The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Optimizing strategies for lung nodule evaluation and management.

Lung nodules are frequently detected on low-dose computed tomography scans performed for lung cancer screening and incidentally detected on imaging performed for other reasons. There is wide variability in how lung nodules are managed by general practitioners and subspecialists, with high rates of guideline-discordant care. This may be due in part to the level of evidence underlying current practice guideline recommendations (primarily based on findings from uncontrolled studies of diagnostic accuracy). The primary aims of lung nodule management are to minimize harms of diagnostic evaluations while expediting the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of lung cancer. Potentially useful tools such as lung cancer probability calculators, automated methods to identify patients with nodules in the electronic health record, and multidisciplinary team evaluation are often underused due to limited availability, accessibility, and/or provider knowledge. Finally, relatively little attention has been paid to identifying and reducing disparities among individuals with screening-detected or incidentally detected lung nodules. This contribution to the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable Strategic Plan aims to identify and describe these knowledge gaps in lung nodule management and propose recommendations to advance clinical practice and research. Major themes that are addressed include improving the quality of evidence supporting lung nodule evaluation guidelines, strategically leveraging information technology, and placing emphasis on equitable approaches to nodule management. The recommendations outlined in this strategic plan, when carried out through interdisciplinary efforts with a focus on health equity, ultimately aim to improve early detection and reduce the morbidity and mortality of lung cancer. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Lung nodules may be identified on chest scans of individuals who undergo lung cancer screening (screening-detected nodules) or among patients for whom a scan was performed for another reason (incidental nodules). Although the vast majority of lung nodules are not lung cancer, it is important to have evidence-based, standardized approaches to the evaluation and management of a lung nodule. The primary aims of lung nodule management are to diagnose lung cancer while it is still in an early stage and to avoid unnecessary procedures and other harms.

Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: Lung nodules are common incidental findings, and timely evaluation is critical to ensure diagnosis of localized-stage and potentially curable lung cancers. Rates of guideline-concordant lung nodule evaluation are low, and the risk of delayed evaluation is higher for minoritized groups. Objectives: To summarize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and prioritize research questions related to interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee was convened to review the evidence and identify key knowledge gaps in four domains: 1) research methodology, 2) patient-level interventions, 3) clinician-level interventions, and 4) health system-level interventions. A modified Delphi approach was used to identify research priorities. Results: Key knowledge gaps included 1) a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with lung nodule management disparities, 2) limited data evaluating the role of social determinants of health on disparities in lung nodule management, 3) a lack of certainty regarding the optimal strategy to improve patient-clinician communication and information transmission and/or retention, and 4) a paucity of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trained multidisciplinary teams. Conclusions: This statement outlines a research agenda intended to stimulate high-impact studies of interventions to mitigate disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Research questions were prioritized around the following domains: 1) need for methodologic guidelines for conducting research related to disparities in nodule management, 2) evaluating how social determinants of health influence lung nodule evaluation, 3) studying approaches to improve patient-clinician communication, and 4) evaluating the utility of patient navigators and culturally enriched multidisciplinary teams to reduce disparities.

Thrombocytopenia is Associated with Higher Fontan Pressure and Increased Morbidity in Patients with Fontan Circulation.

After the Fontan procedure, patients require lifelong follow-up due to significant late morbidity and mortality. Thrombocytopenia is seen frequently post-Fontan, likely due to secondary hypersplenism from elevated Fontan pressure. We investigated platelet counts in patients with a Fontan circulation and assessed associations with catheterization data and clinical outcomes. This retrospective study included 92 patients (33% female) post-Fontan who had a complete blood count performed between January 2011 and July 2023. The age at evaluation was 24.0 ± 8.9 years. Outcomes measured included elevated Fontan pressure (≥ 15 mmHg), Fontan-associated liver disease (FALD), unscheduled admissions, transplant, and death. Participants with thrombocytopenia (≤ 150,000/µL) had significantly higher rates of elevated Fontan pressure (OR 8.1, 95% CI 1.3-52.7, p = 0.03), FALD (OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.6-10.6, p = 0.004), and unscheduled admissions (362 ± 577 versus 115 ± 185 admissions per 1000 patient-years, p = 0.02). Thrombocytopenia post-Fontan is associated with elevated Fontan pressure, FALD, and increased morbidity. Platelet count could serve as a non-invasive factor in identifying patients at risk of decompensation.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening for patients with breast cancer in medical oncology: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in oncology presents numerous challenges. Implementation strategies that are responsive to local context may be critical elements of adoption and sustainment. We evaluated barriers and facilitators to implementation of a depression screening program for breast cancer patients in a community medical oncology setting as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we employed qualitative methods to evaluate clinician, administrator, and patient perceptions of the program using semi-structured interviews. We used a team-coding approach for the data; thematic development focused on barriers and facilitators to implementation using a grounded theory approach. The codebook was refined through open discussions of subjectivity and unintentional bias, coding, and memo applications (including emergent coding), and the hierarchical structure and relationships of themes. RESULTS: We conducted 20 interviews with 11 clinicians/administrators and 9 patients. Five major themes emerged: (1) gradual acceptance and support of the intervention and workflow; (2) compatibility with system and personal norms and goals; (3) reinforcement of the value of and need for adaptability; (4) self-efficacy within the nursing team; and (5) importance of identifying accountable front-line staff beyond leadership "champions." CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a high degree of acceptability and feasibility due to the selection of appropriate implementation strategies, alignment of norms and goals, and a high degree of workflow adaptability. These findings will be uniquely helpful in generating actionable, real-world knowledge to inform the design, implementation, and sustainment of guideline-recommended depression screening programs in oncology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02941614.

