Inhaled Fluticasone Furoate for Outpatient Treatment of Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of inhaled glucocorticoids in shortening the time to symptom resolution or preventing hospitalization or death among outpatients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial in the United States to assess the use of repurposed medications in outpatients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Nonhospitalized adults 30 years of age or older who had at least two symptoms of acute infection that had been present for no more than 7 days before enrollment were randomly assigned to receive inhaled fluticasone furoate at a dose of 200 µg once daily for 14 days or placebo. The primary outcome was the time to sustained recovery, defined as the third of 3 consecutive days without symptoms. Key secondary outcomes included hospitalization or death by day 28 and a composite outcome of the need for an urgent-care or emergency department visit or hospitalization or death through day 28. RESULTS: Of the 1407 enrolled participants who underwent randomization, 715 were assigned to receive inhaled fluticasone furoate and 692 to receive placebo, and 656 and 621, respectively, were included in the analysis. There was no evidence that the use of fluticasone furoate resulted in a shorter time to recovery than placebo (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% credible interval, 0.91 to 1.12; posterior probability of benefit [defined as a hazard ratio >1], 0.56). A total of 24 participants (3.7%) in the fluticasone furoate group had urgent-care or emergency department visits or were hospitalized, as compared with 13 participants (2.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% credible interval, 0.8 to 3.5). Three participants in each group were hospitalized, and no deaths occurred. Adverse events were uncommon in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with inhaled fluticasone furoate for 14 days did not result in a shorter time to recovery than placebo among outpatients with Covid-19 in the United States. (Funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences and others; ACTIV-6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04885530.).

Limitations of Noninvasive Tests-Based Population-Level Risk Stratification Strategy for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are highly prevalent but underdiagnosed. AIMS: We used an electronic health record data network to test a population-level risk stratification strategy using noninvasive tests (NITs) of liver fibrosis. METHODS: Data were obtained from PCORnet® sites in the East, Midwest, Southwest, and Southeast United States from patients aged [Formula: see text] 18 with or without ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes for NAFLD, NASH, and NASH-cirrhosis between 9/1/2017 and 8/31/2020. Average and standard deviations (SD) for Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4), NAFLD fibrosis score (NFS), and Hepatic Steatosis Index (HSI) were estimated by site for each patient cohort. Sample-wide estimates were calculated as weighted averages across study sites. RESULTS: Of 11,875,959 patients, 0.8% and 0.1% were coded with NAFLD and NASH, respectively. NAFLD diagnosis rates in White, Black, and Hispanic patients were 0.93%, 0.50%, and 1.25%, respectively, and for NASH 0.19%, 0.04%, and 0.16%, respectively. Among undiagnosed patients, insufficient EHR data for estimating NITs ranged from 68% (FIB-4) to 76% (NFS). Predicted prevalence of NAFLD by HSI was 60%, with estimated prevalence of advanced fibrosis of 13% by NFS and 7% by FIB-4. Approximately, 15% and 23% of patients were classified in the intermediate range by FIB-4 and NFS, respectively. Among NAFLD-cirrhosis patients, a third had FIB-4 scores in the low or intermediate range. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several potential barriers to a population-level NIT-based screening strategy. HSI-based NAFLD screening appears unrealistic. Further research is needed to define merits of NFS- versus FIB-4-based strategies, which may identify different high-risk groups.

Preoperative Depression Status and 5 Year Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Outcomes in the PCORnet Bariatric Study Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether depression status before metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) influenced 5-year weight loss, diabetes, and safety/utilization outcomes in the PCORnet Bariatric Study. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Research on the impact of depression on MBS outcomes is inconsistent with few large, long-term studies. METHODS: Data were extracted from 23 health systems on 36,871 patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG; n=16,158) or gastric bypass (RYGB; n=20,713) from 2005-2015. Patients with and without a depression diagnosis in the year before MBS were evaluated for % total weight loss (%TWL), diabetes outcomes, and postsurgical safety/utilization (reoperations, revisions, endoscopy, hospitalizations, mortality) at 1, 3, and 5 years after MBS. RESULTS: 27.1% of SG and 33.0% of RYGB patients had preoperative depression, and they had more medical and psychiatric comorbidities than those without depression. At 5 years of follow-up, those with depression, versus those without depression, had slightly less %TWL after RYGB, but not after SG (between group difference = 0.42%TWL, P = 0.04). However, patients with depression had slightly larger HbA1c improvements after RYGB but not after SG (between group difference = - 0.19, P = 0.04). Baseline depression did not moderate diabetes remission or relapse, reoperations, revision, or mortality across operations; however, baseline depression did moderate the risk of endoscopy and repeat hospitalization across RYGB versus SG. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with depression undergoing RYGB and SG had similar weight loss, diabetes, and safety/utilization outcomes to those without depression. The effects of depression were clinically small compared to the choice of operation.

