Disparities in Diagnostic Imaging for Initial Local Staging for Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the presence, quality, and timeliness of initial staging imaging for rectal cancer patients, and to evaluate demographic factors associated with disparities. METHODS: We conducted a chart review of consecutive rectal adenocarcinoma cancer registry cases from a single institution for the period from 2015 to 2020. We recorded whether initial staging MRI or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was performed, and whether it was performed in or outside the institution. MRI quality was assessed based on compliance to the Society of Abdominal Radiology rectal cancer disease-focused panel protocol recommendations. The times between diagnosis and imaging were calculated. Patients' age, race, ethnicity, sex, body mass index, address, and primary payer were acquired from the electronic medical record. Descriptive analysis, odds ratios, and Student's t tests were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of 346 patients, 39% were female, and the average age was 59 years. A total of 93 patients (26.8%) had no initial staging MRI or endoscopic ultrasound. Of the 142 MRIs evaluated for image quality, 100 patient exams (72.4%) met the criteria for adequate quality. The mean time interval from diagnosis to imaging was 30.9 days. A lower likelihood of receiving initial local staging was associated with being of Hispanic ethnicity (P < .01), having Medicaid or no insurance (P < .01), and residing in a low-income census block (P < .01). Higher quality of imaging was associated with residence in a census block with high median income (P < 0.01), more recent diagnosis (P < .01), and MRI performed at the institution presented (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Although radiologic workup variability was found across all demographics, sociodemographic factors have an effect on local initial imaging of rectal cancer, emphasizing the need to improve image acquisition for underserved patients and improve quality standardization at low-volume centers.

Does mismatch negativity have utility for NMDA receptor drug development in depression?

Rapid antidepressant effects associated with ketamine have shifted the landscape for the development of therapeutics to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) from a monoaminergic to glutamatergic model. Treatment with ketamine, an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, may be effective, but has many non-glutamatergic targets, and clinical and logistical problems are potential challenges. These factors underscore the importance of manipulations of binding mechanics to produce antidepressant effects without concomitant clinical side effects. This will require identification of efficient biomarkers to monitor target engagement. The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a widely used electrophysiological signature linked to the activity of NMDA receptors (NMDAR) in humans and animals and validated in pre-clinical and clinical studies of ketamine. In this review, we explore the flexibility of the MMN and its capabilities for reliable use in drug development for NMDAR antagonists in MDD. We supplement this with findings from our own research with three distinct NMDAR antagonists. The research described illustrates that there are important distinctions between the mechanisms of NMDAR antagonism, which are further crystallized when considering the paradigm used to study the MMN. We conclude that the lack of standardized methodology currently prevents MMN from being ready for common use in drug discovery. Clinical trial registration: This manuscript describes data collected from the following National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Veterans Affairs (VA) studies: AV-101, NCT03583554; lanicemine, NCT03166501; ketamine, NCT02556606.

Determining the incidence of distraction among trauma patients in all modes of transportation.

BACKGROUND: The use of distracting technology is an increasing source of risk for injury among trauma patients. Both drivers and pedestrians show increased unsafe behavior. The data for prevalence and risk for distraction in trauma has varied widely. Our hypothesis is that distraction is more highly prevalent and widely distributed among all mechanisms of injury and variety of trauma patients. METHODS: A 10-question survey of adult trauma victims at a Level I trauma center regarding distraction at time of event was performed, examining age, sex, ethnicity, education level, mode of injury and role in the accident (driver, passenger, pedestrian, bicyclist, motorcyclist). Multiple-variable logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for distraction. RESULTS: From June 2016 to October 2018, 1,316 patients were surveyed, and 1,011 (76.8%) patients reported their role in the traffic accident. The prevalence of distraction was 21.73% among drivers, 9.01% among passengers, 16.50% among pedestrians, 20.00% among bicyclists, and 8.09% among motorcyclists. Males (odds ratio [OR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-2.67) as well as all Others (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.10-3.98) showed statistically significant increased risk for distraction. Motorcyclist (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.13-0.50) and passenger (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18-0.77) roles during collision were a lowered risk of distraction. Furthermore, Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.94-2.79) trended toward being at greater risk for distraction. CONCLUSION: Distraction is prevalent among a wide range of traffic accident victims, not just drivers. Males as well as all Others are more likely to be distracted. In contrast, motorcyclists and passengers are less likely to be distracted. Further studies to assist in determining effective interventions and public safety efforts aimed at specific at-risk groups beyond motor vehicle drivers are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level V.