Use of the Pfizer Pentavalent Meningococcal Vaccine Among Persons Aged ≥10 Years: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2023.

Meningococcal disease is a life-threatening invasive infection caused by Neisseria meningitidis. Two quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W, and Y) meningococcal conjugate vaccines (MenACWY) (MenACWY-CRM [Menveo, GSK] and MenACWY-TT [MenQuadfi, Sanofi Pasteur]) and two serogroup B meningococcal vaccines (MenB) (MenB-4C [Bexsero, GSK] and MenB-FHbp [Trumenba, Pfizer Inc.]), are licensed and available in the United States and have been recommended by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). On October 20, 2023, the Food and Drug Administration approved the use of a pentavalent meningococcal vaccine (MenACWY-TT/MenB-FHbp [Penbraya, Pfizer Inc.]) for prevention of invasive disease caused by N. meningitidis serogroups A, B, C, W, and Y among persons aged 10-25 years. On October 25, 2023, ACIP recommended that MenACWY-TT/MenB-FHbp may be used when both MenACWY and MenB are indicated at the same visit for the following groups: 1) healthy persons aged 16-23 years (routine schedule) when shared clinical decision-making favors administration of MenB vaccine, and 2) persons aged ≥10 years who are at increased risk for meningococcal disease (e.g., because of persistent complement deficiencies, complement inhibitor use, or functional or anatomic asplenia). Different manufacturers' serogroup B-containing vaccines are not interchangeable; therefore, when MenACWY-TT/MenB-FHbp is used, subsequent doses of MenB should be from the same manufacturer (Pfizer Inc.). This report summarizes evidence considered for these recommendations and provides clinical guidance for the use of MenACWY-TT/MenB-FHbp.

Prevalence of Emergent Dolutegravir Resistance Mutations in People Living with HIV: A Rapid Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Dolutegravir (DTG) is a cornerstone of global antiretroviral (ARV) therapy (ART) due to its high efficacy and favorable tolerability. However, limited data exist regarding the risk of emergent integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI) drug-resistance mutations (DRMs) in individuals receiving DTG-containing ART. METHODS: We performed a PubMed search using the term "Dolutegravir", last updated 18 December 2023, to estimate the prevalence of VF with emergent INSTI DRMs in people living with HIV (PLWH) without previous VF on an INSTI who received DTG-containing ART. RESULTS: Of 2131 retrieved records, 43 clinical trials, 39 cohorts, and 6 cross-sectional studies provided data across 6 clinical scenarios based on ART history, virological status, and co-administered ARVs: (1) ART-naïve PLWH receiving DTG plus two NRTIs; (2) ART-naïve PLWH receiving DTG plus lamivudine; (3) ART-experienced PLWH with VF on a previous regimen receiving DTG plus two NRTIs; (4) ART-experienced PLWH with virological suppression receiving DTG plus two NRTIs; (5) ART-experienced PLWH with virological suppression receiving DTG and a second ARV; and (6) ART-experienced PLWH with virological suppression receiving DTG monotherapy. The median proportion of PLWH in clinical trials with emergent INSTI DRMs was 1.5% for scenario 3 and 3.4% for scenario 6. In the remaining four trial scenarios, VF prevalence with emergent INSTI DRMs was ≤0.1%. Data from cohort studies minimally influenced prevalence estimates from clinical trials, whereas cross-sectional studies yielded prevalence data lacking denominator details. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical trials, the prevalence of VF with emergent INSTI DRMs in PLWH receiving DTG-containing regimens has been low. Novel approaches are required to assess VF prevalence with emergent INSTI DRMs in PLWH receiving DTG in real-world settings.

A tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized follow-up studies of exposure effects (ROBINS-E).

BACKGROUND: Observational epidemiologic studies provide critical data for the evaluation of the potential effects of environmental, occupational and behavioural exposures on human health. Systematic reviews of these studies play a key role in informing policy and practice. Systematic reviews should incorporate assessments of the risk of bias in results of the included studies. OBJECTIVE: To develop a new tool, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposures (ROBINS-E) to assess risk of bias in estimates from cohort studies of the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROBINS-E was developed by a large group of researchers from diverse research and public health disciplines through a series of working groups, in-person meetings and pilot testing phases. The tool aims to assess the risk of bias in a specific result (exposure effect estimate) from an individual observational study that examines the effect of an exposure on an outcome. A series of preliminary considerations informs the core ROBINS-E assessment, including details of the result being assessed and the causal effect being estimated. The assessment addresses bias within seven domains, through a series of 'signalling questions'. Domain-level judgements about risk of bias are derived from the answers to these questions, then combined to produce an overall risk of bias judgement for the result, together with judgements about the direction of bias. CONCLUSION: ROBINS-E provides a standardized framework for examining potential biases in results from cohort studies. Future work will produce variants of the tool for other epidemiologic study designs (e.g. case-control studies). We believe that ROBINS-E represents an important development in the integration of exposure assessment, evidence synthesis and causal inference.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19: Serologic Testing.