Stakeholder Research Priorities to Promote Implementation of Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: An American Thoracic Society and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Statement.

Rationale: Shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended in guidelines and required by Medicare, yet it is seldom achieved in practice. The best approach for implementing SDM for LCS remains unknown, and the 2021 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force calls for implementation research to increase uptake of SDM for LCS. Objectives: To develop a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and recommended outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS. Methods: The American Thoracic Society and VA Health Services Research and Development Service convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in SDM, LCS, patient-centered care, and implementation science. During a virtual State of the Art conference, we reviewed evidence and identified research questions to address barriers to implementing SDM for LCS, as well as outcome constructs, which were refined by writing group members. Our committee (n = 34) then ranked research questions and SDM effectiveness outcomes by perceived importance in an online survey. Results: We present our committee's consensus on three topics important to implementing SDM for LCS: 1) foundational principles for the best practice of SDM for LCS; 2) stakeholder rankings of 22 implementation research questions; and 3) recommended outcomes, including Proctor's implementation outcomes and stakeholder rankings of SDM effectiveness outcomes for hybrid implementation-effectiveness studies. Our committee ranked questions that apply innovative implementation approaches to relieve primary care providers of the sole responsibility of SDM for LCS as highest priority. We rated effectiveness constructs that capture the patient experience of SDM as most important. Conclusions: This statement offers a stakeholder-prioritized research agenda and outcomes to advance implementation of SDM for LCS.

Characteristics of Persons Screened for Lung Cancer in the United States : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) was recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in 2013, making approximately 8 million Americans eligible for screening. The demographic characteristics and adherence of persons screened in the United States have not been reported at the population level. OBJECTIVE: To define sociodemographic characteristics and adherence among persons screened and entered into the American College of Radiology's Lung Cancer Screening Registry (LCSR). DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: United States, 2015 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Persons receiving a baseline LDCT for LCS from 3625 facilities reporting to the LCSR. MEASUREMENTS: Age, sex, and smoking status distributions (percentages) were computed among persons who were screened and among respondents in the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) who were eligible for screening. The prevalence between the LCSR and the NHIS was compared with prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% CIs. Adherence to annual screening was defined as having a follow-up test within 11 to 15 months of an initial LDCT. RESULTS: Among 1 159 092 persons who were screened, 90.8% (n = 1 052 591) met the USPSTF eligibility criteria. Compared with adults from the NHIS who met the criteria (n = 1257), screening recipients in the LCSR were older (34.7% vs. 44.8% were aged 65 to 74 years; PR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.20 to 1.39]), more likely to be female (41.8% vs. 48.1%; PR, 1.15 [CI, 1.08 to 1.23]), and more likely to currently smoke (52.3% vs. 61.4%; PR, 1.17 [CI, 1.11 to 1.23]). Only 22.3% had a repeated annual LDCT. If follow-up was extended to 24 months and more than 24 months, 34.3% and 40.3% were adherent, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Underreporting of LCS and missing data may skew demographic characteristics of persons reported to be screened. Underreporting of adherence may result in underestimates of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Approximately 91% of persons who had LCS met USPSTF eligibility criteria. In addition to continuing to target all eligible adults, men, those who formerly smoked, and younger eligible patients may be less likely to be screened. Adherence to annual follow-up screening was poor, potentially limiting screening effectiveness. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There may be many predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients, but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized medical patients and searched Medline and EMBASE from inception through May 2018. We considered studies that identified potential prognostic factors for VTE and bleeding in hospitalized adult medical patients. Reviewers extracted data in duplicate and independently and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Of 69 410 citations, we included 17 studies in our analysis: 14 that reported on VTE, and 3 that reported on bleeding. For VTE, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age; elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and fibrinogen levels; tachycardia; thrombocytosis; leukocytosis; fever; leg edema; lower Barthel Index (BI) score; immobility; paresis; previous history of VTE; thrombophilia; malignancy; critical illness; and infections. For bleeding, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, sex, anemia, obesity, low hemoglobin, gastroduodenal ulcers, rehospitalization, critical illness, thrombocytopenia, blood dyscrasias, hepatic disease, renal failure, antithrombotic medication, and presence of a central venous catheter. Elevated CRP, a lower BI, a history of malignancy, and elevated heart rate are not included in most VTE risk assessment models. This study informs risk prediction in the management of hospitalized medical patients for VTE and bleeding; it also informs guidelines for VTE prevention and future research.

