Conceptualizing National Advisory Boards in primary care research: application to the Two in One HIV and COVID screening and testing model.

The authors report on their development of a National Advisory Board (NAB) to guide a funded project: Two in One: HIV + COVID-19 Screening and Testing Model. This project aimed to improve primary care practitioners' capacity to routinize HIV, PrEP/PEP, and COVID-19 vaccine screenings for all their patients while relying on culturally responsive communication with their minoritized patients. To approach their monumental research and education tasks, they created a NAB, drawing from the literature on advisory boards to (a) promote board member engagement and (b) progress successfully through the six stages suggested for successful advisory boards. A midpoint survey and final focus groups with NAB members indicated mixed levels of engagement, a sense of time and work being valued, and pride in the media and academic reach of the project. The authors offer considerations for others considering forming a NAB to guide primary care research and interventions.

Task force of the Brazilian Society of Otology - evaluation and management of peripheral facial palsy.

OBJECTIVE: To review key evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral facial palsy in children and adults. METHODS: Task force members were educated on knowledge synthesis methods, including electronic database search, review and selection of relevant citations, and critical appraisal of selected studies. Articles written in English or Portuguese on peripheral facial palsy were eligible for inclusion. The American College of Physicians' guideline grading system and the American Thyroid Association's guideline criteria were used for critical appraisal of evidence and recommendations for therapeutic interventions. RESULTS: The topics were divided into 2 main parts: (1) Evaluation and diagnosis of facial palsy: electrophysiologic tests, idiopathic facial palsy, Ramsay Hunt syndrome, traumatic peripheral facial palsy, recurrent peripheral facial palsy, facial nerve tumors, and peripheral facial palsy in children; and (2) Rehabilitation procedures: surgical decompression of the facial nerve, facial nerve grafting, surgical treatment of long-term peripheral facial palsy, and non-surgical rehabilitation of the facial nerve. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral facial palsy is a condition of diverse etiology. Treatment should be individualized according to the cause of facial nerve dysfunction, but the literature presents better evidence-based recommendations for systemic corticosteroid therapy.

Challenges and Solutions to Support Oncology Professionals Serving Underserved Populations With Cancer in the United States: Results From the ASCO Serving the Underserved Task Force.

PURPOSE: Little data exist regarding approaches to support oncology professionals who deliver cancer care for underserved populations. In response, ASCO developed the Serving the Underserved Task Force to learn from and support oncology professionals serving underserved populations. METHODS: The Task Force developed a 28-question survey to assess oncology professionals' experiences and strategies to support their work caring for underserved populations. The survey was deployed via an online link to 600 oncology professionals and assessed respondent and patient demographic characteristics, clinic-based processes to coordinate health-related social services, and strategies for professional society support and engagement. We used chi-square tests to evaluate whether there were associations between percent full-time equivalent (FTE) effort serving underserved populations (<50% FTE v ≥50% FTE) with responses. RESULTS: Of 462 respondents who completed the survey (77% response rate), 79 (17.1%) were Asian; 30 (6.5%) Black; 43 (9.3%) Hispanic or Latino/Latina; and 277 (60%) White. The majority (n = 366, 79.2%) had a medical doctor degree (MD). A total of 174 (37.7%) had <25% FTE, 151 (32.7%) had 25%-50% FTE, and 121 (26.2%) had ≥50% FTE effort serving underserved populations. Most best guessed patients' sociodemographic characteristics (n = 388; 84%), while 42 (9.2%) used data collected by the clinic. Social workers coordinated most health-related social services. However, in clinical settings with high proportions of underserved patients, there was greater reliance on nonclinical personnel, such as navigators (odds ratio [OR], 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07 to 4.33]) or no individual (OR, 2.55 [95% CI, 1.14 to 5.72]) for addressing mental health needs and greater reliance on physicians or advance practice practitioners (OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.11 to 5.81]) or no individual (OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.09 to 3.35]) for addressing childcare or eldercare needs compared with social workers. Prioritization of solutions, which did not differ by FTE effort serving underserved populations, included a return-on-investment model to support personnel, integrated health-related social needs screening, and collaboration with the professional society on advocacy and policy. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight crucial strategies that professional societies can implement to support oncology clinicians serving underserved populations with cancer.

Outcomes of Breast Cancer Screening Strategies Based on Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Estimates.

