2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE: This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Clinical outcome assessments of disease burden and progression in late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses.

The late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses, comprising late-onset Tay-Sachs and Sandhoff diseases, are rare, slowly progressive, neurogenetic disorders primarily characterized by neurogenic weakness, ataxia, and dysarthria. The aim of this longitudinal study was to characterize the natural history of late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses using a number of clinical outcome assessments to measure different aspects of disease burden and progression over time, including neurological, functional, and quality of life, to inform the design of future clinical interventional trials. Patients attending the United States National Tay-Sachs & Allied Diseases Family Conference between 2015 and 2019 underwent annual clinical outcome assessments. Currently, there are no clinical outcome assessments validated to assess late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses; therefore, instruments used or designed for diseases with similar features, or to address various aspects of the clinical presentations, were used. Clinical outcome assessments included the Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale, the 9-Hole Peg Test, and the Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech. Twenty-three patients participated in at least one meeting visit (late-onset Tay-Sachs, n = 19; late-onset Sandhoff, n = 4). Patients had high disease burden at baseline, and scores for the different clinical outcome assessments were generally lower than would be expected for the general population. Longitudinal analyses showed slow, but statistically significant, neurological progression as evidenced by worsening scores on the 9-Hole Peg Test (2.68%/year, 95% CI: 0.13-5.29; p = 0.04) and the Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale neurological examination (1.31 points/year, 95% CI: 0.26-2.35; p = 0.02). Time since diagnosis to study entry correlated with worsening scores on the 9-Hole Peg Test (r = 0.728; p < 0.001), Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale neurological examination (r = 0.727; p < 0.001), and Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech intelligibility (r = -0.654; p = 0.001). In summary, patients with late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses had high disease burden and slow disease progression. Several clinical outcome assessments suitable for clinical trials showed only small changes and standardized effect sizes (change/standard deviation of change) over 4 years. These longitudinal natural history study results illustrate the challenge of identifying responsive endpoints for clinical trials in rare, slowly progressive, neurogenerative disorders where arguably the treatment goal is to halt or decrease the rate of decline rather than improve clinical status. Furthermore, powering such a study would require a large sample size and/or a long study duration, neither of which is an attractive option for an ultra-rare disease with no available treatment. These findings support the development of potentially more sensitive late-onset GM2 gangliosidoses-specific rating instruments and/or surrogate endpoints for use in future clinical trials.

Role of FDG PET/CT in Patients With Lymphoma Treated With Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy: Current Concepts.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a cellular therapy in which the patient's T cells are enhanced to recognize and bind to specific tumor antigens. CAR T-cell therapy was initially developed for the treatment of leukemia, but its current main indication is the treatment of relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma. FDG PET/CT plays a fundamental role in the diagnosis, staging, therapy response assessment, and recurrence evaluation of patients with metabolically active lymphoma. Consistent with the examination's role in lymphoma management, FDG PET/CT is also the imaging modality of choice to evaluate patients before and after CAR T-cell therapy, and evidence supporting its utility in this setting continues to accumulate. In this article, we review current concepts in CAR T-cell therapy in patients with lymphoma, emphasizing the critical role of FDG PET/CT before and after therapy. A framework is presented that entails performing FDG PET/CT at four time points over the course of CAR T-cell therapy: pretherapy at baseline at the time of decision to administer CAR T-cell therapy and after any bridging therapies and posttherapy 1 and 3 months after infusion. PET parameters assessed at these time points predict various patient outcomes.

Defining clinical endpoints in limb girdle muscular dystrophy: a GRASP-LGMD study.

