Factors associated with reporting left ventricular ejection fraction with 3D echocardiography in real-world practice.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend 3D echocardiography (3DE) to assess left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) when possible, but it is unclear which factors are most strongly associated with reporting 3DE LVEF in real-world practice. METHODS: We evaluated 3DE LVEF reporting by age, sex, BMI, TTE location and variation in reporting by sonographer and reader. All TTEs were performed without contrast enhancement agent at a large medical center from 9/2015 to 12/2020 using ultrasound machines capable of 3DE. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess which factors were most associated with reporting 3DE LVEF. RESULTS: Among 35 641 TTEs included in this study, 57.4% were performed on women. 3DE LVEF was reported on 18 391 TTEs (51.6% of cohort; 50.5% for women and 52.4% for men). Portable inpatient TTEs (n = 5569) had the lowest rates of 3DE LVEF reporting (30.9%), while general outpatient TTEs (n = 15 933) had greater reporting (56.9%). Outpatient TTEs with an indication for chemotherapy (n = 3244) had the highest rates of 3DE LVEF (87.2%). The median (IQR) percentage of TTEs reporting 3D LVEF was 52.7% (43.1%-68.1%) among sonographers and 51.6% (46.5%-59.6%) among readers. Among 20082 (56.3%) TTEs with 3DE LVEF measured by sonographers, 91.6% were included by readers in the final report. After adjustment, performing sonographer in the highest reporting quartile was most strongly associated with reporting 3DE LVEF (OR 7.04, 95% CI 6.55-7.56), while an inpatient portable study had the strongest negative association for reporting (OR .38, 95% CI .35-.40). CONCLUSIONS: Use of 3DE LVEF in real-world practice varies substantially based on performing sonographer and is low for hospitalized patients, but can be frequently used for chemotherapy. Initiatives are needed to increase sonographer 3DE acquisition in most clinical settings.

Increasing trends in the use of the Precivia® intravitreal injection assist device across the UK.

BACKGROUND: Intravitreal anti-VEGF injections are the most frequently performed outpatient procedure in the UK, the need for which continues to rise. To meet this demand, injection assist devices such as Precivia® are increasingly adopted to aid in their prompt and safe delivery. We present data on the usage of Precivia® intravitreal injection assist device across two district general hospitals and its distribution across the UK over five years. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all Precivia® assisted intravitreal injections delivered at Great Western Hospitals NHS Trust (GWH), and Gloucestershire and Cheltenham Hospitals NHS Trust (GCH) between 2015-2020. Data were also obtained from the Precivia® device UK distributor; Veni Vidi Medical. RESULTS: In GCH, 47,968 intravitreal injections were administered with Precivia®: 5947 in year 1; 7058 in year 2; 9893 in year 3; 11,503 in year 4 and 13,567 injections in year 5, observing a 128.13% increase in the use of Precivia® over the five-year-period. In GWH, 26,923 injections were administered with Precivia®: 4232 in year 1; 5117 in year 2; 5437 in year 3; 5878 in year 4 and 6259 in year 5, observing a 47.89% increase in Precivia® injections over a five-year study period. The number of Precivia® devices distributed across the UK similarly increased including 42,150 devices sold in 2015; 68,125 in 2016; 72,575 in 2017; 88,325 in 2018; 112,850 in 2019 and 115,125 in 2020 observing a 173.31% increase in five years. CONCLUSION: An increasing trend in the use of the Precivia® intravitreal injection assist device was observed across the UK.

Utilisation and impact of predict prostate on decision-making among clinicians and patients in a specialist tertiary referral centre: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer are faced with the decision of whether to undergo radical treatment. Decision-making aids, such as Predict Prostate, can empower both clinicians and patients to make treatment decisions with personalised information, but their impact on multi-disciplinary team (MDT) decision-making and uptake of radical treatment remains unknown. Objective: The objective of this study is to assess the utilisation and utility of Predict Prostate in informing treatment decisions for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in Cambridge University Hospitals (CUH) of patients referred to the prostate cancer specialist multi-disciplinary team (pcSMDT) and robotic prostatectomy clinic (ROPD) between September 2019 and August 2021 for consideration of radical prostatectomy (RARP). Data on patient characteristics, use of PredictProstate and management decisions were collected from the Epic electronic medical record (EMR) of 839 patients, of whom 386 had intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Results: The use of Predict Prostate at the pcSMDT increased in the second half of the study period (34.5% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001). The use of Predict Prostate was associated with an increased likelihood of attending ROPD for men with CPG2 prostate cancer (OR = 2.155, 95% CI = 1.158-4.013, p = 0.015) but a reduced likelihood of proceeding with RARP for men with CPG2 (OR = 0.397, 95% CI = 0.209-0.753, p = 0.005) and CPG3 (OR = 0.305, 95% CI = 0.108-0.861, p = 0.025) prostate cancer. Conclusion: Our study showed that the use of Predict Prostate for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer is associated with increased attendance at specialist surgical clinic and a reduced chance of undergoing radical prostate surgery.