Defining Complex Patient Populations: Implications for Population Size, Composition, Utilization, and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to support patients with complex needs have proliferated in recent years, but the question of how to identify patients with complex needs has received relatively little attention. There are innumerable ways to structure inclusion and exclusion criteria for complex care interventions, and little is known about the implications of choices made in designing patient selection criteria. OBJECTIVE: To provide insights into the design of patient selection criteria for interventions, by implementing criteria sets within a large health plan member population and comparing the characteristics of the resulting complex patient cohorts. DESIGN: Retrospective observational descriptive study. SUBJECTS: Patients identified as having complex needs, within the membership population of Kaiser Permanente Southern California, a large, population-based health plan with more than 4 million members. We characterize five commonly used archetypes of complex needs: high-cost patients, patients with multiple chronic conditions, frail elders, emergency department high-utilizers, and inpatient high-utilizers. MEASURES: We selected an initial set of criteria for identifying patients in each of the archetypical complex populations, based on available administrative data. We then tested multiple variants of each definition. We compared the resulting patient cohorts using univariate and bivariate descriptive statistics. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 32.7% of the 3,112,797 adults in our population-based sample were selected by at least one of the 25 definitions of complexity we tested. Across definitions the total number of patients identified as complex ranged from 622,560 to 1583 and complex patient cohorts varied widely in demographic characteristics, chronic conditions, healthcare utilization, spending, and survival. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of patient population is critical to the design of complex care programs. Exploratory analyses of population criteria can provide useful information for program planning in the setting of limited resources for interventions. Data such as these should be generated as a key step in program design.

Machine Learning for Early Lung Cancer Identification Using Routine Clinical and Laboratory Data.

Rationale: Most lung cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Presymptomatic identification of high-risk individuals can prompt earlier intervention and improve long-term outcomes. Objectives: To develop a model to predict a future diagnosis of lung cancer on the basis of routine clinical and laboratory data by using machine learning. Methods: We assembled data from 6,505 case patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 189,597 contemporaneous control subjects and compared the accuracy of a novel machine learning model with a modified version of the well-validated 2012 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial risk model (mPLCOm2012), by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and diagnostic odds ratio (OR) as measures of model performance. Measurements and Main Results: Among ever-smokers in the test set, a machine learning model was more accurate than the mPLCOm2012 for identifying NSCLC 9-12 months before clinical diagnosis (P < 0.00001) and demonstrated an AUC of 0.86, a diagnostic OR of 12.3, and a sensitivity of 40.1% at a predefined specificity of 95%. In comparison, the mPLCOm2012 demonstrated an AUC of 0.79, an OR of 7.4, and a sensitivity of 27.9% at the same specificity. The machine learning model was more accurate than standard eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening and more accurate than the mPLCOm2012 when applied to a screening-eligible population. Influential model variables included known risk factors and novel predictors such as white blood cell and platelet counts. Conclusions: A machine learning model was more accurate for early diagnosis of NSCLC than either standard eligibility criteria for screening or the mPLCOm2012, demonstrating the potential to help prevent lung cancer deaths through early detection.