External validity in distributed data networks.

PURPOSE: While much has been written about how distributed networks address internal validity, external validity is rarely discussed. We aimed to define key terms related to external validity, discuss how they relate to distributed networks, and identify how three networks (the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System, the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies [CNODES], and the National Patient Centered Clinical Research Network [PCORnet]) deal with external validity. METHODS: We define external validity, target populations, target validity, generalizability, and transportability and describe how each relates to distributed networks. We then describe Sentinel, CNODES, and PCORnet and how each approaches these concepts, including a sample case study. RESULTS: Each network approaches external validity differently. As its target population is US citizens and it includes only US data, Sentinel primarily worries about lack of external validity by not including some segments of the population. The fact that CNODES includes Canadian, United States, and United Kingdom data forces them to seriously consider whether the United States and United Kingdom data will be transportable to Canadian citizens when they meta-analyze database-specific estimates. PCORnet, with its focus on study-specific cohorts and pragmatic trials, conducts more case-by-case explorations of external validity for each new analytic data set it generates. CONCLUSIONS: There is no one-size-fits-all approach to external validity within distributed networks. With these networks and comparisons between their findings becoming a key part of pharmacoepidemiology, there is a need to adapt tools for improving external validity to the distributed network setting.

Effect of Fluvoxamine vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effectiveness of fluvoxamine to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of low-dose fluvoxamine (50 mg twice daily) for 10 days compared with placebo for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ongoing Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV-6) platform randomized clinical trial was designed to test repurposed medications in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1288 participants aged 30 years or older with test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute COVID-19 for 7 days or less were enrolled between August 6, 2021, and May 27, 2022, at 91 sites in the US. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive 50 mg of fluvoxamine twice daily for 10 days or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery (defined as the third day of 3 consecutive days without symptoms). There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite outcome of hospitalization, urgent care visit, emergency department visit, or death through day 28. Results: Among 1331 participants who were randomized (median age, 47 years [IQR, 38-57 years]; 57% were women; and 67% reported receiving ≥2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1288 completed the trial (674 in the fluvoxamine group and 614 in the placebo group). The median time to sustained recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-14 days) in the fluvoxamine group and 13 days (IQR, 12-13 days) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96 [95% credible interval, 0.86-1.06], posterior P = .21 for the probability of benefit [determined by an HR >1]). For the composite outcome, 26 participants (3.9%) in the fluvoxamine group were hospitalized, had an urgent care visit, had an emergency department visit, or died compared with 23 participants (3.8%) in the placebo group (HR, 1.1 [95% credible interval, 0.5-1.8], posterior P = .35 for the probability of benefit [determined by an HR <1]). One participant in the fluvoxamine group and 2 participants in the placebo group were hospitalized; no deaths occurred in either group. Adverse events were uncommon in both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with 50 mg of fluvoxamine twice daily for 10 days, compared with placebo, did not improve time to sustained recovery. These findings do not support the use of fluvoxamine at this dose and duration in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Effect of Higher-Dose Ivermectin for 6 Days vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is unknown whether ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 µg/kg, shortens symptom duration or prevents hospitalization among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of ivermectin at a maximum targeted dose of 600 µg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo, for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ongoing Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines 6 (ACTIV-6) platform randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1206 participants older than 30 years with confirmed COVID-19 experiencing at least 2 symptoms of acute infection for less than or equal to 7 days were enrolled at 93 sites in the US from February 16, 2022, through July 22, 2022, with follow-up data through November 10, 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 µg/kg (n = 602) daily, or placebo (n = 604) for 6 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. The 7 secondary outcomes included a composite of hospitalization, death, or urgent/emergent care utilization by day 28. Results: Among 1206 randomized participants who received study medication or placebo, the median (IQR) age was 48 (38-58) years, 713 (59.1%) were women, and 1008 (83.5%) reported receiving at least 2 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses. The median (IQR) time to sustained recovery was 11 (11-12) days in the ivermectin group and 11 (11-12) days in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (posterior probability of benefit) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.02 (95% credible interval, 0.92-1.13; P = .68). Among those receiving ivermectin, 