Robust Institutional Support and Collaboration Between Summer Training Programs in Cancer and Biomedicine Drive the Pivot to a Virtual Format in Response to the COVID Pandemic.

Summer internships serve important roles in training the next generation of biomedical researchers and healthcare providers through laboratory and clinical experiences that excite trainees about these fields and help them make informed decisions about career paths. The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) pandemic and associated physical distancing restrictions precluded implementation of traditional in-person summer curricula and led to the cancellation of many internships across the USA. COVID-related disruptions also created opportunities for trainees to engage in remote research, become proficient in online learning platforms, and explore multidisciplinary topics. These skills are highly relevant to trainees as virtual interfaces occupy an increasingly mainstream role in their professional paths. The response to the COVID pandemic required real-time adaptations at all levels for major biomedical institutions including the University of Maryland Baltimore (UMB). Pivoting summer programs to a virtual format as part of this response provided a "teachable moment" to expose trainees to the innovation and resilience that are essential components of the biomedical profession. UMB summer programs, which span diverse biomedical disciplines from cancer research to diabetes, consolidated resources and identified mentors with online research projects to develop a robust virtual curriculum. Herein, data from a cancer-focused internship illustrate the collaborative adaptations to established components and creation of new learning modules in the transition to, and implementation of, online training. Outcomes are presented in the context of the COVID pandemic and significant societal issues that arose in the summer of 2020. The utility of virtual components and their impact on future programs is discussed.

Residual edema evaluation with ranibizumab 0.5 mg and 2.0 mg formulations for diabetic macular edema (REEF study).

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of ranibizumab 0.5-mg and 2.0-mg intravitreal injections for persistent diabetic macular edema (DME) previously treated with bevacizumab. METHODS: In all, 43 patients with residual center-involved DME following intravitreal bevacizumab were included in this 12-month prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study. Enrolled patients received three monthly ranibizumab 0.5-mg injections. At month 3, patients with residual macular edema switched to three monthly injections of ranibizumab 2.0-mg. Assessments included monthly visual acuity and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: Mean visual acuity improved by +6.4 letters at month 3 and +8.8 letters at month 6. Mean central subfield thickness (CST) decreased by -113 µm at month 3 and -165 µm at month 6. Before enrollment, 29/43 (67.4%) patients showed <10% CST reduction following monthly bevacizumab treatment. After three monthly ranibizumab 0.5-mg injections, 22/29 (75.9%) patients showed >10% reduction in CST, whereas 6 showed <10% reduction. Of these six, three (50%) showed >10% reduction in CST after switching to three monthly ranibizumab 2.0-mg doses. No serious adverse events were observed to month 6. CONCLUSION: Ranibizumab 0.5-mg or 2.0-mg may improve visual and anatomic outcomes in patients with DME who demonstrated minimal or no response to bevacizumab therapy. Moreover, increased dosage of ranibizumab (2.0-mg) may provide additional benefit over ranibizumab 0.5-mg in some patients. However, 2.0-mg ranibizumab is not currently commercially licensed or available.

Older adult psychiatric inpatients with non-cognitive disorders should be screened for vitamin B12 deficiency.

OBJECTIVE: Vitamin B12 (B12) deficiency is most prevalent among older adults. Practice guidelines recommend screening older adults with symptoms of cognitive disorder for B12 deficiency. However, guidelines for non-cognitive psychiatric disorders typically do not mention screening older adults for B12 deficiency. The purpose of this study was to determine whether routine screening of older adult psychiatric inpatients for B12 deficiency, regardless of cognitive symptoms, is clinically justified. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective chart-review study of consecutive inpatient admissions. SETTING: Older Adult Acute Psychiatric Inpatient Unit at the University of Maryland Medical Center from 10/2007-4/2010. PARTICIPANTS: Acute psychiatric inpatients aged ≥50 years who met inclusion criteria (N=374). MEASUREMENTS: Mean (SD) B12 levels and percentages of probable (<180pg/mL) and possible (180-350pg/mL) B12 deficiency as well as characteristics of patients with probable and possible B12 deficiency compared to patients with optimal B12 levels. RESULTS: Mean (SD) B12 levels and percentages of probable and possible B12 deficiency, respectively, for cognitive disorder patients [468 (284) pg/mL, 7.8 % (n=5) and 29.7% (n=19)] and for non-cognitive disorder patients [481(268) pg/mL, 4.8 %(n=15) and 33.2%( n=103)] were not significantly different (t=0.339, df=372, P=0.735; χ2=1.084, df=2, P=0.582, respectively). CONCLUSION: Considering the potential benefits and low costs of screening and treatment, we conclude that it is justified to routinely screen older adult psychiatric inpatients for B12 deficiency whether or not cognitive disorder symptoms are present.