Effect of a Community-Based Medical Oncology Depression Screening Program on Behavioral Health Referrals Among Patients With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Implementation of guideline-recommended depression screening in medical oncology remains challenging. Evidence suggests that multicomponent care pathways with algorithm-based referral and management are effective, yet implementation of sustainable programs remains limited and implementation-science guided approaches are understudied. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an implementation-strategy guided depression screening program for patients with breast cancer in a community setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial conducted within Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). The trial included 6 medical centers and 1436 patients diagnosed with new primary breast cancer who had a consultation with medical oncology between October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018. Patients were followed up through study end date of May 31, 2019. Interventions: Six medical centers in Southern California participated and were randomized 1:1 to tailored implementation strategies (intervention, 3 sites, n = 744 patients) or education-only (control, 3 sites, n = 692 patients) groups. The program consisted of screening with the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and algorithm-based scoring and referral to behavioral health services based on low, moderate, or high score. Clinical teams at tailored intervention sites received program education, audit, and feedback of performance data and implementation facilitation, and clinical workflows were adapted to suit local context. Education-only controls sites received program education. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was percent of eligible patients screened and referred (based on PHQ-9 score) at intervention vs control groups measured at the patient level. Secondary outcomes included outpatient health care utilization for behavioral health, primary care, oncology, urgent care, and emergency department. Results: All 1436 eligible patients were randomized at the center level (mean age, 61.5 years; 99% women; 18% Asian, 17% Black, 26% Hispanic, and 37% White) and were followed up to the end of the study, insurance disenrollment, or death. Groups were similar in demographic and tumor characteristics. For the primary outcome, 7.9% (59 of 744) of patients at tailored sites were referred compared with 0.1% (1 of 692) at education-only sites (difference, 7.8%; 95% CI, 5.8%-9.8%). Referrals to a behavioral health clinician were completed by 44 of 59 patients treated at the intervention sites (75%) intervention sites vs 1 of 1 patient at the education-only sites (100%). In adjusted models patients at tailored sites had significantly fewer outpatient visits in medical oncology (rate ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.86-0.89; P = .001), and no significant difference in utilization of primary care, urgent care, and emergency department visits. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with breast cancer treated in community-based oncology practices, tailored strategies for implementation of routine depression screening compared with an education-only control group resulted in a greater proportion of referrals to behavioral care. Further research is needed to understand the clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of this program. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02941614.

Personalized lung cancer screening: Are we ready to ENGAGE?

LAY SUMMARY: The goal of delivering personalized lung cancer screening is a worthy one. It is inspiring to envision a future in which screening decisions are informed by the best available evidence, tailored to an individual's specific characteristics, and consistent with their preferences and values. At the societal level, tradeoffs between effectiveness, efficiency and equity are inevitable and will need to be balanced exquisitely, with ample input from patients and other stakeholders. Tools such as the ENGAGE framework will continue to enlighten and to shape the ongoing conversation.

Dual slot-mode NOEM phase shifter.

Photonic system component counts are increasing rapidly, particularly in CMOS-compatible silicon photonics processes. Large numbers of cascaded active photonic devices are difficult to implement when accounting for constraints on area, power dissipation, and response time. Plasma dispersion and the thermo-optic effect, both available in CMOS-compatible silicon processes, address a subset of these criteria. With the addition of a few back-end-of-line etch processing steps, silicon photonics platforms can support nano-opto-electro-mechanical (NOEM) phase shifters. Realizing NOEM phase shifters that operate at CMOS-compatible voltages (≤ 1.2 V) and with low insertion loss remains a challenge. Here, we introduce a novel NOEM phase shifter fabricated alongside 90 nanometer transistors that imparts 5.63 radians phase shift at 1.08 volts bias over an actuation length of 25µm with an insertion loss of less than 0.04 dB and 3 dB bandwidth of 0.26 MHz.

A Patient Portal-Based Commitment Device to Improve Adherence with Screening for Colorectal Cancer: a Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant investment in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, 40% of US adults are not up-to-date. Commitment devices, which are psychologically tailored approaches to enforce health goals, may be an effective method to increase CRC screening. OBJECTIVE: Compare the effectiveness of a commitment device (patient self-ordering fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits) to standard CRC screening outreach. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were > 49 years and < 75 years, had no history of CRC, and were eligible for CRC screening. INTERVENTION: An electronic screening reminder with an embedded order button allowed participants to order FIT kits directly from a patient portal. Those who used the order button were promptly sent a kit; those who did not were later mailed kits. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was completion of FIT kits. Secondary outcomes included number of days to completion, completion of follow-up for positive results, and CRC diagnosis; we also examined prior use of FIT kit. We used inverse probability of treatment weights to control for pretreatment imbalances. KEY RESULTS: The cohort comprised 176,231 participants: 53% female; median age was 59; 11% were Asian, 21% Hispanic/Latino, 7% black, 51% White, 3% other/mixed race. Approximately 10% (N = 16,918) used the button. Using inverse probability of treatment weights, we found that those who used the button had 3.8 times the odds of completing a kit compared to participants who did not (odds ratio, 3.77; 95% confidence interval, 3.57-3.98). Within the button group, 63% of those eligible completed a FIT kit in the year prior to the button compared to 87% in the year after the button became available (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The ability to self-order screening kits may act as a commitment device that increases CRC screening. Scalable tools leveraging existing patient portals such as this can complement existing CRC outreach strategies.

