Online patient-provider cannabis consultations.

Cannabis has been legalized, decriminalized, or medicalized in over half the U.S. states. With restrictions on cannabis research, accepted standards to guide clinical practice are lacking. Analyzing online communications through a digital health platform, we characterized patient questions about cannabis use and provider responses. Coded for content were 4579 questions posted anonymously online between March 2011 through January 2017, and the responses from 1439 U.S. licensed clinicians. Provider responses to medical cannabis use questions were coded for sentiment: "negative", "positive", and "mixed." Responses could be "thanked" by patients and receive "agrees" from providers. The most frequent themes were detection of cannabis use (25.3%), health harms (19.9%), co-use with other substances (9.1%), and medical use (8.2%). The 425 medical cannabis use questions most frequently related to treatment of mental illness (20.3%), pain (20.0%), and cancer care (6.7%). The 762 provider responses regarding medical cannabis use were coded for sentiment as 59.6% negative, 28.6% mixed, and 11.8% positive. Provider sentiment was most positive regarding cannabis use for palliative care and most negative for treating respiratory conditions, poor appetite, and mental illness. The proportion of positive sentiment responses increased from 17.6% to 32.4%. Provider responses coded as negative sentiment received more provider "Agrees" (mean rank = 280) than those coded as positive (mean rank = 215), beta coefficient = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.62; p = .02. Cannabis use is a health topic of public interest. Variability in provider responses reflects the need for more research and consensus building to inform evidence-based clinical guidelines for cannabis use in medicine.

Performance of Screening Breast MRI across Women with Different Elevated Breast Cancer Risk Indications.

Background Screening breast MRI is recommended for women with BRCA mutation or a history of chest radiation, but guidelines are equivocal for MRI screening of women with a personal history of breast cancer or high-risk lesion. Purpose To evaluate screening breast MRI performance across women with different elevated breast cancer risk indications. Materials and Methods All screening breast MRI examinations performed between 2011 and 2014 underwent retrospective medical record review. Indications for screening were as follows: BRCA mutation carrier or history of chest radiation (BRCA/RT group), family history of breast cancer (FH group), personal history of breast cancer (PH group), and history of high-risk lesion (HRL group). Screening performance metrics were calculated and compared among indications by using logistic regression adjusted for age, available prior MRI, mammographic density, examination year, and multiple risk factors. Results There were 5170 screening examinations in 2637 women (mean age, 52 years; range, 23-86 years); 67 breast cancers were detected. The cancer detection rate (CDR) was highest in the BRCA/RT group (26 per 1000 examinations; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 16, 43 per 1000 examinations), intermediate for those in the PH and HRL groups (12 per 1000 examinations [95% CI: 9, 17 per 1000 examinations] and 15 per 1000 examinations [95% CI: 7, 32 per 1000 examinations], respectively), and lowest for those in the FH group (8 per 1000 examinations; 95% CI: 4, 14 per 1000 examinations). No difference in CDR was evident for the PH or HRL group compared with the BRCA/RT group (P = .14 and .18, respectively). The CDR was lower for the FH group compared with the BRCA/RT group (P = .02). No difference was evident in positive predictive value for biopsies performed (PPV3) for the BRCA/RT group (41%; 95% CI: 26%, 56%) compared with the PH (41%; 95% CI: 31%, 52%; P = .63) or HRL (36%, 95% CI: 17%, 60%; P = .37) groups. PPV3 was lower for the FH group (14%; 95% CI: 8%, 25%; P = .048). Conclusion Screening breast MRI should be considered for women with a personal history of breast cancer or high-risk lesion. Worse screening MRI performance in patients with a family history of breast cancer suggests that better risk assessment strategies may benefit these women. © RSNA, 2019.

