Faculty Bibliography

Sex and gender influence every aspect of human health; thus, sex- and gender-related topics should be incorporated in all aspects of health education curricula. Sex and gender health education (SGHE) is the rigorous, intersectional, data-driven integration of sex and gender into all elements of health education. A multisectoral group of thought leaders has collaborated to advance SGHE since 2012. This cross-sector collaboration to advance SGHE has been successful on several fronts, primarily developing robust interprofessional SGHE programs, hosting a series of international SGHE summits, developing sex- and gender-specific resources, and broadening the collaboration beyond medical education. However, other deeply entrenched challenges have proven more difficult to address, including accurate and consistent sex and gender reporting in research publications, broadening institutional support for SGHE, and the development and implementation of evaluation plans for assessing learner outcomes and the downstream effects of SGHE on patient care. This commentary reflects on progress made in SGHE over the first decade of the current collaboration (2012-2022), articulates a vision for next steps to advance SGHE, and proposes 4 benchmarks to guide the next decade of SGHE: (1) integrate sex, gender, and intersectionality across health curricula; (2) develop sex- and gender-specific resources for health professionals; (3) improve sex and gender reporting in research publications; and (4) develop evaluation plans to assess learner and patient outcomes.

While there is some research investigating whole foods or diets that are easily understood and accessible to patients with osteoarthritis, specific nutrients or nutraceuticals are more commonly identified. Unfortunately, guidelines and evidence surrounding individual nutrients, extracts, and nutraceuticals are conflicting and are more difficult to interpret and implement for patients with osteoarthritis. The purpose of this umbrella review is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the existing evidence of whole foods and dietary patterns effects on osteoarthritis-related outcomes to inform evidence-based recommendations for healthcare professionals and identify areas where more research is warranted. A literature search identified relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses using five databases from inception to May 2022. Five systematic reviews/meta-analyses were included in the current umbrella review. Most evidence supported the Mediterranean diet improving osteoarthritis-related outcomes (e.g., pain, stiffness, inflammation, biomarkers of cartilage degeneration). There was little to no evidence supporting the effects of fruits and herbs on osteoarthritis-related outcomes; however, there was some suggestion that specific foods could potentiate symptom improvement through antioxidative mechanisms. The overall lack of homogeneity between the studies limits the conclusions that can be made and highlights the need for quality research that can identify consumer-accessible foods to improve osteoarthritis-related symptoms.

The discovery of PCSK9 and its role in regulating the LDL receptor, and the effect of loss of function mutations of its gene, identified it as a therapeutic target in 2006. Fully humanized monoclonal antibodies to PCSK9 (alirocumab and evolocumab) proved effective for lowering LDL cholesterol and subsequently for reducing atherosclerotic events in large outcome trials. Suppressing PCSK9 synthesis via gene silencing using inclisiran, a small interfering RNA, is another approach that effectively reduces LDL cholesterol, and a cardiovascular outcome trial is in progress. These treatments are given subcutaneously on a background of maximally tolerated statin treatment and are long-lasting: dosing is once or twice a month, self-administered, for alirocumab and evolocumab, and every 6 months for inclisiran, in the clinic, with an extra dose at 3 months in the initial year of therapy. These three agents produce mean LDL reductions of about 55% with no important adverse effects detectable to date. They are indicated in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease or familial hypercholesterolemia who cannot achieve LDL cholesterol targets with maximally tolerated statin treatment. Such therapy can produce very low plasma LDL cholesterol and PCSK9, but there is no evidence this is harmful. Introduction into clinical practice has been impeded by economic considerations. The barrier to their use has not been scientific or medical, but rather the impact on healthcare resources. Prices have been reduced, but whether they are now cost-effective varies from country to country.