Identifying patients with symptoms suspicious for COVID-19 at elevated risk of adverse events: The COVAS score.

OBJECTIVE: Develop and validate a risk score using variables available during an Emergency Department (ED) encounter to predict adverse events among patients with suspected COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of adult visits for suspected COVID-19 between March 1 - April 30, 2020 at 15 EDs in Southern California. The primary outcomes were death or respiratory decompensation within 7-days. We used least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) models and logistic regression to derive a risk score. We report metrics for derivation and validation cohorts, and subgroups with pneumonia or COVID-19 diagnoses. RESULTS: 26,600 ED encounters were included and 1079 experienced an adverse event. Five categories (comorbidities, obesity/BMI ≥ 40, vital signs, age and sex) were included in the final score. The area under the curve (AUC) in the derivation cohort was 0.891 (95% CI, 0.880-0.901); similar performance was observed in the validation cohort (AUC = 0.895, 95% CI, 0.874-0.916). Sensitivity ranging from 100% (Score 0) to 41.7% (Score of ≥15) and specificity from 13.9% (score 0) to 96.8% (score ≥ 15). In the subgroups with pneumonia (n = 3252) the AUCs were 0.780 (derivation, 95% CI 0.759-0.801) and 0.832 (validation, 95% CI 0.794-0.870), while for COVID-19 diagnoses (n = 2059) the AUCs were 0.867 (95% CI 0.843-0.892) and 0.837 (95% CI 0.774-0.899) respectively. CONCLUSION: Physicians evaluating ED patients with pneumonia, COVID-19, or symptoms suspicious for COVID-19 can apply the COVAS score to assist with decisions to hospitalize or discharge patients during the SARS CoV-2 pandemic.

A retrospective study to determine the cefepime-induced neurotoxicity threshold in hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVES: Cefepime-induced neurotoxicity (CIN) has been demonstrated to be associated with cefepime plasma concentrations; however, the toxicity threshold remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to identify the cefepime plasma trough concentration at which neurotoxicity occurs. Secondary objectives were to determine the incidence of CIN at a large tertiary institution and to identify patient factors associated with the development of CIN. METHODS: A retrospective review of all adult patients administered cefepime between October 2017 and May 2018 in a tertiary hospital was conducted to determine total incidence of CIN. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to review the sensitivity and specificity of using various cefepime trough plasma concentrations to predict the development of neurotoxicity. Cefepime plasma concentrations were measured using ultra-HPLC. A regression was conducted to identify patient factors associated with CIN. RESULTS: In total, 206 patients were administered 259 courses of cefepime, with an overall CIN incidence of 6% (16/259 courses). A total of 64 courses had a cefepime trough concentration measured (24.7%). A cefepime trough concentration of 36 mg/L provided the best differentiation between patients who experienced neurotoxicity and those who did not. No other patient covariates were identified to be significantly associated with neurotoxicity occurring. CONCLUSIONS: A cefepime trough plasma concentration ≥36 mg/L appears to be the most sensitive and specific cut-off to predict CIN occurring. No patient factors were associated with the development of CIN when accounting for cefepime trough plasma concentrations.

Embedded Research in the Learning Healthcare System: Ongoing Challenges and Recommendations for Researchers, Clinicians, and Health System Leaders.

Embedded research is an innovative means to improve performance in the learning healthcare system (LHS). However, few descriptions of successful embedded research programs have been published. In this perspective, we describe the Care Improvement Research Team, a mature partnership between researchers and clinicians at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. The program supports a core team of researchers and staff with dedicated resources to partner with health system leaders and practicing clinicians, using diverse methods to identify and rectify gaps in clinical practice. For example, recent projects helped clinicians to provide better care by reducing prescribing of unnecessary antibiotics for acute sinusitis and by preventing readmissions among the elderly. Embedded in operational workgroups, the team helps formulate research questions and enhances the rigor and relevance of data collection and analysis. A recent business-case analysis cited savings to the organization of over $10 million. We conclude that embedded research programs can play a key role in fulfilling the promise of the LHS. Program success depends on dedicated funding, robust data systems, and strong relationships between researchers and clinical stakeholders. Embedded researchers must be responsive to health system priorities and timelines, while clinicians should embrace researchers as partners in problem solving.