34 (5.7%) were hospitalized, died, or had urgent or emergency care visits compared with 36 (6.0%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 1.0 [95% credible interval, 0.6-1.5]; P = .53). In the ivermectin group, 1 participant died and 4 were hospitalized (0.8%); 2 participants (0.3%) were hospitalized in the placebo group and there were no deaths. Adverse events were uncommon in both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, with a maximum targeted dose of 600 µg/kg daily for 6 days, compared with placebo did not improve time to sustained recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Higher-Dose Fluvoxamine and Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With COVID-19: The ACTIV-6 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of higher-dose fluvoxamine in reducing symptom duration among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 remains uncertain. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of fluvoxamine, 100 mg twice daily, compared with placebo, for treating mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ACTIV-6 platform randomized clinical trial aims to evaluate repurposed medications for mild to moderate COVID-19. Between August 25, 2022, and January 20, 2023, a total of 1175 participants were enrolled at 103 US sites for evaluating fluvoxamine; participants were 30 years or older with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and at least 2 acute COVID-19 symptoms for 7 days or less. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive fluvoxamine, 50 mg twice daily on day 1 followed by 100 mg twice daily for 12 additional days (n = 601), or placebo (n = 607). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery (defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms). Secondary outcomes included time to death; time to hospitalization or death; a composite of hospitalization, urgent care visit, emergency department visit, or death; COVID-19 clinical progression scale score; and difference in mean time unwell. Follow-up occurred through day 28. Results: Among 1208 participants who were randomized and received the study drug, the median (IQR) age was 50 (40-60) years, 65.8% were women, 45.5% identified as Hispanic/Latino, and 76.8% reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Among 589 participants who received fluvoxamine and 586 who received placebo included in the primary analysis, differences in time to sustained recovery were not observed (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.89-1.09]; P for efficacy = .40]). Additionally, unadjusted median time to sustained recovery was 10 (95% CI, 10-11) days in both the intervention and placebo groups. No deaths were reported. Thirty-five participants reported health care use events (a priori defined as death, hospitalization, or emergency department/urgent care visit): 14 in the fluvoxamine group compared with 21 in the placebo group (HR, 0.69 [95% credible interval, 0.27-1.21]; P for efficacy = .86) There were 7 serious adverse events in 6 participants (2 with fluvoxamine and 4 with placebo) but no deaths. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with fluvoxamine does not reduce duration of COVID-19 symptoms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Electronic Health Record-Based Recruitment and Retention and Mobile Health App Usage: Multisite Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: To address the obesity epidemic, there is a need for novel paradigms, including those that address the timing of eating and sleep in relation to circadian rhythms. Electronic health records (EHRs) are an efficient way to identify potentially eligible participants for health research studies. Mobile health (mHealth) apps offer available and convenient data collection of health behaviors, such as timing of eating and sleep. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this descriptive analysis was to report on recruitment, retention, and app use from a 6-month cohort study using a mobile app called Daily24. METHODS: Using an EHR query, adult patients from three health care systems in the PaTH clinical research network were identified as potentially eligible, invited electronically to participate, and instructed to download and use the Daily24 mobile app, which focuses on eating and sleep timing. Online surveys were completed at baseline and 4 months. We described app use and identified predictors of app use, defined as 1 or more days of use, versus nonuse and usage categories (ie, immediate, consistent, and sustained) using multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 70,661 patients who were sent research invitations, 1021 (1.44%) completed electronic consent forms and online baseline surveys; 4 withdrew, leaving a total of 1017 participants in the analytic sample. A total of 53.79% (n=547) of the participants were app users and, of those, 75.3% (n=412), 50.1% (n=274), and 25.4% (n=139) were immediate, consistent, and sustained users, respectively. Median app use was 28 (IQR 7-75) days over 6 months. Younger age, White race, higher educational level, higher income, having no children younger than 18 years, and having used 1 to 5 health apps significantly predicted app use (vs nonuse) in adjusted models. Older age and lower BMI predicted early, consistent, and sustained use. About half (532/1017, 52.31%) of the participants completed the 4-month online surveys. A total of 33.5% (183/547), 29.3% (157/536), and 27.1% (143/527) of app users were still using the app for at least 2 days per month during months 4, 5, and 6 of the study, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EHR recruitment offers an efficient (ie, high reach, low touch, and minimal participant burden) approach to recruiting participants from health care settings into mHealth research. Efforts to recruit and retain less engaged subgroups are needed to collect more generalizable data. Additionally, future app iterations should include more evidence-based features to increase participant use.