BACKGROUND: The Limb Girdle Muscular Dystrophies (LGMDs) are characterized by progressive weakness of the shoulder and hip girdle muscles as a result of over 30 different genetic mutations. This study is designed to develop clinical outcome assessments across the group of disorders. METHODS/DESIGN: The primary goal of this study is to evaluate the utility of a set of outcome measures on a wide range of LGMD phenotypes and ability levels to determine if it would be possible to use similar outcomes between individuals with different phenotypes. We will perform a multi-center, 12-month study of 188 LGMD patients within the established Genetic Resolution and Assessments Solving Phenotypes in LGMD (GRASP-LGMD) Research Consortium, which is comprised of 11 sites in the United States and 2 sites in Europe. Enrolled patients will be clinically affected and have mutations in CAPN3 (LGMDR1), ANO5 (LGMDR12), DYSF (LGMDR2), DNAJB6 (LGMDD1), SGCA (LGMDR3), SGCB (LGMDR4), SGCD (LGMDR6), or SGCG (LGMDR5, or FKRP-related (LGMDR9). DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, this will be the largest consortium organized to prospectively validate clinical outcome assessments (COAs) in LGMD at its completion. These assessments will help clinical trial readiness by identifying reliable, valid, and responsive outcome measures as well as providing data driven clinical trial decision making for future clinical trials on therapeutic agents for LGMD. The results of this study will permit more efficient clinical trial design. All relevant data will be made available for investigators or companies involved in LGMD therapeutic development upon conclusion of this study as applicable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03981289; Date of registration: 6/10/2019.

Discrimination and health: A cross-sectional study comparing Muslims with other-religious.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to report perceived discrimination among Muslims living in Norway and to address and compare associations between perceived discrimination and health among Muslims with an immigrant background and other-religious with an immigrant background. METHOD: A representative sample of individuals with an immigrant background in Norway was used in a cross-sectional study design that included 5484 respondents aged 16 to 74 years. The respondents were sub-grouped after religious affiliation, and as immigrants and Norwegian-born. This sample is from 'The Survey on living conditions among persons with an immigrant background 2016', conducted by Statistics Norway. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between perceived discrimination and self-rated health and between perceived discrimination and mental health problems. RESULTS: Our findings show that Muslims with an immigrant background are more likely to report perceived discrimination than non-Muslims with an immigrant background. Perceived discrimination was associated with poor self-rated health and mental health problems among immigrant Muslims and Norwegian-born Muslims. Among other-religious with an immigrant background, perceived discrimination had an inverse relationship with mental health problems among immigrants, while an association between perceived discrimination and poor self-rated health was found among Norwegian-born. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that perceived discrimination does play a role in health among minorities with an immigrant background in Norway, regardless of religion. However, the association between perceived discrimination and poor health seems to be stronger among Muslims, especially Norwegian-born Muslims.

Clinician-Reported Physical and Cognitive Impairments After Convulsive Status Epilepticus: Post Hoc Study of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) measures are emerging as useful contributors to assessments of treatment benefits. The objective of this study was to collect ClinRO measures of physical and cognitive impairments after convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) requiring intensive care unit admission. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the data from HYBERNATUS, a multicenter open-label controlled trial that randomized 270 critically ill patients with CSE requiring mechanical ventilation in 11 French intensive care units to therapeutic hypothermia (32-34 °C for 24 h) plus standard care or standard care alone. We included all patients who attended a day 90 in-person neurologist visit with measurement of the functional independence measure (FIM) score (range from 18 [total assistance] to 126 [total independence]), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (range 0-30), and Glasgow outcome scale (GOS) score (1, death; 2, vegetative state; 3, severe disability; 4, moderate disability; and 5, mild or no disability). These three scores were compared across groups defined by several patient and CSE characteristics. RESULTS: Of 229 patients with GOS scores ≥ 3 on day 90 (male sex, 58.2%; median age, 56 years [47-67]), 67 (29%) attended an in-person neurologist visit. Twenty-nine (43%) patients had a previous history of epilepsy, and 16 (24%) patients had a primary brain insult. CSE was refractory in 22 (33%) patients. On day 90 after CSE onset, median FIM and MMSE scores were 121 (112-125) and 26.0 (24.0-28.8), respectively. The GOS score was 3 in 16 (33.8%) patients, 4 in 9 (13.4%) patients, and 5 in 42 (62.7%) patients. Worse GOS score values were significantly associated with worse FIM and MMSE scores. CONCLUSIONS: In patients attending the in-person neurologist visit on day 90 after CSE onset, ClinRO measures indicated that the main impairments were cognitive. FIM and MMSE scores were associated with GOS scores. Further studies are needed to evaluate the possible impact of neuroprotective and rehabilitation strategies on disability and cognitive impairments in survivors of CSE. Clinical trial registration NCT01359332.

