EUS imaging for the diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS is increasingly used to evaluate patients with liver disease, but its role in assessing hepatic steatosis has not been reported. The goal of our study was to assess the accuracy of EUS for diagnosing hepatic steatosis. METHODS: We identified all patients who underwent EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling at our institution. All digitally stored EUS liver images were reviewed by a single radiologist, who rated the severity of liver echogenicity using a 4-point US scale. Liver biopsy specimens for all study patients were reviewed by a single liver pathologist, who rated them for steatosis and fibrosis using Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network criteria. Receiver operator characteristic curves were used to assess the diagnostic accuracy of EUS for hepatic steatosis for all patients and in a subgroup analysis for obese and nonobese patients. RESULTS: During the study period, 76 patients underwent EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling. The average age of study patients was 56.5 years, 50% were women, and 43.2% were obese. The accuracy for EUS for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis was .8 (95% confidence interval [CI], .7-.89). The accuracy of EUS for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis in obese patients was .93 (95% CI, .8-.99) and in nonobese patients was .69 (95% CI, .54-.83). For obese patients, EUS had a positive predictive value of 89.7% and a negative predictive value of 75%. The finding of course echotexture on EUS had an accuracy of 79% for the diagnosis of grade 3 fibrosis or cirrhosis. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is a useful tool for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis, particularly in obese patients in whom abdominal US has modest accuracy.

Durable Response to PD-1 Blockade in a Patient With Metastatic Pancreatic Undifferentiated Carcinoma With Osteoclast-Like Giant Cells.

Undifferentiated carcinoma with osteoclast-like giant cells (UCOGC) of the pancreas is a rare and potentially aggressive variant of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Data on this disease are sparse, and despite genetic similarities to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, UCOGC clinical outcomes can be markedly different. We report on a female patient aged 62 years who presented with UCOGC with pulmonary metastases initially treated with 2 lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy. After rapid disease progression with both cytotoxic treatments, the patient's tissue was sent for next-generation sequencing, which revealed a high tumor mutation burden (32 mutations per megabase), as well as somatic mutations in BRAF, NF1, PIK3CA, CDKN2A, TERT, and TP53. Pancreatic cancers have previously demonstrated suboptimal responses to immunotherapeutic approaches. However, given the high tumor mutation burden and distinctiveness of the tumor class, the patient began third-line pembrolizumab monotherapy after palliative radiation to the rapidly progressing and painful abdominal mass from her primary tumor. She had a marked response in her primary UCOGC tumor and metastatic sites, and she remains on pembrolizumab monotherapy with ongoing response after 32 months of therapy. Recent evidence showing significant PD-L1 enrichment on neoplastic cells of undifferentiated carcinomas (including UCOGC) may indicate a role for immunotherapeutic approaches in these patients. Rare cancers such as UCOGC and other undifferentiated carcinomas may benefit from next-generation sequencing to inform treatment decisions when standards of care are absent, as in this report.

A randomized trial of two methods to disclose prognosis to surrogate decision makers in intensive care units.

RATIONALE: Surrogate decision makers and clinicians often have discordant perceptions about a patient's prognosis. There is a paucity of empirical data to guide communication about prognosis. OBJECTIVES: To assess: (1) whether numeric or qualitative statements more reliably convey prognostic estimates; and (2) whether surrogates believe physicians' prognostic estimates. METHODS: A total of 169 surrogate decision makers for intensive care unit patients were randomized to view 1 of 2 versions of a video portraying a simulated family conference involving a hypothetical patient. The videos varied only by whether prognosis was conveyed in numeric terms ("10% chance of surviving") or qualitative terms ("very unlikely" to survive). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We assessed: (1) surrogates' personal estimates of the patient's prognosis; and (2) surrogates' understanding of the physician's prognostic estimate. Neither surrogates' personal estimates nor their understanding of the physician's prognostication differed when prognosis was conveyed numerically versus qualitatively (surrogates' estimate, 22 ± 23% chance of survival versus 26 ± 24%, P = 0.26; understanding of physician's estimate, 17 ± 22% chance of survival versus 16 ± 17%, P = 0.62). One in five surrogates estimated the patient's prognosis was greater than 20% more optimistic than the physician's prognostication. Less trust in physicians was associated with larger discrepancies between surrogates' personal estimates and their understanding of the physician's estimate. CONCLUSIONS: Neither numeric nor qualitative statements reliably convey news of a poor prognosis to surrogates in intensive care units. Many surrogates do not view physicians' prognostications as absolutely accurate. Factors other than ineffective communication may contribute to physician-surrogate discordance about prognosis.