Effect of Ivermectin vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients With Mild to Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the US with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin, 400 µg/kg, daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1591 participants aged 30 years and older with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute infection for 7 days or less, were enrolled from June 23, 2021, through February 4, 2022, with follow-up data through May 31, 2022, at 93 sites in the US. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive ivermectin, 400 µg/kg (n = 817), daily for 3 days or placebo (n = 774). Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28. Results: Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

Characterization of bariatric surgery and outcomes using administrative claims data in the research network of a nationwide commercial health plan.

BACKGROUND: The supplementation of electronic health records data with administrative claims data may be used to capture outcome events more comprehensively in longitudinal observational studies. This study investigated the utility of administrative claims data to identify outcomes across health systems using a comparative effectiveness study of different types of bariatric surgery as a model. METHODS: This observational cohort study identified patients who had bariatric surgery between 2007 and 2015 within the HealthCore Anthem Research Network (HCARN) database in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) common data model. Patients whose procedures were performed in a member facility affiliated with PCORnet Clinical Research Networks (CRNs) were selected. The outcomes included a 30-day composite adverse event (including venous thromboembolism, percutaneous/operative intervention, failure to discharge and death), and all-cause hospitalization, abdominal operation or intervention, and in-hospital death up to 5 years after the procedure. Outcomes were classified as occurring within or outside PCORnet CRN health systems using facility identifiers. RESULTS: We identified 4899 patients who had bariatric surgery in one of the PCORnet CRN health systems. For 30-day composite adverse event, the inclusion of HCARN multi-site claims data marginally increased the incidence rate based only on HCARN single-site claims data for PCORnet CRNs from 3.9 to 4.2%. During the 5-year follow-up period, 56.8% of all-cause hospitalizations, 31.2% abdominal operations or interventions, and 32.3% of in-hospital deaths occurred outside PCORnet CRNs. Incidence rates (events per 100 patient-years) were significantly lower when based on claims from a single PCORnet CRN only compared to using claims from all health systems in the HCARN: all-cause hospitalization, 11.0 (95% Confidence Internal [CI]: 10.4, 11.6) to 25.3 (95% CI: 24.4, 26.3); abdominal operations or interventions, 4.2 (95% CI: 3.9, 4.6) to 6.1 (95% CI: 5.7, 6.6); in-hospital death, 0.2 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.27) to 0.3 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term inclusion of multi-site claims data only marginally increased the incidence rate computed from single-site claims data alone. Longer-term follow up captured a notable number of events outside of PCORnet CRNs. The findings suggest that supplementing claims data improves the outcome ascertainment in longitudinal observational comparative effectiveness studies.