Variability between Different Hand-Held Dynamometers for Measuring Muscle Strength.

Muscle strength is routinely measured in patients with neuromuscular disorders by hand-held dynamometry incorporating a wireless load cell to evaluate disease severity and therapeutic efficacy, with magnitude of effect often based on normative reference values. While several hand-held dynamometers exist, their interchangeability is unknown which limits the utility of normative data. We investigated the variability between six commercially available dynamometers for measuring the isometric muscle strength of four muscle groups in thirty healthy individuals. Following electro-mechanical sensor calibration against knowns loads, Citec, Nicholas, MicroFET2, and Commander dynamometers were used to assess the strength of ankle dorsiflexors, hip internal rotators, and shoulder external rotators. Citec, Jamar Plus, and Baseline Hydraulic dynamometers were used to capture hand grip strength. Variability between dynamometers was represented as percent differences and statistical significance was calculated with one-way repeated measures ANOVA. Percent differences between dynamometers ranged from 0.2% to 16%. No significant differences were recorded between the Citec, Nicholas, and MicroFET2 dynamometers (p > 0.05). Citec grip strength measures differed to the Jamar Plus and Baseline Hydraulic dynamometers (p < 0.01). However, when controlling for grip circumference, they were comparable (p > 0.05). Several hand-held dynamometers can be used interchangeably to measure upper and lower limb strength, thereby maximising the use of normative reference values.

Ataxia Rating Scales Reflect Patient Experience: an Examination of the Relationship Between Clinician Assessments of Cerebellar Ataxia and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Ataxia rating scales are observer administered clinical outcome assessments (COAs) of the cerebellar motor syndrome. It is not known whether these COAs mirror patient experience of their disease. Here we test the hypothesis that ataxia COAs are related to and reflect patient reported symptoms and impact of illness. A concept library of symptoms and activities impacted by ataxia was created by reviewing (a) concept elicitation data from surveys completed by 147 ataxia patients and 80 family members and (b) cognitive debrief data from focus groups of 17 ataxia patients used to develop the Patient Reported Outcome Measure of Ataxia. These findings were mapped across the items on 4 clinical measures of ataxia (SARA, BARS, ICARS and FARS). Symptoms reported most commonly related to balance, gait or walking, speech, tremor and involuntary movements, and vision impairment. Symptoms reported less frequently related to hand coordination, loss of muscle control, dizziness and vertigo, muscle discomfort or pain, swallowing, and incontinence. There was a mosaic mapping of items in the observer-derived ataxia COAs with the subjective reports by ataxia patients/families of the relevance of these items to their daily lives. Most COA item mapped onto multiple real-life manifestations; and most of the real-life impact of disease mapped onto multiple COA items. The 4 common ataxia COAs reflect patient reported symptoms and impact of illness. These results validate the relevance of the COAs to patients' lives and underscore the inadvisability of singling out any one COA item to represent the totality of the patient experience.

Updated Recommendations on Evidence Needed to Support Measurement Comparability Among Modes of Data Collection for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

The ISPOR Task Force on measurement comparability between modes of data collection for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has updated the good practice recommendations from the 2009 ISPOR electronic patient-reported outcome and 2014 patient-reported outcome mixed modes Good Research Practices Task Force reports in light of accumulated evidence of measurement comparability among different modes of PROM data collection. Furthermore, with the increasing use of electronic formats of clinical outcome assessments in clinical trials and the US Food and Drug Administration's encouragement of electronic data collection, this new task force report provides stakeholders with best practice recommendations reflecting the current body of evidence and enables them to respond to future developments in research and technology. This task force recommends an evidence-based approach to determine whether new research is needed to evaluate measurement comparability for a given questionnaire or technology. The suitability of existing evidence depends upon whether it satisfactorily demonstrates that the change in data collection mode has not affected the PROM's measurement properties. In cases where sufficient evidence of measurement comparability exists and best practices for faithful migration are followed, this task force concludes that further testing of measurement comparability among the data collection modes is unnecessary, including cases of "mixing modes" within clinical trials such as bring your own device designs.

