Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Women with breast cancer have worse health outcomes with co-occurring type 2 diabetes, possibly due to suboptimal breast cancer treatment. METHODS:We created a cohort of women ages 66 to 85 y with stage I to III breast cancer from 1993 to 2012 from an integrated health care delivery system (n=1612) and fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (n=98,915), linked to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data (total n=100,527). We evaluated associations between type 2 diabetes and other factors with undergoing guideline-concordant cancer treatment. We estimated χ tests for univariate analysis and relative risks (RRs) using multivariable log-binomial models for outcomes of (1) overall guideline-concordant treatment, (2) definitive surgical therapy (mastectomy or lumpectomy with radiation), (3) chemotherapy if indicated, and (4) endocrine therapy. RESULTS:Our cohort included 60% of subjects with stage 1 tumors, one quarter below 70 years old, 23% had diabetes, 35% underwent overall guideline-concordant treatment, 24% chemotherapy, and 83% endocrine therapy. Women with diabetes were less likely to undergo overall guideline-concordant treatment (RR: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.94-0.98), and only slightly less likely to undergo guideline-concordant definitive surgical therapy (RR: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: 0.99-1.00). No differences were found for chemotherapy or endocrine therapy. Other factors significantly associated with a lower risk of guideline-concordant care were cancer stages II to III (vs. I; RR=0.47-0.69, P<0.0001), older age (vs. 66 to 69 y; RR=0.56-0.90, P<0.0001), higher comorbidity burden, and Medicaid dual-eligibility. CONCLUSIONS:Diabetes was associated with lower adherence to overall guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment. However, higher stage, older age, higher comorbidity burden, and Medicaid insurance were more strongly associated with lower use of guideline-concordant treatment. Given the heavy burden of breast cancer and diabetes, long-term outcomes analysis should consider guideline-concordant treatment. IMPACT/CONCLUSIONS:Other factors besides diabetes are more strongly associated with guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment.

Many women diagnosed with breast cancer have chronic conditions such as diabetes that may impact other health behaviors. Our purpose was to determine if breast cancer screening and detection differs among women with and without diabetes. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a retrospective cohort of women aged 52-74 years diagnosed with incident stages I-III breast cancer enrolled in an integrated health plan between 1999 and 2014 with linkage to the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registry (n = 2040). Screening data were taken from electronic health records. We used multivariable modified Poisson regression models with robust standard errors to estimate relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes of (i) receipt of screening in the 2 years prior to diagnosis; (ii) symptom-detected breast cancer; and (iii) diagnosis of locally advanced stage III breast cancer. Compared to women without diabetes, women with diabetes were similar with respect to receipt of screening mammography (78% and 77%), symptom-detected breast cancer (46% and 49%), and stage III diagnosis (7% and 7%). In multivariable models adjusting for age and year of diagnosis, race, BMI, Charlson comorbidity score and depression diagnosis no differences were observed in the outcomes by presence of diabetes. Further investigation is warranted to determine how diabetes acts as a mediating factor in adverse breast cancer outcomes.

Background: Every year about 2.4 million CT Pulmonary Angiog-raphy (CTPA) scans are performed to evaluate for pulmonary embolism in Emergency Departments (ED) in the United States. Each CTPA carries a 14% risk of contrast induced nephropathy and a lifetime malignancy risk that can be as high as 2.76%. Incidental findings requiring diagnostic follow up are found in 24% of tests, increasing both costs and harms from repeat imaging. CTPA yield (percent of studies positive for PE) is a measure of appropriateness of use and has not been reviewed systematically. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of CTPA yield in US EDs to establish a typical yield for our current practice environment and to determine if there have been changes to this yield over time.
Method(s): Cochrane, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science were searched as data sources. Observational cohort studies of adults were selected that measured CTPA yield in all ED patients referred for testing with clinical suspicion of PE. The titles and abstracts of studies identified by the search were independently reviewed by two reviewers. Studies were evaluated for exclusion criteria. Remaining studies were reviewed in full text by two independent reviewers. We extracted study characteristics and CTPA yield from the remaining studies. CTPA yields were estimated using random effects models. The I2 test was used to assess heterogeneity in CTA yields among the studies.
Result(s): Our search identified a total of 2,746 potentially relevant articles. Of those 296 remained after title and abstract review and 31 remained after full text review. The 31 studies included in our meta-analysis included a total of 42,670 patients. These studies were divided into three time periods for which CTPA yield was calculated. For time periods 1997-2002, 2003-2007 and 2008-2013 the yields were 11% (9%, 14%), 8% (6%,9%) and 8% (6%, 10%) respectively. The studies were heterogeneous for all calculated pooled CTA yields (I2 =82%, 94%, and 86% respectively).
Conclusion(s): This is the first study to systematically review CTPA yield in US EDs. Establishing a national benchmark for yield assists health systems seeking to monitor and increase CTPA yield as a part of quality improvement efforts. Future directions include further stratification by type of health system and analysis of non-US yields