BACKGROUND: The role of serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 has evolved during the pandemic as seroprevalence in global populations has increased. The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology literature and construct updated best practice guidance related to SARS-CoV-2 serologic testing. This guideline is an update to the fourth in a series of rapid, frequently updated COVID-19 guidelines developed by IDSA. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations and identify unmet research needs pertaining to the use of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests for diagnosis, decisions related to vaccination and administration of monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma in immunocompromised patients, and identification of a serologic correlate of immunity. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists and experts in systematic literature reviewed, identified, and prioritized clinical questions related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 serologic tests. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. RESULTS: The panel recommends against serologic testing to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first two weeks after symptom onset (strong recommendations, low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing should not be used to provide evidence of COVID-19 in symptomatic patients with a high clinical suspicion and repeatedly negative nucleic acid amplification test results (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). Serologic testing may assist with the diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (strong recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). To seek evidence for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the panel suggests testing for IgG, IgG/IgM, or total antibodies to nucleocapsid protein three to five weeks after symptom onset (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence). In individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination, we suggest against routine serologic testing given no demonstrated benefit to improving patient outcomes (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence.) The panel acknowledges further that a negative spike antibody test may be a useful metric to identify immunocompromised patients who are candidates for immune therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The high seroprevalence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 worldwide limits the utility of detecting anti-SARS CoV-2 antibody. The certainty of available evidence supporting the use of serology for diagnosis was graded as very low to low. Future studies should use serologic assays calibrated to a common reference standard.

Failure of scabies treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment failure is considered to be an important factor in relation to the increase in scabies incidence over the last decade. However, the regional and temporal differences, in addition to the predictors of therapy failure, are unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the prevalence of treatment failure in patients with scabies and investigation of associated factors. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Global Health and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to August 2021 for randomized and quasi-randomized trials, in addition to observational studies that enrolled children or adults diagnosed with confirmed or clinical scabies treated with permethrin, ivermectin, crotamiton, benzyl benzoate, malathion, sulfur or lindane, and measured treatment failure or factors associated with treatment failure. We performed a random effects meta-analysis for all outcomes reported by at least two studies. RESULTS: A total of 147 studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. The overall prevalence of treatment failure was 15.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.9-17.6; I2 = 95.3%, moderate-certainty evidence] with regional differences between World Health Organization regions (P = 0.003) being highest in the Western Pacific region (26.9%, 95% CI 14.5-41.2). Oral ivermectin (11.8%, 95% CI 8.4-15.4), topical ivermectin (9.3%, 95% CI 5.1-14.3) and permethrin (10.8%, 95% CI 7.5-14.5) had relatively lower failure prevalence compared with the overall prevalence. Failure prevalence was lower in patients treated with two doses of oral ivermectin (7.1%, 95% CI 3.1-12.3) compared with those treated with one dose (15.2%, 95% CI 10.8-20.2; P = 0.021). Overall and permethrin treatment failure prevalence in the included studies (1983-2021) increased by 0.27% and 0.58% per year, respectively. Only three studies conducted a multivariable risk factor analysis; no studies assessed resistance. CONCLUSIONS: A second dose of ivermectin showed lower failure prevalence than single-dose ivermectin, which should be considered in all guidelines. The increase in treatment failure over time hints at decreasing mite susceptibility for several drugs, but reasons for failure are rarely assessed. Ideally, scabicide susceptibility testing should be implemented in future studies.

The Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Molecular Diagnostic Testing.

Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and for identifying asymptomatic carriage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The number of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests continues to increase as does the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assist clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients, and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss nuances of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs related to COVID-19 diagnostic testing. IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations. The panel agreed on 12 diagnostic recommendations. Access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention, and the public health response to COVID-19 infection. Information on the clinical performance of available tests continues to grow, but the quality of evidence of the current literature to support this updated molecular diagnostic guideline remains moderate to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is suggested for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions. Evidence in support of rapid testing and testing of upper respiratory specimens other than nasopharyngeal swabs, which offer logistical advantages, is sufficient to warrant conditional recommendations in favor of these approaches.