Background There is ongoing debate about recommendations for breast cancer screening strategies, specifically regarding the frequency of screening and the age at which to initiate screening. Purpose To compare estimates of breast cancer screening outcomes published by the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) to understand the benefits and risks of different screening scenarios. Materials and Methods Modeling estimates published by CISNET are based on hypothetical cohorts in the United States and compare women, starting at 40 years of age, who do and do not undergo breast cancer screening with mammography. The four scenarios assessed in this study, of multiple possible scenarios, were biennial screening ages 50-74 years (2009 and 2016 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [USPSTF] recommendations), biennial screening ages 40-74 years (2023 USPSTF draft recommendation), annual screening ages 40-74 years, and annual screening ages 40-79 years. For each scenario, CISNET estimates of median lifetime benefits were compared. Risks that included false-positive screening results per examination and benign biopsies per examination were also calculated and compared. Results Estimates from CISNET 2023 showed that annual screening ages 40-79 years improved breast cancer mortality reduction compared with biennial screening ages 50-74 years and biennial screening ages 40-74 years (41.7%, 25.4%, and 30%, respectively). Annual screening ages 40-79 years averted the most breast cancer deaths (11.5 per 1000) and gained the most life-years (230 per 1000) compared with other screening scenarios (range, 6.7-11.5 per 1000 and 121-230 per 1000, respectively). False-positive screening results per examination were less than 10% for all screening scenarios (range, 6.5%-9.6%) and lowest for annual screening ages 40-79 years (6.5%). Benign biopsies per examination were less than 1.33% for all screening scenarios (range, 0.88%-1.32%) and lowest for annual screening ages 40-79 years (0.88%). Conclusion CISNET 2023 modeling estimates indicate that annual breast cancer screening starting at 40 years of age provides the greatest benefit to women and the least risk per examination. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Joe in this issue.

Justifying the source of external comparators in single-arm oncology health technology submissions: a review of NICE and PBAC assessments.

Background: The drive to expedite patient access for diseases with high unmet treatment needs has come with an increasing use of single-arm trials (SATs), especially in oncology. However, the lack of control arms in such trials creates challenges to assess and demonstrate comparative efficacy. External control (EC) arms can be used to bridge this gap, with various types of sources available to obtain relevant data. Objective: To examine the source of ECs in single-arm oncology health technology assessment (HTA) submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) and how this selection was justified by manufacturers and assessed by the respective HTA body. Methods: Single-arm oncology HTA submission reports published by NICE (England) and PBAC (Australia) from January 2011 to August 2021 were reviewed, with data qualitatively synthesized to identify themes. Results: Forty-eight oncology submissions using EC arms between 2011 and 2021 were identified, with most submissions encompassing blood and bone marrow cancers (52%). In HTA submissions to NICE and PBAC, the EC arm was typically constructed from a combination of data sources, with the company's justification in data source selection infrequently provided (PBAC [2 out of 19]; NICE [6 out of 29]), although this lack of justification was not heavily criticized by either HTA body. Conclusion: Although HTA bodies such as NICE and PBAC encourage that EC source justification should be provided in submissions, this review found that this is not typically implemented in practice. Guidance is needed to establish best practices as to how EC selection should be documented in HTA submissions.

Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) Review Advisory Committee post-implementation review of MBS telehealth items: abolition of initial telehealth consultations for non-general practitioner specialists.

In 2022, the Australian Federal Minister for Health and Aged Care commissioned the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) Review Advisory Committee (MRAC) to conduct a post-implementation review of MBS telehealth services, including settings of video and telephone consultations. The MRAC has made a series of administrative recommendations for telehealth practice that appear at cross-purposes to the evidence-base on medical consultations and that would limit patient access to medical specialist assessment in Australia. These recommendations particularly underestimate the role of telehealth in rural and remote Australia and did not take into account high patient satisfaction with telehealth assessment and treatment during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. They also appear to contradict the Medical Board of Australia's guidance on telehealth. On this basis, the recommendations for telehealth principles and abolition of reimbursement for telehealth for all initial non-general practitioner medical specialist consultations should be withdrawn.

Screening for Speech and Language Delay and Disorders in Children: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Speech and language delays and disorders can pose significant problems for children and their families. Evidence suggests that school-aged children with speech or language delays may be at increased risk of learning and literacy disabilities, including difficulties with reading and writing. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger. Population: Asymptomatic children 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children who do not present with signs or symptoms or parent/caregiver concerns. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger without signs or symptoms. (I statement).

Indian Academy of Pediatrics (IAP) Advisory Committee on Vaccines and Immunization Practices (ACVIP): Recommended Immunization Schedule (2023) and Update on Immunization for Children Aged 0 Through 18 Years.