Patient Recruitment Into a Multicenter Clinical Cohort Linking Electronic Health Records From 5 Health Systems: Cross-sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in identifying and recruiting research participants from health systems using electronic health records (EHRs). However, few studies have described the practical aspects of the recruitment process or compared electronic recruitment methods to in-person recruitment, particularly across health systems. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the steps and efficiency of the recruitment process and participant characteristics by recruitment strategy. METHODS: EHR-based eligibility criteria included being an adult patient engaged in outpatient primary or bariatric surgery care at one of 5 health systems in the PaTH Clinical Research Network and having ≥2 weight measurements and 1 height measurement recorded in their EHR within the last 5 years. Recruitment strategies varied by site and included one or more of the following methods: (1) in-person recruitment by study staff from clinical sites, (2) US postal mail recruitment letters, (3) secure email, and (4) direct EHR recruitment through secure patient web portals. We used descriptive statistics to evaluate participant characteristics and proportion of patients recruited (ie, efficiency) by modality. RESULTS: The total number of eligible patients from the 5 health systems was 5,051,187. Of these, 40,048 (0.8%) were invited to enter an EHR-based cohort study and 1085 were enrolled. Recruitment efficiency was highest for in-person recruitment (33.5%), followed by electronic messaging (2.9%), including email (2.9%) and EHR patient portal messages (2.9%). Overall, 779 (65.7%) patients were enrolled through electronic messaging, which also showed greater rates of recruitment of Black patients compared with the other strategies. CONCLUSIONS: We recruited a total of 1085 patients from primary care and bariatric surgery settings using 4 recruitment strategies. The recruitment efficiency was 2.9% for email and EHR patient portals, with the majority of participants recruited electronically. This study can inform the design of future research studies using EHR-based recruitment.

Lifestyle Habits Associated with Weight Regain After Intentional Loss in Primary Care Patients Participating in a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Though long-term weight loss maintenance is the treatment goal for obesity, weight regain is typical and few studies have evaluated lifestyle habits associated with weight regain. OBJECTIVE: To identify dietary and physical activity habits associated with 6- and 24-month weight regain among participants in a weight loss maintenance clinical trial. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of randomized clinical trial data. PARTICIPANTS: Adult primary care patients with recent, intentional weight loss of at least 5%. MAIN MEASURES: Lifestyle habits included consumption of low-fat foods, fish, desserts, sugary beverages, fruits, and vegetables and eating at restaurants from the Connor Diet Habit Survey; moderate-vigorous physical activity by self-report; steps recorded by a pedometer; and sedentary behavior by self-report. The outcome variable was weight change at 6 and 24 months. Linear regression models estimated adjusted associations between changes in weight and changes in dietary and physical activity habits. KEY RESULTS: Overall, participants (mean (SD): 53.4 (12.2) years old; 26% male; 88% white) maintained weight loss at 6 months (n = 178, mean (SD): - 0.02 (5.70)% change) but began to regain weight by 24 months (n = 157, mean (SD): 4.22 (9.15)% increase). When considered all together, more eating at restaurants, reduced fish consumption, and less physical activity were most consistently associated with weight regain in fully adjusted models at both 6 and 24 months of follow-up. In addition, more sedentary behavior was associated with weight regain at 6 months while reduced consumption of low-fat foods, and more desserts and sugary beverages were associated with weight regain at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Consuming less fish, fewer steps per day, and more frequent restaurant eating were most consistently associated with weight regain in primary care patients. Primary care providers may consider addressing specific lifestyle behaviors when counseling patients after successful weight loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01946191.

Effect of Electronic Health Record-Based Coaching on Weight Maintenance: A Randomized Trial.

Background: Weight regain after intentional loss is common. Most evidence-based weight management programs focus on short-term loss rather than long-term maintenance. Objective: To evaluate the benefit of coaching in an electronic health record (EHR)-based weight maintenance intervention. Design: Randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01946191). Setting: Practices affiliated with an academic medical center. Participants: Adult outpatients with body mass index (BMI) of 25 kg/m2 or higher, intentional weight loss of at least 5% in the previous 2 years, and no bariatric procedures in the previous 5 years. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to EHR tools (tracking group) versus EHR tools plus coaching (coaching group). The EHR tools included weight, diet, and physical activity tracking flow sheets; standardized surveys; and reminders. The coaching group received 24 months of personalized coaching through the EHR patient portal, with 24 scheduled contacts. Measurements: The primary outcome was weight change at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included 5% weight loss maintenance and changes in BMI, waist circumference, number of steps per day, health-related quality of life, physical function, blood pressure, and satisfaction. Results: Among 194 randomly assigned participants (mean age, 53.4 years [SD, 12.2]; 143 [74%] women; 171 [88%] white), 157 (81%) completed the trial. Mean baseline weight and BMI were 85.8 kg (SD, 19.1) and 30.4 kg/m2 (SD, 5.9). At 24 months, mean weight regain (± SE) was 2.1 ± 0.62 kg and 4.9 ± 0.63 kg in the coaching and tracking groups, respectively. The between-group difference in weight change at 24 months was significant (-2.86 kg [95% CI, -4.60 to -1.11 kg]) in the linear mixed model. At 24 months, 65% of participants in the coaching group and 50% in the tracking group maintained weight loss of at least 5%. Limitation: Single-site trial, which limits generalizability. Conclusion: Among adults with intentional weight loss of at least 5%, use of EHR tools plus coaching resulted in less weight regain than EHR tools alone. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and National Institutes of Health.