Components of Outpatient Child and Youth Concurrent Disorders Programs: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis: Composantes des programmes de troubles concomitants des enfants et des jeunes ambulatoires : une synthèse interprétative critique.

OBJECTIVE: Co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders (concurrent disorders) lead to significant morbidity in children and youth. Programs for integrated treatment of concurrent disorders have been developed; however, there exists little guidance outlining their structure and activities. Our objective was to synthesize available information on outpatient child and youth concurrent disorders programs and produce a comprehensive framework detailing the components of such programs. METHODS: We used a four-stage critical interpretive synthesis design: (1) systematic review of published and grey literature, (2) data abstraction to identify program components and purposive sampling to fill identified gaps, (3) organization of components into a structured framework, (4) feedback from programs. We employed an iterative process by which programs reviewed data abstraction and framework development and provided feedback. RESULTS: Through systematic review (yielding 1,408 records total and 7 records eligible for inclusion) and outreach strategies (yielding an additional 7 eligible records), we identified 11 programs (4 American, 7 Canadian) and 2 theoretical models from which data could be abstracted. Program activities were categorized into 12 overarching constructs that make up the components of the framework: accessibility, engagement, family involvement, integrated assessment, psychotherapy for patients, psychotherapy for families, medication management, health promotion, case management, vocational support, recreation and social support, and transition services. Program components are informed by the philosophical orientation of the program and models of care. This framework considers health system factors, clinical service factors, program development, and community partnership that impact program structure and activities. Multidisciplinary teams provide care and include addiction medicine, psychiatry, psychology, nursing, social work, occupational therapy, recreation therapy, peer support, and program evaluation. CONCLUSION: We developed a comprehensive framework describing components of child and youth outpatient concurrent disorders programs. This framework may assist programs currently operating, and those in development, to reflect on their structure and activities.

Probiotics, Prebiotics, Lactoferrin, and Combination Products for Prevention of Mortality and Morbidity in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Modulation of intestinal microbiome by administering probiotics, prebiotics, or both may prevent morbidity and mortality in premature infants. Objective: To assess the comparative effectiveness of alternative prophylactic strategies through a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar from inception until May 10, 2023. Study Selection: Eligible trials tested probiotics, prebiotics, lactoferrin, and combination products for prevention of morbidity or mortality in preterm infants. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A frequentist random-effects model was used for the NMA, and the certainty of evidence and inferences regarding relative effectiveness were assessed using the GRADE approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause mortality, severe necrotizing enterocolitis, culture-proven sepsis, feeding intolerance, time to reach full enteral feeding, and duration of hospitalization. Results: A total of 106 trials involving 25 840 preterm infants were included. Only multiple-strain probiotics were associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with placebo (risk ratio [RR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.86; risk difference [RD], -1.7%; 95% CI, -2.4% to -0.8%). Multiple-strain probiotics alone (vs placebo: RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.50; RD, -3.7%; 95% CI, -4.1% to -2.9%) or in combination with oligosaccharides (vs placebo: RR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.37; RD, -5.1%; 95% CI, -5.6% to -3.7%) were among the most effective interventions reducing severe necrotizing enterocolitis. Single-strain probiotics in combination with lactoferrin (vs placebo RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.78; RD, -10.7%; 95% CI, -13.7% to -3.5%) were the most effective intervention for reducing sepsis. Multiple-strain probiotics alone (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.80; RD, -10.0%; 95% CI, -13.9% to -5.1%) or in combination with oligosaccharides (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.67; RD, -14.1%; 95% CI, -18.3% to -8.5%) and single-strain probiotics (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; RD, -10.0%; 95% CI, -12.6% to -7.2%) proved of best effectiveness in reduction of feeding intolerance vs placebo. Single-strain probiotics (MD, -1.94 days; 95% CI, -2.96 to -0.92) and multistrain probiotics (MD, -2.03 days; 95% CI, -3.04 to -1.02) proved the most effective in reducing the time to reach full enteral feeding compared with placebo. Only single-strain and multistrain probiotics were associated with greater effectiveness compared with placebo in reducing duration of hospitalization (MD, -3.31 days; 95% CI, -5.05 to -1.58; and MD, -2.20 days; 95% CI, -4.08 to -0.31, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and NMA, moderate- to high-certainty evidence demonstrated an association between multistrain probiotics and reduction in all-cause mortality; these interventions were also associated with the best effectiveness for other key outcomes. Combination products, including single- and multiple-strain probiotics combined with prebiotics or lactoferrin, were associated with the largest reduction in morbidity and mortality.