Augmenting subnetwork inference with information extracted from the scientific literature.

Many biological studies involve either (i) manipulating some aspect of a cell or its environment and then simultaneously measuring the effect on thousands of genes, or (ii) systematically manipulating each gene and then measuring the effect on some response of interest. A common challenge that arises in these studies is to explain how genes identified as relevant in the given experiment are organized into a subnetwork that accounts for the response of interest. The task of inferring a subnetwork is typically dependent on the information available in publicly available, structured databases, which suffer from incompleteness. However, a wealth of potentially relevant information resides in the scientific literature, such as information about genes associated with certain concepts of interest, as well as interactions that occur among various biological entities. We contend that by exploiting this information, we can improve the explanatory power and accuracy of subnetwork inference in multiple applications. Here we propose and investigate several ways in which information extracted from the scientific literature can be used to augment subnetwork inference. We show that we can use literature-extracted information to (i) augment the set of entities identified as being relevant in a subnetwork inference task, (ii) augment the set of interactions used in the process, and (iii) support targeted browsing of a large inferred subnetwork by identifying entities and interactions that are closely related to concepts of interest. We use this approach to uncover the pathways involved in interactions between a virus and a host cell, and the pathways that are regulated by a transcription factor associated with breast cancer. Our experimental results demonstrate that these approaches can provide more accurate and more interpretable subnetworks. Integer program code, background network data, and pathfinding code are available at https://github.com/Craven-Biostat-Lab/subnetwork_inference.

Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-related Pneumonitis. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Rationale: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer care but are associated with unique adverse events, including potentially life-threatening pneumonitis. The diagnosis of ICI-pneumonitis is increasing; however, the biological mechanisms, clinical and radiologic features, and the diagnosis and management have not been well defined.Objectives: To summarize evidence, identify knowledge and research gaps, and prioritize topics and propose methods for future research on ICI-pneumonitis.Methods: A multidisciplinary group of international clinical researchers reviewed available data on ICI-pneumonitis to develop and refine research questions pertaining to ICI-pneumonitis.Results: This statement identifies gaps in knowledge and develops potential research questions to further expand knowledge regarding risk, biologic mechanisms, clinical and radiologic presentation, and management of ICI-pneumonitis.Conclusions: Gaps in knowledge of the basic biological mechanisms of ICI-pneumonitis, coupled with a precipitous increase in the use of ICIs alone or combined with other therapies, highlight the importance in triaging research priorities for ICI-pneumonitis.

Effect of a HEART Care Pathway on Chest Pain Management Within an Integrated Health System.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We describe the association of implementing a History, ECG, Age, Risk Factors, and Troponin (HEART) care pathway on use of hospital care and noninvasive stress testing, as well as 30-day patient outcomes in community emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: We performed a prospective interrupted-time-series study of adult encounters for patients evaluated for suspected acute coronary syndrome. The primary outcome was hospitalization or observation, noninvasive stress testing, or both within 30 days. The secondary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality or acute myocardial infarction. A generalized estimating equation segmented logistic regression model was used to compare the odds of the primary outcome before and after HEART implementation. All models were adjusted for patient and facility characteristics and fit with physicians as a clustering variable. RESULTS: A total of 65,393 ED encounters (before, 30,522; after, 34,871) were included in the study. Overall, 33.5% (before, 35.5%; after, 31.8%) of ED chest pain encounters resulted in hospitalization or observation, noninvasive stress testing, or both. Primary adjusted results found a significant decrease in the primary outcome postimplementation (odds ratio 0.984; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.974 to 0.995). This resulted in an absolute adjusted month-to-month decrease of 4.39% (95% CI 3.72% to 5.07%) after 12 months' follow-up, with a continued trend downward. There was no difference in 30-day mortality or myocardial infarction (0.6% [before] versus 0.6% [after]; odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.08). CONCLUSION: Implementation of a HEART pathway in the ED evaluation of patients with chest pain resulted in less inpatient care and noninvasive cardiac testing and was safe. Using HEART to risk stratify chest pain patients can improve the efficiency and quality of care.