Effect of Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Cancer Risk Across Different High-Risk Patient Populations Undergoing Screening Breast MRI.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast cancer risk across different high-risk patient populations undergoing screening breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive screening breast MRI examinations performed between 2011 and 2014 were reviewed. Multivariate logistic regression using generalized estimating equations was used to assess the association of the following variables with cancer risk: age, qualitative BPE prospective clinical assessment (minimal or mild vs moderate or marked), mammographic breast density (dense vs not dense), and screening indication (prioritized in the following order: BRCA carrier or history of thoracic radiation, breast cancer personal history, high-risk lesion, and breast cancer family history). Cancer diagnosis was defined as a tissue diagnosis of invasive or in situ carcinoma within 12 months of the screening MRI. RESULTS: The study cohort included 4686 screening MRI examinations performed in 2446 women, grouped by BPE as minimal or mild (3975/4686; 85%) versus moderate or marked (711/4686; 15%) and by screening indication as BRCA carrier or history of thoracic radiation (548/4686; 12%), breast cancer personal history (2541/4686; 54%), high-risk lesion (362/4686; 8%), and breast cancer family history (1235/4686; 26%). After adjustment for confounding variables, only BPE and screening indication were independent predictors of cancer diagnosis (p = 0.02 and p < 0.01, respectively). The odds ratio for developing cancer in the moderate or marked BPE group compared with the minimal or mild group was 2.1 (95% CI, 1.1-4.0), after adjusting for age, breast density, and screening indication. CONCLUSION: Increased BPE level is an independent predictor of breast cancer in women undergoing screening MRI for different high-risk indications.

Diagnostic accuracy of GPT-4 on common clinical scenarios and challenging cases.

Introduction: Large language models (LLMs) have a high diagnostic accuracy when they evaluate previously published clinical cases. Methods: We compared the accuracy of GPT-4's differential diagnoses for previously unpublished challenging case scenarios with the diagnostic accuracy for previously published cases. Results: For a set of previously unpublished challenging clinical cases, GPT-4 achieved 61.1% correct in its top 6 diagnoses versus the previously reported 49.1% for physicians. For a set of 45 clinical vignettes of more common clinical scenarios, GPT-4 included the correct diagnosis in its top 3 diagnoses 100% of the time versus the previously reported 84.3% for physicians. Conclusions: GPT-4 performs at a level at least as good as, if not better than, that of experienced physicians on highly challenging cases in internal medicine. The extraordinary performance of GPT-4 on diagnosing common clinical scenarios could be explained in part by the fact that these cases were previously published and may have been included in the training dataset for this LLM.

Women's Questions About Perinatal Cannabis Use and Health Care Providers' Responses.

Background: Cannabis use is common among individuals of reproductive age. We examined publicly posted questions about perinatal cannabis use and licensed United States health care provider responses. Materials and Methods: Data were medical questions on perinatal cannabis use posted online from March 2011 to January 2017 on an anonymous digital health platform. Posters were able to "thank" health care providers for their responses and providers could "agree" with other provider responses. We characterized 364 user questions and 596 responses from 277 unique providers and examined endorsement of responses through provider "agrees" and user "thanks." Results: The most frequent questions concerned prenatal cannabis use detection (24.7%), effects on fertility (22.6%), harms of prenatal use to the fetus (21.3%), and risks of baby exposure to cannabis through breast milk (14.4%). Provider sentiment in responses regarding the safety of perinatal cannabis use were coded as 55.6% harmful, 8.8% safe, 8.8% mixed/unsure, and 26.8% safety unaddressed. Half of providers (49.6%) discouraged perinatal cannabis use, 0.5% encouraged use, and 49.9% neither encouraged nor discouraged use. Provider responses received 1,004 provider "agrees" and 583 user "thanks." Provider responses indicating that perinatal cannabis use is unsafe received more provider "agrees" than responses indicating that use is safe (B = 0.42, 95% CI 0.02-0.82, p = 0.04). User "thanks" did not differ by provider responses regarding safety or dis/encouragement. Conclusion: The data indicate public interest in cannabis use effects before, during, and after pregnancy. While most health care providers indicated cannabis use during pregnancy and breastfeeding is not safe, many did not address safety or discourage use, suggesting a missed educational opportunity.