An Assessment of National Strategic Action Plans for Viral Hepatitis Elimination, 2016-2021.

In 2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) released the Global Health Sector Strategy (GHSS) setting goals for global hepatitis elimination. To inform new or revised viral hepatitis national strategic action plans (NSAPs) for 2022-2030, NSAPs developed during 2016-2021 were assessed for alignment with the WHO GHSS. Country NSAPs were assessed to determine if they included components in the 2016 GHSS. Of 55 country NSAPs, 19 (35%) did not include hepatitis B and C virus elimination goals, only 18 (33%) included targets for needles and syringes for persons who inject drugs, and 21 (38%) had a national budget or financing plan for hepatitis activities. Gaps identified indicate need for technical support in NSAP development.

Physical activity interventions for cancer-related fatigue: A scoping review of randomized controlled trials from a Nursing Science Precision Health Model perspective.

BACKGROUND: The Nursing Science Precision Health (NSPH) Model has the potential to guide research on the development, testing, and targeting of interventions. PURPOSE: This scoping review examines the relationship between physical activity (PA) and cancer-related fatigue (CRF) within the context of the NSPH Model. METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guided this review. We included randomized controlled trials in people with cancer that investigated PA interventions and measured change in CRF as an outcome. DISCUSSION: A total of 181 studies met the eligibility criteria. Over 20 different instruments were used to measure CRF. The most common PA interventions were strength training (48%), walking (36%), cycling (26%), and yoga (15%). A limited number of studies reported phenotypic characteristics (32/181, 17%) or biomarkers (31/181, 17%) associated with CRF. CONCLUSION: This scoping review identified the body of existing research exploring CRF and PA from a precision health perspective.

Certainty of Evidence Assessment in Systematic Reviews Published by High-Impact Sports Science Journals: A Meta-epidemiological Study.

BACKGROUND: Assessing certainty of evidence is a key element of any systematic review. The aim of this meta-epidemiology study was to understand the frequency and ways with which certainty of evidence is assessed in contemporary systematic reviews published in high-impact sports science journals. METHODS: We searched PubMed and relevant journal web sites from 1 August 2016 to 11 October 2022 for systematic reviews published in the top-ten highest-impact journals within the 2020 Journal Citation Report for the Sports Sciences category. Pairs of independent reviewers screened items using a priori established criteria. RESULTS: Of 1250 eligible documents, 258 (20.6%) assessed the certainty of evidence, defined as using two or more distinct domains to provide an overall rating of the trustworthiness of findings across studies. Nine methods were cited for assessing certainty, with the most common being the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach (61.6%). The proportion of systematic reviews assessing certainty of evidence appeared to increase over the 6-year timeframe analyzed. Across all reviews analyzed, a large majority addressed the domains of risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency of the results. Other certainty domains including indirectness/applicability were less commonly assessed. DISCUSSION: Only one in five recent contemporary systematic reviews in the field of exercise and sports science assessed certainty of evidence. Organizational and institutional education on methods for assessing evidence may help further increase uptake of these methods and improve both the quality and clinical impact of systematic reviews in the field.

GRADE GUIDANCE 38: Updated guidance for rating up certainty of evidence due to a dose-response gradient.

INTRODUCTION: This updated guidance from the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation addresses rating up certainty of evidence due to a dose-response gradient (DRG) observed in synthesis of intervention and exposure studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This guidance was developed using iterative discussions and consensus in multiple meetings and was presented to attendees of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group meeting for feedback in November 2022 and for final approval in May 2023. RESULTS: The guidance consists of two steps. The first is to determine whether the DRG is credible. We describe five items for assessing credibility: a) is DRG identified using a proper analytical approach; b) is confounding the cause of the DRG; c) is there serious concern about ecological bias; d) is the DRG consistent across studies; and e) is there indirect evidence supporting the DRG. The first two of these items are the most critical. If the DRG was judged to be credible, then the second step is to apply the DRG domain and consider rating up, but only by one level due to the concern about residual confounding. CONCLUSION: Systematic review authors should only rate up certainty in evidence when a DRG is deemed credible.