Understanding Primary Care Patients' Self-weighing Habits: Cohort Analysis from the PaTH Clinical Data Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Greater than 60% of adults have overweight or obesity. Self-weighing is an effective weight loss and weight maintenance tool. However, little is known about self-weighing habits among the primary care patient population. Our objective was to examine the frequency of patient-reported self-weighing, and to evaluate the associations of self-weighing with demographic characteristics and self-monitoring behaviors. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of survey data collected as part of the PaTH Clinical Data Research Network, which recruited a cohort of 1,021 primary care patients at 4 academic medical centers. Patients of all body mass index (BMI) categories were included. RESULTS: Response rate of 6-month survey was 727 (71%). The mean age was 56 years, and most were female (68%), White (78%), college graduates (66%), and employed/retired (85%). The mean BMI was 30.2 kg/m2, 80% of participants had a BMI â‰§ 25 kg/m2. Of patients with BMI â‰§ 25 kg/m2, 35% of participants self-weighed weekly and 23% daily. Participants who reported self-weighing at least weekly were more likely to be older (59 vs 54 years, p < 0.01), married (p = 0.01), college graduates (p = 0.03), White (p < 0.01), and employed vs disabled/unemployed (p < 0.01). Patients who self-weighed daily had a lower BMI (29 kg/m2 vs 31 kg/m2, p = 0.04). Patients who tracked exercise or food intake were more likely to self-weigh daily (p < 0.01), as were patients wanting to lose or maintain weight (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite its potential for primary and secondary obesity prevention, only 35% of primary care patients with overweight or obesity engage in self-weighing weekly and less than a quarter (23%) self-weigh daily. Socioeconomic status appears to be a factor influencing regular self-weighing in this population, potentially contributing to greater health disparities in obesity rates. Patients who self-weighed daily had a lower BMI, suggesting that it may play a role in primary prevention of obesity. More work is needed to explore self-weighing among patients.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Bariatric Procedures for Weight Loss: A PCORnet Cohort Study.

Background: There has been a dramatic shift in use of bariatric procedures, but little is known about their long-term comparative effectiveness. Objective: To compare weight loss and safety among bariatric procedures. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study, January 2005 to September 2015. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02741674). Setting: 41 health systems in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Participants: 65 093 patients aged 20 to 79 years with body mass index (BMI) of 35 kg/m2 or greater who had bariatric procedures. Intervention: 32 208 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 29 693 sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and 3192 adjustable gastric banding (AGB) procedures. Measurements: Estimated percent total weight loss (TWL) at 1, 3, and 5 years; 30-day rates of major adverse events. Results: Total numbers of eligible patients with weight measures at 1, 3, and 5 years were 44 978 (84%), 20 783 (68%), and 7159 (69%), respectively. Thirty-day rates of major adverse events were 5.0% for RYGB, 2.6% for SG, and 2.9% for AGB. One-year mean TWLs were 31.2% (95% CI, 31.1% to 31.3%) for RYGB, 25.2% (CI, 25.1% to 25.4%) for SG, and 13.7% (CI, 13.3% to 14.0%) for AGB. At 1 year, RYGB patients lost 5.9 (CI, 5.8 to 6.1) percentage points more weight than SG patients and 17.7 (CI, 17.3 to 18.1) percentage points more than AGB patients, and SG patients lost 12.0 (CI, 11.6 to 12.5) percentage points more than AGB patients. Five-year mean TWLs were 25.5% (CI, 25.1% to 25.9%) for RYGB, 18.8% (CI, 18.0% to 19.6%) for SG, and 11.7% (CI, 10.2% to 13.1%) for AGB. Patients with diabetes, those with BMI less than 50 kg/m2, those aged 65 years or older, African American patients, and Hispanic patients lost less weight than patients without those characteristics. Limitation: Potential unobserved confounding due to nonrandomized design; electronic health record databases had missing outcome data. Conclusion: Adults lost more weight with RYGB than with SG or AGB at 1, 3, and 5 years; however, RYGB had the highest 30-day rate of major adverse events. Small subgroup differences in weight loss outcomes were observed. Primary Funding Source: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Online Lifestyle Modification Intervention: Survey of Primary Care Providers' Attitudes and Views.