Translation and Validation of the Self-Assessment Psoriasis Area Severity Index.

BACKGROUND: The self-assessment psoriasis area severity index (SAPASI) is a patient-administered psoriasis assessment tool for which we present a validated translation from English to Swedish. METHODS: Validity was evaluated in this single-centre study using the psoriasis area severity index (PASI) as the standard. Test-retest reliability was assessed using repeated SAPASI measurements. RESULTS: Significant correlations (p < 0.0001) using Spearman's correlation coefficient (r) were found between PASI and SAPASI scores (r = 0.60) for 51 participants (median baseline PASI 4.4, interquartile range [IQR]: 1.8-5.6) and repeated SAPASI measurements (r = 0.70) among 38 participants (median baseline SAPASI 4.0, IQR: 2.5-6.1). Bland-Altman plots showed generally higher SAPASI scores than PASI scores. CONCLUSION: The translated version of SAPASI is valid and reliable, although patients generally tend to overrate their disease severity compared to PASI. Keeping this limitation in mind, SAPASI has the potential of being implemented as a time- and cost-efficient assessment tool in a Scandinavian context.

Providing meaningful interpretation of performance outcome measures by co-calibration with patient-reported outcomes through the Rasch model: illustration with multiple sclerosis measures.

Performance outcome (PerfO) measures are based on tasks performed by patients in a controlled environment, making their meaningful interpretation challenging to establish. Co-calibrating PerfO and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures of the same target concept allow for interpretation of the PerfO with the item content of the PRO. The Rasch model applied to the discretized PerfO measure together with the PRO items allows expressing parameters related to the PerfO measure in the PRO metric for it to be linked to the PRO responses. We applied this approach to two PerfO measures used in multiple sclerosis (MS) for walking and manual ability: the Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW) and the 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT). To determine meaningful interpretation of these two PerfO measures, they were co-calibrated with two PRO measures of closely related concepts, the MS walking scale - 12 items (MSWS-12) and the ABILHAND, using the data of 2,043 subjects from five global clinical trials in MS. The probabilistic relationships between the PerfO measures and the PRO metrics were used to express the response pattern to the PRO items as a function of the unit of the PerfOs. This example illustrates the promises of the co-calibration approach for the interpretation of PerfO measures but also highlights the challenges associated with it, mostly related to the quality of the PRO metric in terms of coverage of the targeted concept. Co-calibration with PRO measures could also be an adequate solution for interpretation of digital sensor measures whose meaningfulness is also often questioned.

Special Issue PRO-Analysis of Clinically Meaningful Change on Patient-Reported Outcomes: Renewed Insights About Covariate Adjustment.

Determining clinically meaningful change (CMC) in a patient-reported (PRO) measure is central to its existence in gauging how patients feel and function, especially for evaluating a treatment effect. Anchor-based approaches are recommended to estimate a CMC threshold on a PRO measure. Determination of CMC involves linking changes or differences in the target PRO measure to that in an external (anchor) measure that is easier to interpret than and appreciably associated with the PRO measure. One type of anchor-based approach for CMC is the "mean change method" where the mean change in score of the target PRO measure within a particular anchor transition level (e.g. one-category improvement) is subtracted from the mean change in score of within an adjacent anchor category (e.g. no change category). In the literature, the mean change method has been applied with and without an adjustment for the baseline scores for the PRO of interest. This article provides the analytic rationale and conceptual justification for keeping the analysis unadjusted and not controlling for baseline PRO scores. Two illustrative examples are highlighted. The current research is essentially a variation of Lord's paradox (where whether to adjust for a baseline variable depends on the research question) placed in a new context. Once the adjustment is made, the resulting CMC estimate reflects an artificial case where the anchor transition levels are forced to have the same average baseline PRO score. The unadjusted estimate acknowledges that the anchor transition levels are naturally occurring (not randomized) groups and thus maintains external validity.

