant statistical difference in the cell viability in the entire piece, epithelial and stromal layers regardless of the size of allograft piece (p = 0.092, 0.188 and 0.581, respectively), and in the entire piece and stromal layer of hypothermically stored versus cryopreserved AM (p = 0.054 and 0.646, respectively). Surgical end-user feedback (n = 49) indicated that 16.3 % of AM allografts were excellent and 61.2 % were satisfactory. These results support the expanded clinical use of different sizes of cryopreserved AM allografts and address the issue of orientation of the AM during transplant for the treatment of dermatological defects and ocular surface disorders.

A Survey to Assess the Current Status of Structured Benefit-Risk Assessment in the Global Drug and Medical Device Industry.

BACKGROUND: This industry survey was conducted to gain insight into the ways structured Benefit-Risk assessment (sBRA) of medical products is approached across drug or medical device developing companies, including frameworks and methods that are currently used and areas where future work is being planned. METHODS: A survey containing 28 questions covering five key areas of sBRA was set-up and shared with representatives from the participating companies. Each company was asked to complete a single survey response including inputs across the company's multidisciplinary key representatives involved in benefit-risk assessment. RESULTS: Of the 26 participating companies, 21 (81%) are conducting sBRA. Considering these 21 qualitative frameworks were used by almost every company (19, 90%), while only 12 (57%) have used a quantitative method. Many companies have sBRA training (17, 81%), document templates (16,76%), Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)/checklists (13, 62%), and /or best practice manuals/examples (12,57%) available. Considering all 26 companies Software tools (15, 58%) and BR planning documents (11,42%) were identified as areas into which many companies intend to put effort. CONCLUSIONS: The industry survey confirmed a wide usage of sBRA by many companies involved in research and development. Nevertheless, sBRA is evolving and several future opportunities like the implementation of visualization tools were identified by the representatives of the pharmaceutical companies. Finally, challenges like the cross-functional comprehension of the added value of sBRA are still seen.

Key Opinion Leaders' Interviews to Inform the Future of Benefit-Risk Planning in the Medical Total Product Life Cycle of Global Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Organizations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Key opinion leader (KOL) interviews were conducted by the Benefit-Risk Assessment Planning (BRAP) Taskforce to seek expert opinion mainly from industry and regulatory bodies, about the current status and future direction of benefit-risk assessment (BRA) planning in the lifecycle of medical product development. The findings from these interviews are intended to help communication concerning planning for BRA between industry and regulators and shape future guidance. METHODS: Key opinion leader interviews consisted of 5 questions related to BRA planning, which were administered to volunteers (mainly clinicians and statisticians) within a pool of experienced pharmaceutical and medical device professionals representing academia, industry, regulatory agencies and a patient group. The interviewees' responses to the 5 questions were summarized. To analyze the qualitative data, a Coding System was developed to label themes arising from the interviews. The key findings from the interviews were summarized into a Master Template. A quantitative analysis based on descriptive statistics was also conducted. RESULTS: Of the 27 interviewees, there were 11 professionals from regulatory agencies, 11 from industry, 4 from academia and 1 from a patient advocacy group. Key findings based on the comments provided by 48% of the interviewees indicated the need of incorporating BRA into other (e.g., existing) processes with the importance of alignment between processes being stressed in the comments provided by 59% of the interviewees. Commencing BRA early in the product lifecycle was emphasized in comments provided by 44% of the interviewees. Among other needs identified were an appropriate contextualization of benefits and risks (based on comments provided by 41% of interviewees) through adoption of an integrated approach with structured support by regulatory agencies and a need for understanding the audience with better communication of benefit-risk (BR) among all stakeholders (based on comments provided by 44% of the interviewees). Almost all comments provided by interviewees (96%) highlighted the importance of utilizing patient experience/preference to guide new product development and BRA. Comments provided by 74% of the interviewees expressed the need to understand patient tolerance for risk and trade-offs, with a majority (78%) of interviewees highlighting how to gather information, and 59% stressing the need for the selection and development of appropriate methodologies as important considerations for enhancing the quality and relevance of the data collected from patients. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees indicated that BRA should commence early in the medical product development and inform decision-making throughout the product lifecycle. Better planning and integration of BRA into existing processes within industry would be valuable. The importance of incorporating the patient voice into BRA and medical product development was emphasized. Other key findings from the KOL interviews included a need for improved communication of BR information, and establishment of methodologies for performing BRA and soliciting patient input.