BACKGROUND: Online tools are a convenient and effective method of delivering lifestyle interventions to obese adult primary care patients. A referral model allows physicians to efficiently direct their patients to the intervention during a primary care visit. However, little is known of physicians' perspectives and utilization of the referral model for an online lifestyle modification intervention. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the response of primary care providers (PCPs) to a referral model for implementing a year-long online intervention for weight loss to obese adult patients. METHODS: The PCPs at six primary care clinics were asked to refer adult obese patients to a year-long online lifestyle intervention providing self-management support for weight loss. Following the 1-year intervention, all providers at the participating practices were surveyed regarding their views of the program. Respondents completed survey items assessing their attitudes regarding the 1-year intensive weight loss intervention and identifying resources they would find helpful for assisting patients with weight loss. Referring physicians were asked about their level of satisfaction with implementing the counseling services using standard electronic health record referral processes. Attitudes toward obesity counseling among referring and nonreferring providers were compared. Impressions of how smoothly the referral model of obesity treatment integrated with the clinical workflow were also quantified. RESULTS: Of the 67 providers who completed the surveys, nonreferring providers (n=17) were more likely to prefer counseling themselves (P=.04) and to report having sufficient time to do so (P=.03) than referring providers (n=50) were. Nonreferring providers were more likely to report that their patients lacked computer skills (76%, 13/17 vs 34%, 17/50) or had less access to the Internet (65%, 11/17 vs 32%, 16/50). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding providers' views and barriers regarding the integration of online tools will facilitate widespread implementation of an online lifestyle modification intervention.

Cost effectiveness of an internet-delivered lifestyle intervention in primary care patients with high cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an online adaptation of the diabetes prevention program (ODPP) lifestyle intervention. METHODS: ODPP was a before-after evaluation of a weight loss intervention comprising 16 weekly and 8 monthly lessons, incorporating behavioral tools and regular, brief, web-based individualized counseling in an overweight/obese cohort (mean age 52, 76% female, 92% white, 28% with diabetes). A Markov model was developed to estimate ODPP cost effectiveness compared with usual care (UC) to reduce metabolic risk over 10years. Intervention costs and weight change outcomes were obtained from the study; other model parameters were based on published reports. In the model, diabetes risk was a function of weight change with and without the intervention. RESULTS: Compared to UC, the ODPP in our cohort cost $14,351 and $29,331 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the health care system and societal perspectives, respectively. In a hypothetical cohort without diabetes, the ODPP cost $7777 and $18,263 per QALY gained, respectively. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses, but enrolling cohorts with lower annual risk of developing diabetes (≤1.8%), enrolling fewer participants (≤15), or increasing the hourly cost (≥$91.20) or annual per-participant time (≥1.45h) required for technical support could increase ODPP cost to >$20,000 per QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, ODPP was cost-effective in 20-58% of model iterations using an acceptability threshold of $20,000, 73-92% at $50,000, and 95-99% at $100,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: The ODPP may offer an economical approach to combating overweight and obesity.

Gestational weight gain, early pregnancy maternal adiposity distribution, and maternal hyperglycemia.