Predicting later categories of upper limb activity from earlier clinical assessments following stroke: an exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: Accelerometers allow for direct measurement of upper limb (UL) activity. Recently, multi-dimensional categories of UL performance have been formed to provide a more complete measure of UL use in daily life. Prediction of motor outcomes after stroke have tremendous clinical utility and a next step is to explore what factors might predict someone's subsequent UL performance category. PURPOSE: To explore how different machine learning techniques can be used to understand how clinical measures and participant demographics captured early after stroke are associated with the subsequent UL performance categories. METHODS: This study analyzed data from two time points from a previous cohort (n = 54). Data used was participant characteristics and clinical measures from early after stroke and a previously established category of UL performance at a later post stroke time point. Different machine learning techniques (a single decision tree, bagged trees, and random forests) were used to build predictive models with different input variables. Model performance was quantified with the explanatory power (in-sample accuracy), predictive power (out-of-bag estimate of error), and variable importance. RESULTS: A total of seven models were built, including one single decision tree, three bagged trees, and three random forests. Measures of UL impairment and capacity were the most important predictors of the subsequent UL performance category, regardless of the machine learning algorithm used. Other non-motor clinical measures emerged as key predictors, while participant demographics predictors (with the exception of age) were generally less important across the models. Models built with the bagging algorithms outperformed the single decision tree for in-sample accuracy (26-30% better classification) but had only modest cross-validation accuracy (48-55% out of bag classification). CONCLUSIONS: UL clinical measures were the most important predictors of the subsequent UL performance category in this exploratory analysis regardless of the machine learning algorithm used. Interestingly, cognitive and affective measures emerged as important predictors when the number of input variables was expanded. These results reinforce that UL performance, in vivo, is not a simple product of body functions nor the capacity for movement, instead being a complex phenomenon dependent on many physiological and psychological factors. Utilizing machine learning, this exploratory analysis is a productive step toward the prediction of UL performance. Trial registration NA.

Why a clinical trial is as good as its outcome measure: A framework for the selection and use of cognitive outcome measures for clinical trials of Alzheimer's disease.

A crucial aspect of any clinical trial is using the right outcome measure to assess treatment efficacy. Compared to the rapidly evolved understanding and measurement of pathophysiology in preclinical and early symptomatic stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD), relatively less progress has been made in the evolution of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) for those stages. The current paper aims to provide a benchmark for the design and evaluation of COAs for use in early AD trials. We discuss lessons learned on capturing cognitive changes in predementia stages of AD, including challenges when validating novel COAs for those early stages and necessary evidence for their implementation in clinical trials. Moving forward, we propose a multi-step framework to advance the use of more effective COAs to assess clinically meaningful changes in early AD, which will hopefully contribute to the much-needed consensus around more appropriate outcome measures to assess clinical efficacy of putative treatments. HIGHLIGHTS: We discuss lessons learned on capturing cognitive changes in predementia stages of AD. We propose a framework for the design and evaluation of performance based cognitive tests for use in early AD trials. We provide recommendations to facilitate the implementation of more effective cognitive outcome measures in AD trials.