Impact of Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Diagnostic Performance in Screening Breast MRI.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on diagnostic performance in screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive screening breast MRIs performed at our institution from 2011 to 2014 were reviewed in a HIPAA-compliant manner with institutional review board approval. BPE was extracted from radiology reports and examinations grouped into minimal/mild (lower) or moderate/marked (higher) BPE. Performance measures were compared between the two groups with Pearson's χ2 test and with logistic regression to adjust for possible confounders of age, screening indication, mammographic density, available prior MRI, and examination year, using lower BPE as the reference group. RESULTS: For 4686 screening MRIs performed in 2446 women, BPE was reported as minimal or mild for 3975 (85%) examinations and moderate or marked for 711(15%). Following logistic regression to adjust for multiple confounders, abnormal interpretation rate (AIR) significantly differed between the two BPE groups. AIR was 13% (89/711) in the higher BPE group versus 7% (295/3975) in the lower BPE group with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.37 (95% confidence interval: 1.03, 1.82). After adjustment, all other performance metrics, including cancer detection rate, positive predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity did not significantly differ between the two BPE groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Higher BPE on screening MRI is associated with higher abnormal interpretation rate, with no impact on cancer detection rate, sensitivity, or specificity.

Online Patient-Provider E-cigarette Consultations: Perceptions of Safety and Harm.

INTRODUCTION: E-cigarettes are popular and unregulated. Patient-provider communications concerning e-cigarettes were characterized to identify patient concerns, provider advice and attitudes, and research needs. METHODS: An observational study of online patient-provider communications was conducted January 2011-June 2015 from a network providing free medical advice, and analyzed July 2014-May 2016. Patient and provider themes, and provider attitudes toward e-cigarettes (positive, negative, or neutral) were coded qualitatively. Provider attitudes were analyzed with cumulative logit modeling to account for clustering. Patient satisfaction with provider responses was expressed via a Thank function. RESULTS: An increase in e-cigarette-related questions was observed over time. Patient questions (N=512) primarily concerned specific side effects and harms (34%); general safety (27%); e-cigarettes as quit aids (19%); comparison of e-cigarette harms relative to combusted tobacco (18%); use with pre-existing medical conditions (18%); and nicotine-free e-cigarettes (14%). Half of provider responses discussed e-cigarettes as a harm reduction option (48%); 26% discussed them as quit aids. Overall, 47% of providers' responses represented a negative attitude toward e-cigarettes; 33% were neutral (contradictory or non-committal); and 20% were positive. Attitudes did not differ statistically by medical specialty; provider responses positive toward e-cigarettes received significantly more Thanks. CONCLUSIONS: Examination of online patient-provider communications provides insight into consumer health experience with emerging alternative tobacco products. Patient concerns largely related to harms and safety, and patients preferred provider responses positively inclined toward e-cigarettes. Lacking conclusive evidence of e-cigarette safety or efficacy, healthcare providers encouraged smoking cessation and recommended first-line cessation treatment approaches.

Nature of crossing vessels in patients with radiographically normal ureteropelvic junctions: prevalence and anatomic characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of crossing vessels in asymptomatic patients with a radiographically normal ureteropelvic junction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the computed tomography angiography images of 601 patients who were evaluated for possible living organ donation at the University of Minnesota from 2005 to 2008. One patient had asymptomatic hydronephrosis and was excluded from the analysis. The prevalence and characteristics of crossing vessels at the ureteropelvic junction were determined, including vessel location, origin, size, distance from the ureteropelvic junction, and vessel type (artery or vein). RESULTS: The prevalence of crossing vessels at the radiographically normal ureteropelvic junction was 22.7%. A total of 163 crossing vessels were present in 136 patients; 60.1% were left-sided and 39.9% were right-sided. Arteries accounted for 81.0% of the crossing vessels and veins for 19.0%. Accessory lower pole renal vessels originating from the great vessels constituted 59.5% of the crossing vessels. The location of the crossing vessel relative to the ureteropelvic junction varied and included anterior (25.8%), anterolateral (36.8%), medial (14.6%), anteromedial (2.5%), lateral (12.9%), and posterior (7.4%). The mean diameter and mean distance of the crossing vessel from the ureteropelvic junction was 3.3 mm and 1.8 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of crossing vessels in asymptomatic, healthy patients with a radiographically normal ureteropelvic junction was 22.7%, lower than that seen in association with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. The location of the crossing vessels varied about the ureteropelvic junction, and no location was consistently free of traversing vessels.