Pragmatic Trial of Messaging to Providers About Treatment of Hyperlipidemia (PROMPT-LIPID): A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) is underutilized for very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. PROMPT-LIPID (PRagmatic Trial of Messaging to Providers about Treatment of HyperLIPIDemia) sought to determine whether electronic health record (EHR) alerts improve 90-day LLT intensification in patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. METHODS: PROMPT-LIPID was a pragmatic trial in which cardiovascular and internal medicine clinicians within Yale New Haven Health (New Haven, CT) were cluster-randomized to receive an EHR alert with individualized LLT recommendations or no alert for outpatients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), ≥70 mg/dL. The primary outcome was 90-day LLT intensification (change to high-intensity statin and addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9i [proprotein subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors]). Secondary outcomes included LDL-C level, proportion of patients with LDL-C of <70 or < 55 mg/dL, rate of major adverse cardiovascular events, ED visit incidence, and 6-month mortality. Results were analyzed using logistic and linear regression clustered at the provider level. RESULTS: The no-alert group included 47 clinicians and 1370 patients (median age, 71 years; 50.1% female, median LDL-C, 93 mg/dL); the alert group included 49 clinicians and 1130 patients (median age, 72 years; 47% female, median LDL-C 91, mg/dL). The primary outcome was observed in 14.1% of patients in the alert group as compared with 10.4% in the no-alert group. There were no differences in any secondary outcomes at 6 months. Among 542 patients whose clinicians (n=46) did not dismiss the EHR alert recommendations, LLT intensification was significantly greater (21.2% versus 10.4%, odds ratio, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.48-3.66]). CONCLUSIONS: With a real-time, targeted, individualized EHR alert as compared with usual care, the proportion of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with LLT intensification was numerically higher but not statistically significant. Among clinicians who did not dismiss the alert, there was a > 2-fold increase in LLT intensification. EHR alerts, coupled with strategies to reduce clinician dismissal, may help address persistent gaps in LDL-C management. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04394715, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04394715.

Non-IG::MYC in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma confers variable genomic configurations and MYC transactivation potential.

MYC translocation occurs in 8-14% of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and may concur with BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocation, known as double-hit (DH) or triple-hit (TH). DLBCL-MYC/BCL2-DH/TH are largely germinal centre B-cell like subtype, but show variable clinical outcome, with IG::MYC fusion significantly associated with inferior survival. While DLBCL-MYC/BCL6-DH are variable in their cell-of-origin subtypes and clinical outcome. Intriguingly, only 40-50% of DLBCL with MYC translocation show high MYC protein expression (>70%). We studied 186 DLBCLs with MYC translocation including 32 MYC/BCL2/BCL6-TH, 75 MYC/BCL2-DH and 26 MYC/BCL6-DH. FISH revealed a MYC/BCL6 fusion in 59% of DLBCL-MYC/BCL2/BCL6-TH and 27% of DLBCL-MYC/BCL6-DH. Targeted NGS showed a similar mutation profile and LymphGen genetic subtype between DLBCL-MYC/BCL2/BCL6-TH and DLBCL-MYC/BCL2-DH, but variable LymphGen subtypes among DLBCL-MYC/BCL6-DH. MYC protein expression is uniformly high in DLBCL with IG::MYC, but variable in those with non-IG::MYC including MYC/BCL6-fusion. Translocation breakpoint analyses of 8 cases by TLC-based NGS showed no obvious genomic configuration that enables MYC transactivation in 3 of the 4 cases with non-IG::MYC, while a typical promoter substitution or IGH super enhancer juxtaposition in the remaining cases. The findings potentially explain variable MYC expression in DLBCL with MYC translocation, and also bear practical implications in its routine assessment.