JUSTIFICATION: In view of new developments in vaccinology and the availability of new vaccines, there is a need to revise/review the existing immunization recommendations. PROCESS: The Advisory Committee on Vaccines and Immunization Practices (ACVIP) of Indian Academy of Pediatrics (IAP) had a physical meeting on March 25, 2023, at Vaccicon, Kolkata, followed by online meetings to discuss the updates and new recommendations. Opinion of each member was sought on the various recommendations and updates, following which an evidence-based consensus was reached. The contents were finalized on September 8, 2023, during the National Conference of Pediatric - Infectious Diseases (NCPID) at Aurangabad. An online meeting of all members was held on November 15, 2023 and the recommendations were finalized. Objectives: To review and revise the IAP immunization recommendations of 2020-21 and issue recommendations on existing and new vaccines. RECOMMENDATIONS: The major changes include recommendation of HPV vaccine for boys; a 2-dose schedule of 9vHPV for boys and girls aged 9-14 y; a dose of Td vaccine at 16-18 y; guidance for injectable polio vaccine (IPV) for those patients who are changing from National Immunization Program to IAP schedule.

Endorsement of "European Respiratory Society guideline on non-CPAP therapies for obstructive sleep apnoea" by World Sleep Society.

Guidelines for management of sleep disorders from national or regional societies provide recommendations that may be regionally appropriate but may not always be practical or relevant in other parts of the world. A task force of experts from the World Sleep Society's (WSS) International Sleep Medicine Guidelines Committee and Sleep and Breathing Disorders Task Force reviewed the European Respiratory Society's guideline on non-CPAP therapies for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with respect to its relevance and applicability to the practice of sleep medicine by sleep specialists in various regions of the world. The task force and the WSS guidelines committee endorsed the European Respiratory Society's guideline with respect to the utilization of bariatric surgery, mandibular advancement devices, positioning devices, myofunctional therapy, hypoglossal neurostimulation, maxilo-mandibular surgery, and carbonic anhydrase inhibitors for the treatment of OSA. The task force and the WSS guidelines committee noted that there is substantial new evidence for the role of soft tissue, upper airway surgery, not included in the guidelines paper.

Consensus document of the Spanish Society of Paediatric Infectious Diseases and the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Spanish Association of Pediatrics for vaccination of immunosuppressed individuals.

The number of people with immunosuppression is increasing considerably due to their greater survival and the use of new immunosuppressive treatments for various chronic diseases. This is a heterogeneous group of patients in whom vaccination as a preventive measure is one of the basic pillars of their wellbeing, given their increased risk of contracting infections. This consensus, developed jointly by the Sociedad Española de Infectología Pediátrica (Spanish Society of Pediatric Infectious Diseases) and the Advisory Committee on Vaccines of the Asociación Española de Pediatría (Spanish Association of Paediatrics), provides guidelines for the development of a personalised vaccination schedule for patients in special situations, including general recommendations and specific recommendations for vaccination of bone marrow and solid organ transplant recipients, children with inborn errors of immunity, oncologic patients, patients with chronic or systemic diseases and immunosuppressed travellers.

USPSTF recommends PrEP using effective antiretroviral therapy in adults and adolescents at high risk for HIV.

SOURCE CITATION: US Preventive Services Task Force; Barry MJ, Nicholson WK, Silverstein M, et al. Preexposure prophylaxis to prevent acquisition of HIV: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2023;330:736-745. 37606666.

Screening and Preventive Interventions for Oral Health in Children and Adolescents Aged 5 to 17 Years: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the lifespan. Oral health conditions affect the daily lives of school-age children and adolescents, leading to loss of more than 51 million school hours every year. Untreated oral health conditions in children can lead to serious infections and affect growth, development, and quality of life. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement).

The 2022 classifications of lymphoid neoplasms : Keynote.

Classification of hematological neoplasms in the past 25 years has been generated through international efforts to achieve broad consensus among professionals. In recent years, the understanding of lymphoid neoplasms has advanced notably, particularly with the impact of genomic studies. Two classifications of these neoplasms were produced in 2022. The International Consensus Classification (ICC) was generated following the same successful process used for the third, fourth, and updated fourth editions of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Hematologic Neoplasms, coordinated by a steering committee approved by the Executive Committees of the European Association for Haematopathology and the Society of Hematopathology. The topics were prepared by different working groups and subsequently discussed in the clinical advisory committee (CAC) meeting with the participation of a large group of pathologists, clinicians, and scientists who all approved the classification after reaching consensus on all topics. Simultaneously, the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) of the WHO has produced the fifth edition of the classification of these neoplasms with a group of professionals appointed by the agency who discussed the proposed classification in different meetings. The definition and criteria for diagnosis of many entities have been refined in both proposals. Terminology for some diseases has been adapted to the current knowledge of their biology. Major findings from recent genomic studies have impacted the conceptual framework and diagnostic criteria for many entities. Although most categories are similar in both classifications, there are also conceptual differences and differences in the diagnostic criteria for some diseases.