After an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, people need secondary prevention strategies to identify osteoarthritis at its earliest stages so that interventions can be implemented to halt or slow the progression toward its long-term burden. The Osteoarthritis Action Alliance formed an interdisciplinary Secondary Prevention Task Group to develop a consensus on recommendations to provide clinicians with secondary prevention strategies that are intended to reduce the risk of osteoarthritis after a person has an ACL injury. The group achieved consensus on 15 out of 16 recommendations that address patient education, exercise and rehabilitation, psychological skills training, graded-exposure therapy, cognitive-behavioral counseling (lacked consensus), outcomes to monitor, secondary injury prevention, system-level social support, leveraging technology, and coordinated care models. We hope this statement raises awareness among clinicians and researchers on the importance of taking steps to mitigate the risk of osteoarthritis after an ACL injury.

CONTEXT/BACKGROUND:The Osteoarthritis Action Alliance formed a secondary prevention task group to develop a consensus on secondary prevention recommendations to reduce the risk of osteoarthritis after a knee injury. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Our goal was to provide clinicians with secondary prevention recommendations that are intended to reduce the risk of osteoarthritis after a person has sustained an anterior cruciate ligament injury. Specifically, this manuscript describes our methods, literature reviews, and dissenting opinions to elaborate on the rationale for our recommendations and to identify critical gaps. DESIGN/METHODS:Consensus process. SETTING/METHODS:Virtual video conference calls and online voting. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:The Secondary Prevention Task Group consisted of 29 members from various clinical backgrounds. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)/METHODS:The group initially convened online in August 2020 to discuss the target population, goals, and key topics. After a second call, the task group divided into 9 subgroups to draft the recommendations and supportive text for crucial content areas. Twenty-one members completed 2 rounds of voting and revising the recommendations and supportive text between February and April 2021. A virtual meeting was held to review the wording of the recommendations and obtain final votes. We defined consensus as >80% of voting members supporting a proposed recommendation. RESULTS:The group achieved consensus on 15 of 16 recommendations. The recommendations address patient education, exercise and rehabilitation, psychological skills training, graded-exposure therapy, cognitive-behavioral counseling (lacked consensus), outcomes to monitor, secondary injury prevention, system-level social support, leveraging technology, and coordinated care models. CONCLUSIONS:This consensus statement reflects information synthesized from an interdisciplinary group of experts based on the best available evidence from the literature or personal experience. We hope this document raises awareness among clinicians and researchers to take steps to mitigate the risk of osteoarthritis after an anterior cruciate ligament injury.

This article reviews the safety of statins and non-statin medications for management of dyslipidemia. Statins have uncommon serious adverse effects: myopathy/ rhabdomyolysis, which resolve with statin discontinuation, and diabetes, usually in people with risk factors for diabetes. The CVD benefit of statins far exceeds the risk of diabetes. Statin myalgia, without CK elevation, is likely caused by muscle symptoms with another etiology, or the nocebo effect. Notable adverse effects of non-statin medicines include injection site reactions (alirocumab, evolocumab, inclisiran), increased uric acid and gout (bempedoic acid), atrial fibrillation/flutter (omega-3-fatty acids), and myopathy in combination with a statin (gemfibrozil).

Prediabetes affects at least 1 in 3 adults in the U.S. and 1 in 5 in Europe. Although guidelines advocate aggressive management of lipid parameters in diabetes, most guidelines do not address treatment of dyslipidemia in prediabetes despite the increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Several criteria are used to diagnose prediabetes: impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and HbA1c of 5.7-6.4%. Individuals with prediabetes have a greater risk of diabetes, a higher prevalence of dyslipidemia with a more atherogenic lipid profile and an increased risk of ASCVD. In addition to calculating ASCVD risk using traditional methods, an OGTT may further stratify risk. Those with 1-hour plasma glucose ≥8.6 mmol/L (155 mg/dL) and/or 2-hour ≥7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) (IGT) have a greater risk of ASCVD. Diet and lifestyle modification are fundamental in prediabetes. Statins, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors are recommended in people requiring pharmacotherapy. Although high-intensity statins may increase risk of diabetes, this is acceptable because of the greater reduction of ASCVD. The LDL-C goal in prediabetes should be individualized. In those with IGT and/or elevated 1-hour plasma glucose, the same intensive approach to dyslipidemia as recommended for diabetes should be considered, particularly if other ASCVD risk factors are present.