FDA Approval Summary: Pirtobrutinib for Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma.

In January 2023, the FDA granted accelerated approval to pirtobrutinib for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) after at least two lines of systemic therapy, including a Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Approval was based on BRUIN, a single-arm study of pirtobrutinib monotherapy in patients with B-cell malignancies. Efficacy was based on independent review committee-assessed overall response rate (ORR) supported by durability of response in 120 patients with relapsed or refractory MCL who had received a prior BTK inhibitor and received the approved pirtobrutinib dosage of 200 mg once daily. The ORR was 50% [95% confidence interval (CI), 41-59], and the complete response rate was 13% (95% CI, 7-20), with an estimated median duration of response of 8.3 months. The most common nonhematologic adverse reactions were fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, diarrhea, edema, dyspnea, pneumonia, and bruising. Warnings and Precautions in labeling include infection, hemorrhage, cytopenias, atrial arrhythmias, and second primary malignancies. Postmarketing studies were required to evaluate longer-term safety of pirtobrutinib and to verify the clinical benefit of pirtobrutinib. This article summarizes key aspects of the regulatory review, including the indication statement, efficacy and safety considerations, and postmarketing requirements.

Improving Collection and Analysis of Overall Survival Data.

Advances in anticancer therapies have provided crucial benefits for millions of patients who are living long and fulfilling lives. While these successes should be celebrated, there is certainly room to continue improving cancer care. Increased long-term survival presents additional challenges for determining whether new therapies further extend patients' lives through clinical trials, commonly known as the gold standard endpoint of overall survival (OS). As a result, there is an increasing reliance on earlier efficacy endpoints , which may or may not correlate with OS, to continue the timely pace of translating innovation into novel therapies available for patients. Even when not powered as an efficacy endpoint, OS remains a critical indication of safety for regulatory decisions and is a key aspect of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Project Endpoint. Unfortunately, in the pursuit of earlier endpoints, many registrational clinical trials lack adequate planning, collection, and analysis of OS data, which complicates interpretation of a net clinical benefit or harm. This article shares best practices, proposes novel statistical methodologies, and provides detailed recommendations to improve the rigor of using OS data to inform benefit-risk assessments, including incorporating the following in clinical trials intending to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a cancer therapy: prospective collection of OS data, establishment of fit-for-purpose definitions of OS detriment, and prespecification of analysis plans for using OS data to evaluate for potential harm. These improvements hold promise to help regulators, patients and providers better understand the benefits and risks of novel therapies.

Adaptive, behavioral, and emotional outcomes following postoperative pediatric cerebellar mutism syndrome in survivors treated for medulloblastoma.

OBJECTIVE: Patients who experience postoperative pediatric cerebellar mutism syndrome (CMS) during treatment for medulloblastoma have long-term deficits in neurocognitive functioning; however, the consequences on functional or adaptive outcomes are unknown. The purpose of the present study was to compare adaptive, behavioral, and emotional functioning between survivors with and those without a history of CMS. METHODS: The authors examined outcomes in 45 survivors (15 with CMS and 30 without CMS). Comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations, which included parent-report measures of adaptive, behavioral, and emotional functioning, were completed at a median of 2.90 years following craniospinal irradiation. RESULTS: Adaptive functioning was significantly worse in the CMS group for practical and general adaptive skills compared with the group without CMS. Rates of impairment in practical, conceptual, and general adaptive skills in the CMS group exceeded expected rates in the general population. Despite having lower overall intellectual functioning, working memory, and processing speed, IQ and related cognitive processes were uncorrelated with adaptive outcomes in the CMS group. No significant group differences or increased rates of impairment were observed for behavioral and emotional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors with CMS, compared with those without CMS, are rated as having significant deficits in overall or general adaptive functioning, with specific weakness in practical skills several years posttreatment. Findings from this study demonstrate the high risk for ongoing functional deficits despite acute recovery from symptoms of CMS, highlighting the need for intervention to mitigate such risk.