Do You Recall?: Results From a Within-Person Recall Study of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Form v2.0 - Physical Function 8c.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether responses to Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Form v2.0 - Physical Function 8c (PROMIS PF8c) items differed when the use of a 7-day recall period was compared with no specified recall period. METHODS: Using a within-subject design, we surveyed 1810 individuals from the US general population, administering PROMIS PF8c at survey beginning and end. The order of measure presentation was randomly assigned. We calculated recall difference scores (RDSs) as no recall score minus 7-day recall score using both item response theory-based T scores and raw summed scores. We examined the distribution and created Bland-Altman plots for both RDSTscore and RDSRaw. We also calculated correlations between no recall versus 7-day recall T score and raw scores. Finally, we determined whether differences in no recall versus 7-day recall scores were associated with patient-reported PF. RESULTS: RDSTscore and RDSRaw had means (root mean square differences) of 0.00 (5.43) and -0.04 (3.79), respectively. The vast majority (%) of RDSTscore and RDSRaw values fell between the Bland-Altman limits of agreement (-10.65 to 10.66 and -7.46 to 7.38, respectively). Pearson's correlations between no recall and 7-day recall for T scores and raw scores were 0.88 and 0.87, respectively. Effect sizes for mean RDSTscore and RDSRaw compared across level of Eastern Oncology Cooperative Group performance status, patient global impression of PF severity, and single PF items were near 0. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any significant recall period effect on PF8c responses. Therefore, we recommend the use of the PROMIS physical function standard, with no specified recall time period.

Using validity theory and psychometrics to evaluate and support expanded uses of existing scales.

BACKGROUND: Scale development is a complex activity requiring significant investments of time and money to produce evidence of a scale's ability to produce reliable scores and valid inferences. With increasing use of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) in medical product development, evidentiary expectations of regulatory bodies to support inferences are a key consideration. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate how existing methods in measurement science can be used to identify and fill evidence gaps when considering re-purposing an existing scale for a new use case (e.g., new patient population, altering the recall period), rather than creating a new COA tool. METHODS: We briefly review select validity theory and psychometric concepts, linking them to the nomenclature in the COA/regulated space. Four examples (two in-text and two in online supplemental materials) of modifications are presented to demonstrate these ideas in practice for quality of life (QOL)-related measures. RESULTS: Each example highlights the initial process of evaluating the desired validity claims, identifying gaps in evidence to support these claims, and determining how such gaps could be filled, often without having to develop a new measure. CONCLUSIONS: If an existing scale, with minimal modification or additional evidence, can be shown to be fit for a new purpose, considerable effort can be saved and research waste avoided. In many cases, a new instrument is simply unnecessary. Far better to recycle an "old" scale for a new use-with sufficient evidence that it is fit for that purpose-than to "buy" a new one.

Personality traits and income inequalities in self-rated oral and general health.

The association of low income with poor health is widely recognized, but why some low-income individuals do not experience poor health remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether greater positive personality trait scores modify the association between income and oral and general health-related quality of life (OHRQoL and HRQoL) among a representative sample of the South Australian population. Cross-sectional self-rated questionnaire data from a sample of 3645 adults in 2015-2016 were used for secondary analysis. In four factorial ANOVA models, the main effects, interaction, and effect modification of personality traits [measured using the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI)] on the association between income and OHRQoL [measured using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14)] and HRQoL [measured using the European Quality of Life indicator (EQ-5D-3L)] were assessed. In the low-income group, participants with greater TIPI scale scores had lower means for the OHIP-14 and the EQ-5D-3L (better OHRQoL and HRQoL). Greater emotional stability scores modified the association between low income and HRQoL and OHRQoL. Stronger positive personality traits, such as emotional stability, appear to ameliorate the adverse effect of income inequalities in health.

Clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes for patients who undergo cytoreductive surgery for thoracic meningiomas: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Primary spinal meningiomas represent a rare indolent neoplasm usually situated in the intradural-extramedullary compartment. They have a predilection for afflicting the thoracic spine and most frequently present with sensory and/or motor symptoms. Resection is the first-line treatment for symptomatic tumors, whereas other clinical factors will determine the need for adjuvant therapy. In this study, the authors aimed to elucidate clinical presentation, functional outcomes, and long-term outcomes in this population in order to better equip clinicians with the tools to counsel their patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients treated at the authors' institution between 1998 and 2018. All patients with thoracic meningiomas who underwent resection and completed at least one follow-up appointment were included. Multiple preoperative clinical variables, hospitalization details, and long-term outcomes were collected for the cohort. RESULTS: Forty-six patients who underwent resection for thoracic meningiomas were included. The average age of the cohort was 59 years, and the median follow-up was 53 months. Persistent sensory and motor symptoms were present in 29 patients (63%). Fifteen lesions were ventrally positioned. There were 43 WHO grade I tumors, 2 WHO grade II tumors, and 1 WHO grade III tumor; the grade III tumor was the only case of recurrence. The median length of hospitalization was 4 days. Seventeen patients (37%) were discharged to rehabilitation facilities. Thirty patients (65.2%) experienced resolution or improvement of symptoms, and there were no deaths within 30 days of surgery. Only 1 patient developed painful kyphosis and was managed medically. Ventral tumor position, new postoperative deficits, and length of stay did not correlate with disposition to a facility. Age, ventral position, blood loss, and increasing WHO grade did not correlate with length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes are overall favorable for patients who undergo resection of thoracic meningiomas. Symptomatic patients often experience improvement, and patients generally do not require significant future operations. Tumors located ventrally, while anatomically challenging, do not necessarily herald a significantly worse prognosis or limit the extent of resection.

Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Modular and Unibody Type Endografts.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of modular and unibody endografts for the endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2017, 130 elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms treated in an endovascular manner were retrospectively evaluated. Sixty-six patients with the modular type (Medtronic EndurantTM II and Lifetech AnkuraTM AAA) and 64 patients with the unibody type (Endologix AFX®) were compared with regards to early and postoperative one-year results. RESULTS: There was one in-hospital mortality (0.8%) in the modular group. There was no difference in postoperative first-year mortality rate between the two groups (p = 0.678). Loco-regional anesthesia was used more often in the unibody group [34 patients (53.1%)] and the use of general anesthesia was higher in the modular group [56 patients (84.8%)] (p < 0.001). While the duration of the procedure was shorter in the unibody group (p < 0.001), no statistically significant difference was found in the duration of fluoroscopy (p = 0.813) and the amount of contrast agent used (p = 0.553). The follow-up period in the intensive care unit was shorter in the modular group (p < 0.001). Moreover, the five-year survival rate was similar between the groups (84.8% in the modular group and 78.4% in the unibody group, log-rank p = 0.703). CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in our study show that modular and unibody grafts are effective and reliable, although there are some negligible differences in the early period.

Prospective development of a patient-reported outcomes instrument for desmoid tumors or aggressive fibromatosis.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors (or aggressive fibromatosis) are locally infiltrative connective-tissue tumors that can arise in any anatomic location; they can be asymptomatic, or they can result in pain, deformity, swelling, and loss of mobility and/or threaten visceral organs with bowel perforation, hydronephrosis, neurovascular damage, and other complications. Existing clinical trial endpoints such as the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1) and progression-free survival are inadequate in capturing treatment efficacy. This study was designed to develop a novel clinical trial endpoint by capturing patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Following best practices in qualitative methodology, this study used concept elicitation (CE) interviews to explore desmoid patients' perspectives on key disease-related symptoms and impacts. Qualitative analysis was performed to determine the relative frequency and disturbance of symptoms and impacts as well as other characteristics of these concepts. A draft PRO scale was then developed and tested with cognitive interviewing. Information from the interviews was subsequently incorporated into the refined PRO scale. RESULTS: CE interviews with desmoid patients (n = 31) helped to identify salient concepts and led to a draft scale that included symptom and impact scales. Cognitive interviews were completed with additional patients (n = 15) across 3 phases. Patient input was used to refine instructions, revise and/or remove items, and modify the response scale. This resulted in an 11-item symptom scale and a 17-item impact scale. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first disease-specific PRO instrument developed for desmoid tumors. The instrument is available as an exploratory endpoint in clinical trials. This study highlights the feasibility and challenges of developing PRO instruments for rare diseases.