Background: Clinical decision support (CDS) tools which incorporate clinical prediction rules (CPRs) have the potential to successfully deliver accurate information and guide decision-making at the point of care. Our previously validated integrated clinical prediction rule (iCPR) was designed to guide evidence-based treatment within an electronic health record for streptococcal pharyngitis and pneumonia based on chief complaints of sore throat, cough or upper respiratory infection. In initial testing at a single site, it resulted in high provider tool adoption (58%) and decreased antibiotic prescribing rates (35%) for acute respiratory infections. Our objective for this study was to assess the impact of this tool when adapted and implemented in diverse primary care settings.
Method(s): This was a randomized controlled trial including 33 primary care practices at two large academic health systems in Wisconsin and Utah. Between October 2015 and June 2018 providers in the intervention group were prompted to complete either Centor Score or Heckerling Rule for Pneumonia based onthe chief complaint of the patient encounter. EHR data on provider and patient demographics, tool use rates, and antibiotic order rates from 541 providers and 100,573 monitored patient encounters were collected for analysis. Risk ratios, CIs, and P values are calculated from a generalized estimating equation log-binomial model adjusting for clustering of orders or visits by provider and using robust standard error estimators.
Result(s): The tool was triggered 42,126 times among 214 intervention providers and was completed in 6.9% of eligible visits. The intervention and control groups prescribed antibiotics in 35% and 36% of visits respectively and were not significantly different. There were no differences in rates for rapid streptococcal test or chest X-ray orders between groups (Strep: relative risk, 1.0; P=.11; Pneumonia: relative risk, 1.8; P=.64).
Conclusion(s): In diverse primary care settings, the tool was not effective at reducing unnecessary antibiotic prescription and diagnostic testing. This outcome was possibly driven by low overall use of CDS tools highlighting the growing impact of " alert fatigue" and the need for new approaches to enhance provider engagement with CDS tools. New strategies for reducing the persistently high rates of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections are needed. Novel approaches in future studies are necessary for reducing barriers to CDS tools in order to increase use and engagement

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:These studies were undertaken to determine if fexapotide triflutate 2.5 mg transrectal injectable (FT) has significant long-term (LT) safety and efficacy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS:Two placebo controlled double-blind randomized parallel group trials with 995 BPH patients at 72 sites treated 3:2 FT:placebo, with open-label FT crossover (CO) re-injection in 2 trials n = 344 and long-term follow-up (LF) 2-6.75 years (mean 3.58 years, median 3.67 years; FT re-injection CO mean 4.27 years, median 4.42 years) were evaluated. 12 months post-treatment patients elected no further treatment, approved oral medications, FT, or interventional treatment. Primary endpoint variable was change in Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months and at LF. CO primary co-endpoints were 3-year incidence of (1) surgery for BPH in FT treated CO patients versus patients crossed over to oral BPH medications and (2) surgery or acute urinary retention in FT-treated CO placebo patients versus placebo patients crossed over to oral BPH medications. 28 CO secondary endpoints assessed surgical and symptomatic outcomes in FT reinjected patients versus conventional BPH medication CO and control subgroups at 2 and 3 years. RESULTS:FT injection had no significant safety differences from placebo. LF IPSS change from baseline was higher in FT treated patients compared to placebo (median FT group improvement - 5.2 versus placebo - 3.0, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of AUR (1.08% p = 0.0058) and prostate cancer (PCa) (1.1% p = 0.0116) were both reduced in FT treated patients. LF incidence of intervention for BPH was reduced in the FT group versus oral BPH medications (8.08% versus 27.85% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of intervention or AUR in placebo CO group with FT versus placebo CO group with oral medications was reduced (6.07% versus 33.3% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). 28/28 secondary efficacy endpoints were reached in LF CO re-injection studies. CONCLUSIONS:FT 2.5 mg is a safe and effective transrectal injectable for LT treatment of BPH. FT treated patients also had reduced need for BPH intervention, and reduced incidence of PCa and AUR.

Cognitive deficits and hippocampal atrophy, features that are shared with aging and dementia, have been described in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). T2DM is associated with obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, hypothalamic pituitary adrenocortical (HPA) axis abnormalities and inflammation, all of which have been shown to negatively impact the brain. However, since most reports in T2DM focused on glycemic control, the relative contribution of these modifying factors to the impairments observed in T2DM remains unclear. We contrasted 41 middle-aged dementia-free volunteers with T2DM (on average 7 years since diagnosis) with 47 age-, education-, and gender-matched non-insulin resistant controls on cognition and brain volumes. HPA axis activity and other modifiers that accompany T2DM were assessed to determine their impact on brain and cognition. Individuals with T2DM had specific verbal declarative memory deficits, reduced hippocampal and prefrontal volumes, and impaired HPA axis feedback control. Diminished cortisol suppression after dexamethasone and dyslipidemia were associated with decreased cognitive performance, whereas obesity was negatively related to hippocampal volume. Moreover, prefrontal volume was influenced by worse glycemic control. Thus, obesity and altered cortisol levels may contribute to the impact of T2DM on the hippocampal formation, resulting in decreased verbal declarative memory performance