Outbreak management of multidrug-resistant Bordetella bronchiseptica in 16 shelter-housed cats.

CASE SERIES SUMMARY: This case series describes an outbreak of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Bordetella bronchiseptica in 16 shelter-housed cats with infectious respiratory disease. Four cats presented with acute dyspnea on the same day, each with a history of previous upper respiratory disease that had resolved with treatment. Early diagnostic testing and culture and sensitivity allowed for targeted antimicrobial therapy and environmental interventions. A case definition based on exposure and clinical signs identified 12 additional presumptive cases, including the likely index case. Comprehensive outbreak management included diagnostic testing, risk assessment, vaccination, use of isolation and quarantine, increased surveillance and review of biosecurity practices. The outbreak resolved in 26 days. RELEVANCE AND NOVEL INFORMATION: Management of an MDR B bronchiseptica outbreak in shelter-housed cats has not been previously described. Along with standard population and environmental measures, early and appropriate use of necropsy, PCR and bacterial culture allowed rapid and appropriate use of effective, second-line antibiotics. Shelters are resource-challenged population centers. Veterinarians working in animal shelters can play an important role in helping to develop cost-efficient and effective antimicrobial stewardship practices for companion animal settings. Outbreak management expertise and funding for diagnostic testing, as well as application of the principles of antimicrobial stewardship, are essential components of shelter medicine practice.

Reclassification of the HPGD p.Ala13Glu variant causing primary hypertrophic osteoarthropathy.

Here, we highlight the case of a 31-yr-old man who had clinical features of primary hypertrophic osteoarthropathy (PHOAR) and harbored a homozygous variant (c.38C > A, p.Ala13Glu) in the HPGD gene, as indicated by whole-exome sequencing (WES). This variant has been previously classified by our laboratory as a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). However, another patient with the same phenotype and the same homozygous variant in HPGD was subsequently reported. In reassessing the variant, the absence of this variant in the gnomAD population database, supporting computational predictions, observation in homozygosity in two probands, and specificity of the phenotype for HPGD, all provide sufficient evidence to reclassify the HPGD c.38C > A, p.Ala13Glu variant as likely pathogenic.

Differences in Blood Flow Patterns and Endothelial Shear Stress at the Carotid Artery Using Different Exercise Modalities and Intensities.

Endothelial dysfunction is the first pathophysiological step of atherosclerosis, which is responsible for 90% of strokes. Exercise programs aim to reduce the risk of developing stroke; however, the majority of the beneficial factors of exercise are still unknown. Endothelial shear stress (ESS) is associated with endothelial homeostasis. Unfortunately, ESS has not been characterized during different exercise modalities and intensities in the carotid artery. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine exercise-induced blood flow patterns in the carotid artery. Fourteen apparently healthy young adults (males = 7, females = 7) were recruited for this repeated measures study design. Participants completed maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max) tests on a Treadmill, Cycle-ergometer, and Arm-ergometer, and 1-repetition maximum (1RM) tests of the Squat, Bench Press (Bench), and Biceps Curl (Biceps) on separate days. Thereafter, participants performed each exercise at 3 different exercise intensities (low, moderate, high) while a real-time ultrasound image and blood flow of the carotid artery was obtained. Blood flow patterns were assessed by estimating ESS via Womersley's estimation and turbulence via Reynold's number (Re). Data were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. Pairwise comparisons with Holm-Bonferroni correction were conducted with Hedge's g effect size to determine the magnitude of the difference. There was a main effect of intensity, exercise modality, and intensity * exercise modality interaction on both ESS (p < 0.001). Treadmill at a high intensity yielded the greatest ESS when compared to the other exercise modalities and intensities, while Bench Press and Biceps curls yielded the least ESS. All exercise intensities across all modalities resulted in turbulent blood flow. Clinicians must take into consideration how different exercise modalities and intensities affect ESS and Re of the carotid artery.