To estimate the effects of gestational weight gain (GWG), central adiposity and subcutaneous fat on maternal post-load glucose concentration, pregnant women [n = 413, 62% black, 57% with pregravid body mass index (BMI) ≥25] enrolled in a cohort study at ≤13 weeks gestation. GWG was abstracted from medical records. In a sub-sample of women (n = 214), waist circumference (WC), and biceps and triceps skinfold thicknesses were measured at enrollment. At 24-28 weeks gestation, post-load glucose concentration was measured using a 50-g 1-h oral glucose tolerance test. After adjustment for pre-pregnancy BMI, age, parity, race/ethnicity, smoking, marital status, annual family income, education, family history of diabetes, and gestational age of GDM screening, each 0.3-kg/week increase in weight in the first trimester was associated with a 2.2 (95% CI 0.1, 4.3)-mg/dl increase in glucose concentration. Each 8.6-mm increase in biceps skinfold thickness and each 11.7-mm increase in triceps skinfold thickness was associated with 4.3 (95% CI 0.2, 8.5)-mg/dl increase in maternal glucose, independent of BMI and other confounders. Neither GWG in the second trimester nor WC at ≤13 weeks was significantly associated with glucose concentration after confounder adjustment. Independent of pre-pregnancy BMI, high early pregnancy GWG and maternal subcutaneous body fat may be positively associated with maternal glucose concentrations at 24-28 weeks.

Effect of Montelukast vs Placebo on Time to Sustained Recovery in Outpatients with COVID-19: The ACTIV-6 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of montelukast in reducing symptom duration among outpatients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is uncertain. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of montelukast compared with placebo in treating outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Design Setting and Participants: The ACTIV-6 platform randomized clinical trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of repurposed medications in treating mild to moderate COVID-19. Between January 27, 2023, and June 23, 2023, 1250 participants ≥30 years of age with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and ≥2 acute COVID-19 symptoms for ≤7 days, were included across 104 US sites to evaluate the use of montelukast. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive montelukast 10 mg once daily or matched placebo for 14 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery (defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms). Secondary outcomes included time to death; time to hospitalization or death; a composite of hospitalization, urgent care visit, emergency department visit, or death; COVID clinical progression scale; and difference in mean time unwell. Results: Among participants who were randomized and received study drug, the median age was 53 years (IQR 42-62), 60.2% were female, 64.6% identified as Hispanic/Latino, and 56.3% reported ≥2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Among 628 participants who received montelukast and 622 who received placebo, differences in time to sustained recovery were not observed (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.02; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.92-1.12; P(efficacy) = 0.63]). Unadjusted median time to sustained recovery was 10 days (95% confidence interval 10-11) in both groups. No deaths were reported and 2 hospitalizations were reported in each group; 36 participants reported healthcare utilization events (a priori defined as death, hospitalization, emergency department/urgent care visit); 18 in the montelukast group compared with 18 in the placebo group (HR 1.01; 95% CrI 0.45-1.84; P(efficacy)=0.48). Five participants experienced serious adverse events (3 with montelukast and 2 with placebo). Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with montelukast does not reduce duration of COVID-19 symptoms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04885530 ).

Comparing survey data to qualitative themes in patient stories to help researchers better identify pressing community healthcare needs.

BACKGROUND: Narrative medicine is a powerful approach for strengthening clinicians' therapeutic alliances with patients and helping them understand others' perspectives by giving patients a voice. MyPaTH Story Booth is a cross-sectional observational study that uses narrative medicine concepts to allow community participants to share their health and healthcare-related experiences through relatively unstructured interviews (i.e., stories). The archive forms a qualitative research 'commons' where researchers can learn about patient and caregiver perspectives and tailor research goals to better address community needs. Brief surveys allow storytellers to classify their stories so that the archive is searchable. METHODS: This study assessed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values of self-reported surveys for categorizing 83 stories, compared with a 'gold standard' (most commonly accepted method for interpreting narratives) of qualitative coding. Stories were classified as either having or not having each of 38 different classifications based on US National Library of Medicine (NLM) Health Topics (Type of disorder or condition and Part of the body discussed) or developed with stakeholder input (Type of health/healthcare experience). RESULTS: Survey data assessing 'Part of the body discussed' and 'Type of disorder or condition' typically was highly sensitive (64%-95%) and specific (73%-99%) suggesting high adequacy of surveys in identifying stories. Questions focused on 'Type of health/healthcare experience' showed inconsistent and relatively lower sensitivities (48%-93%) and specificities (30%-79%) suggesting lower adequacy of surveys in identifying stories. CONCLUSION: Survey items based on NLM Health Topics allowed people to categorize their health narratives into relevant, searchable topics making the database more accessible.