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: There is evidence that type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with cognitive impairment. Most studies investigating this association have evaluated elderly individuals, after many years of diabetes, who generally have poor glycaemic control and significant vascular disease. The aim of the current study was to investigate the early cognitive consequences and associated brain correlates of type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With regard to cognition and brain measures, we compared 23 age-, sex- and education-matched control subjects with 23 mostly middle-aged individuals with relatively well-controlled diabetes of less than 10 years from the time of diagnosis. RESULTS: We found deficits in hippocampal-based memory performance and preservation of other cognitive domains. Relative to control subjects, individuals with diabetes had reductions in brain volumes that were restricted to the hippocampus. There was an inverse relationship between glycaemic control and hippocampal volume; in multivariate regression analysis, HbA(1c) was the only significant predictor of hippocampal volume, accounting for 33% of the observed variance. Other variables commonly associated with type 2 diabetes, such as elevated BMI, hypertension or dyslipidaemia, did not independently contribute to the variance in hippocampal volume. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that the medial temporal lobe may be the first brain site affected by type 2 diabetes and that individuals in poorer metabolic control may be affected to a greater extent

We developed and validated a measurement instrument (CLASI-Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index) for lupus erythematosus that could be used in clinical trials. The instrument has separate scores for damage and activity. A group of seven American Dermato-Rheumatologists and the "American College of Rheumatology Response Criteria Committee on SLE (systemic lupus erythematosus)" assessed content validity. After a preliminary session, we conducted standardized interviews with the raters and made slight changes to the instrument. The final instrument was evaluated by five dermatologists and six residents who scored nine patients to estimate inter- and intra-rater reliability in two sessions. Consultation with experts has established content validity of the instrument. Reliability studies demonstrated an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-rater reliability of 0.86 for the activity score (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73-0.99) and of 0.92 for the damage score (95% CI = 0.85-1.00). The Spearman's rho (Sp) for intra-rater reliability for the activity score was 0.96 (95% CI = 0.89 to 1.00) and for the damage score Sp was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.97-1.00). Clinical responsiveness needs to be evaluated in a prospective clinical trial, which is ongoing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor donepezil in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: A total of 270 patients with MCI were enrolled in a 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomized to receive donepezil (n = 133; 5 mg/day for 42 days, followed by forced dose escalation to 10 mg/day) or placebo (n = 137). Primary efficacy measures were the New York University (NYU) Paragraph Delayed Recall test and the Alzheimer disease (AD) Cooperative Study Clinician's Global Impression of Change for MCI (ADCS CGIC-MCI). Secondary efficacy measures included the modified AD Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog), the Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and additional neuropsychologic measures. Efficacy analyses were performed on intent-to-treat (ITT) and fully evaluable (FE) populations. RESULTS: Primary efficacy measures of the NYU Paragraph Recall test and the ADCS CGIC-MCI did not show significant treatment effects in the ITT population. Some secondary measures showed effects favoring donepezil. More donepezil-treated patients showed improvements in ADAS-cog total scores, in tests of attention and psychomotor speed, and in PGA scores. More donepezil-treated than placebo-treated patients experienced adverse events, most of which were mild to moderate and transient. CONCLUSION: Although significant treatment effects were not seen in the primary efficacy measures, outcomes on secondary measures suggest promising directions for further evaluation of donepezil treatment in patients with MCI.

In this paper we discuss a number of issues that are pertinent to the analysis of disease mapping data. As an illustrative example we consider the mapping of larynx cancer across electoral wards in the North West Thames region of the U.K. Bayesian hierarchical models are now frequently employed to carry out such mapping. In a typical situation, a three-stage hierarchical model is specified in which the data are modelled as a function of area-specific relative risks at stage one; the collection of relative risks across the study region are modelled at stage two; and at stage three prior distributions are assigned to parameters of the stage two distribution. Such models allow area-specific disease relative risks to be 'smoothed' towards global and/or local mean levels across the study region. However, these models contain many structural and functional assumptions at different levels of the hierarchy; we aim to discuss some of these assumptions and illustrate their sensitivity. When relative risks are the endpoint of interest, it is common practice to assume that, for each of the age-sex strata of a particular area, there is a common multiplier (the relative risk) acting upon each of the stratum-specific risks in that area; we will examine this proportionality assumption. We also consider the choices of models and priors at stages two and three of the hierarchy, the effect of outlying areas, and an assessment of the level of smoothing that is being carried out. For inference, we concentrate on the description of the spatial variability in relative risks and on the association between the relative risks of larynx cancer and an area-level measure of socio-economic status.