Global Landscape of Benefit-Risk Considerations for Medicinal Products: Current State and Future Directions.

In the last decade there has been a significant increase in the literature discussing the use of benefit-risk methods in medical product (including devices) development. Government agencies, medical product industry groups, academia, and collaborative consortia have extensively discussed the advantages of structured benefit-risk assessments. However, the abundance of information has not resulted in a consistent way to utilize these findings in medical product development. Guidelines and papers on methods, even though well structured, have not led to a firm consensus on a clear and consistent approach. This paper summarizes the global landscape of benefit-risk considerations for product- or program-level decisions from available literature and regulatory guidance, providing the perspectives of three stakeholder groups-regulators, collaborative groups and consortia, and patients. The paper identifies key themes, potential impact on benefit-risk assessments, and significant future trends.

Cost of care for asylum seekers and refugees entering the United States: The case of volunteer medical providers in El Paso, Texas.

BACKGROUND: Between October 2018, and February 2020, the United States saw an unprecedented increase in the number of asylum seekers and refugees arriving unexpectedly at international crossings along the US-Mexico Border. Many of these migrants needed proper medical attention, and consequently created significant pressure on local health systems. In El Paso, Texas, volunteer clinicians, collaborating closely with religious organizations and non-governmental organizations, provided outpatient medical care for the new arrivals; the county hospital provided in-patient care at local tax payers' expense. The objective of this study was to estimate costs of healthcare services offered by these volunteers in order to formulate sustainable and appropriate healthcare policies to address the needs of refugees and asylum seekers in the United States. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used including personal interviews with stakeholders, and follow up surveys with volunteer clinicians. The cost analysis was done from the payer perspective using Medicaid reimbursement rates. RESULTS: Total costs of care provided to asylum seekers and refugees varied between $1.9MM to $4.4MM during the study period. The number of patient visits was estimated at 15,736 to 19,236, and cost per patient ranged between $99 and $281. Most common conditions treated by volunteer providers were abdominal pain, dermatological conditions, headaches, dehydration and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study looking at the cost of healthcare for refugees and asylum seekers provided by volunteer clinicians, in a binational context. The resources invested by volunteer providers were significant, and essential to meet medical needs of migrant populations. Without appropriate financial support, a strategy relying on volunteer and local community resources will prove unsustainable in the long term. Findings from this study will help formulate federal and local policies to support local health systems along the US-Mexico Border in providing care to future migrations into the United States.

Cerebellar Mutism Syndrome in Pediatric Neuro-oncology: A Multidisciplinary Perspective and Call for Research Priorities.

Cerebellar mutism syndrome (CMS), also known as posterior fossa syndrome, occurs in a subset of children after posterior fossa tumor resection, most commonly medulloblastoma. Patients with this syndrome exhibit often transient, although protracted, symptoms of language impairment, emotional lability, cerebellar, and brainstem dysfunction. However, many patients experience persistent neurological deficits and lasting neurocognitive impairment. Historically, research and clinical care were hindered by inconsistent nomenclature, poorly defined diagnostic criteria, and uncertainty surrounding risk factors and etiology. Proposed diagnostic criteria include two major symptoms, language impairment and emotional lability, as proposed by the international Board of the Posterior Fossa Society in their consensus statement as well as other experts in this field. Risk factors most commonly associated with development of CMS include midline tumor location, diagnosis of medulloblastoma and specific tumor subtype, younger age at diagnosis, and preoperative language impairment. A proposed etiology of CMS includes disruption of the cerebellar outflow tracts, the cerebellar nuclei, and their efferent projections through the superior cerebellar peduncle. Treatment for CMS remains supportive. Herein, we present a comprehensive overview of CMS etiology, diagnosis, risk factors, clinical presentation, and clinical management. In addition, we identify essential multidisciplinary research priorities to advance diagnostics, prevention, and intervention efforts for patients with, or at risk for, development of CMS.