Pneumococcal Vaccine for Adults Aged ≥19 Years: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2023

his report compiles and summarizes all published recommendations from CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for use of pneumococcal vaccines in adults aged ≥19 years in the United States. This report also includes updated and new clinical guidance for implementation from CDC. Before 2021, ACIP recommended 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) alone (up to 2 doses), or both a single dose of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) in combination with 1­3 doses of PPSV23 in series (PCV13 followed by PPSV23), for use in U.S. adults depending on age and underlying risk for pneumococcal disease. In 2021, two new pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs), a 15-valent and a 20-valent PCV (PCV15 and PCV20), were licensed for use in U.S. adults aged ≥18 years by the Food and Drug Administration. ACIP recommendations specify the use of either PCV20 alone or PCV15 in series with PPSV23 for all adults aged ≥65 years and for adults aged 19­64 years with certain underlying medical conditions or other risk factors who have not received a PCV or whose vaccination history is unknown. In addition, ACIP recommends use of either a single dose of PCV20 or ≥1 dose of PPSV23 for adults who have started their pneumococcal vaccine series with PCV13 but have not received all recommended PPSV23 doses. Shared clinical decision-making is recommended regarding use of a supplemental PCV20 dose for adults aged ≥65 years who have completed their recommended vaccine series with both PCV13 and PPSV23. Updated and new clinical guidance for implementation from CDC includes the recommendation for use of PCV15 or PCV20 for adults who have received PPSV23 but have not received any PCV dose. The report also includes clinical guidance for adults who have received 7-valent PCV (PCV7) only and adults who are hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

Adjunctive Vasopressors in Patients with Septic Shock: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Over one-third of patients with septic shock have adjunctive vasopressors added to first-line vasopressors. However, no randomized trial has detected improved mortality with adjunctive vasopressors. Published systematic reviews and meta-analysis have sought to inform the use of adjunctive vasopressors, yet each published review has limitations that hinder its interpretation. This review aims to overcome the limitations of previous reviews by systematically synthesizing the direct evidence for adjunctive vasopressor therapy use in adult patients with septic shock. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating adjunctive vasopressors (vasopressin analogues, angiotensin II, hydroxocobalamin, methylene blue, and catecholamine analogues) in adult patients with septic shock. Relevant studies will be identified through comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and reference lists of previous systematic reviews. Only randomized trials comparing adjunctive vasopressors (>75% of subjects on vasopressors at enrollment) to standard care vasopressors in adults with septic shock (>75% of subjects having septic shock) will be included. Titles and abstracts will be screened, full-text articles assessed for eligibility, and data extracted from included studies. Outcomes of interest include short-term mortality, intermediate-term mortality, kidney replacement therapy, digital/peripheral ischemia, and venous thromboembolism. Pairwise meta-analysis using a random-effects model will be utilized to estimate the risk ratio for the outcomes. Risk of bias will be adjudicated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and GRADE will be used to rate the certainty of the body of evidence. Discussion: Although adjunctive vasopressors are commonly used in patients with septic shock their effect on patient-important outcomes is unclear. This study is planned to use rigorous systematic review methodology, including strict adhere to established guidelines, in order to overcome limitations of previously-published reviews and inform clinical practice and treatment guidelines for the use of adjunctive vasopressors in adults with septic shock. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD4202327984.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: methodology and review of evidence.

This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.

Climate disasters and oncology care: a systematic review of effects on patients, healthcare professionals, and health systems.

PURPOSE: Climate disasters have devastating effects on communities and society that encompass all aspects of daily life, including healthcare. Patients with cancer are particularly vulnerable when disaster strikes. As the number and intensity of disasters increases, it is important to understand the effects across the cancer care continuum. This systematic review investigates the effect of climate disasters on patients, the oncology healthcare workforce, and healthcare systems. METHODS: A medical librarian conducted a literature search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science from January 1, 2016, through May 11, 2022. Eligible studies included any published report on a climate disaster globally reporting on patient-, oncology healthcare workforce-, or healthcare systems-level outcomes. Study quality was assessed, and findings were narratively synthesized, given the diversity of reported evidence. RESULTS: The literature search identified 3618 records, of which 46 publications were eligible for inclusion. The most frequent climate disaster was hurricanes (N = 27) followed by tsunami (N = 10). Eighteen publications were from disasters that occurred in the mainland USA with 13 from Japan and 12 from Puerto Rico. Patient-level outcomes included treatment interruptions and inability to communicate with the healthcare team. At the workforce level, findings included distressed clinicians caring for others when their own lives have been affected by a disaster along with lack of disaster preparedness training. Health systems reported closures or shifting services post-disaster and a need to have improved emergency response plans. CONCLUSION: Response to climate disasters necessitates a holistic approach at the patient, workforce, and health systems levels. Specifically, interventions should focus on mitigating interruptions in care for patients, advanced coordination and planning for workforce and health systems, and contingency planning for allocation of resources by health systems.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations.

OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. INTERVENTIONS: In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.