Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Racial and ethnic disparities are a concern in lung cancer screening. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To investigate the performance of risk prediction models to define screening eligibility across 4 U.S. racial and ethnic groups. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Cohort study. SETTING/UNASSIGNED:United States, Lung Cancer Cohort Consortium. PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:641 830 participants aged 50 to 80 years with a smoking history from 12 U.S. cohorts, including 6390 Asian, 9781 Hispanic, 39 872 non-Hispanic Black, and 585 787 non-Hispanic White participants. MEASUREMENTS/UNASSIGNED:Calibration and discrimination were quantified for 16 lung cancer prediction models. Then, screening-related metrics were calculated after applying model thresholds to select the same number of eligible participants as the 2021 criteria from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF-2021). These included eligibility, sensitivity, and efficiency measured as estimated number needed to screen (NNS; the ratio between participants and lung cancer cases) for each strategy or prediction model in each racial and ethnic group. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:General patterns across the 16 models included substantial underestimation of lung cancer risk in non-Hispanic Black participants (expected-observed ratio < 0.75 for 11 of 16 models), lower discrimination in Asian participants than all other groups (13 of 16 models), and lower discrimination in non-Hispanic Black than non-Hispanic White participants (15 of 16 models). When a same-sized screening-eligible population as USPSTF-2021 (38.0%) was enforced, all risk-based strategies achieved better average estimated screening efficiency and reduced racial and ethnic differences in efficiency compared with USPSTF-2021. The Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Model 2012 (PLCOm2012) and Life Years gained From Screening-Computed Tomography model (LYFS-CT) performed best (mean estimated NNS, 36.5 [SD, 8.8] and 40.1 [SD, 8.2], respectively). However, no strategy could simultaneously optimize eligibility, sensitivity, and efficiency while also reducing racial and ethnic differences. LIMITATION/UNASSIGNED:Smaller sample for Asian and Hispanic participants. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:To optimize efficiency and minimize its variation across racial and ethnic groups, risk-based strategies were superior to USPSTF criteria. Further optimization of prediction models for the diverse U.S. population is needed. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE/UNASSIGNED:U.S. National Cancer Institute, Lung Cancer Research Foundation, and Cancer Research UK.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:amp prevalence, molecular subtype, and histologic associations, as well as prognostic impact across diverse genetic ancestries using a large clinicogenomic database (CGDB). METHODS:amp prevalence, histologic and molecular correlations, and associations with OS were examined. RESULTS: CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:

OBJECTIVE:To assess perceived stress levels and to identify key stressors before and after planned oocyte cryopreservation. DESIGN/METHODS:Cross-sectional mixed methods study. SETTING/METHODS:Academic fertility center. SUBJECTS/METHODS:Patients who underwent their first planned oocyte cryopreservation cycle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:Comparison of composite Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10) scores before and after oocyte cryopreservation, and qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts. EXPOSURE/METHODS:Planned oocyte cryopreservation. RESULTS:Of the 471 pre-oocyte cryopreservation orientees contacted, 110 (23.4%) volunteered to participate and 81 (17.2%) were ultimately included in the study analysis after completing both the pre- and post-oocyte cryopreservation surveys; 20 participated in post-treatment interviews. The median composite PSS-10 score was 17 before and after oocyte cryopreservation, indicating moderate perceived stress that did not significantly change after cycle completion. Before oocyte cryopreservation, the most commonly reported stressors were procedural, occupational, and partner-related. Afterwards, procedural stressors largely shifted toward outcome-related concerns. Qualitative analysis identified six major themes influencing stress throughout treatment: financial considerations, medication management, physical and logistical demands, stress surrounding fertility, support systems, and a sense of empowerment coupled with future uncertainty. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:By integrating quantitative and qualitative findings, this study provides a nuanced understanding of how stress is shaped by financial, procedural, occupational, and emotional factors across the oocyte cryopreservation process. These insights may inform more tailored pre-cycle counseling, strengthen patient-centered support infrastructure, and guide the development of targeted interventions to improve the emotional and psychological well-being of planned oocyte cryopreservation patients.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To assess efficacy and adverse outcomes of misoprostol 200mcg versus 400mcg every three hours buccal or vaginal for medication abortion (MAb) from 24-27 weeks' gestation. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:This retrospective cohort study included MAbs from 24 0/7-27 0/7 weeks' gestation at Bellevue Hospital from 7/2022-6/2025. All patients received digoxin 2mg intraamniotic injection and mifepristone 200mg oral followed at 24-48hrs by misoprostol 200mcg or 400mcg every three hours buccal or vaginal based on hospital policy at time of admission. The primary outcome was time from first misoprostol dose to placental expulsion. Secondary outcomes were procedural complications. Primary statistical analysis was performed with Fisher's exact and Wilcox rank-sum tests. RESULTS:Of 55 patients, 27 (49%) received 200mcg doses of misoprostol and 28 (51%) received 400mcg doses of misoprostol. Median time to expulsion was 13hrs in the 200mcg group versus 9.5hrs in the 400mcg group (p=0.144). More patients in the 200mcg group versus the 400mcg group had blood loss ≥500mL (11.1% vs 0%, p=0.11) and retained placenta at four hours (3.7% vs 0%, p=0.49). No patients in either group had uterine rupture. CONCLUSIONS:Misoprostol 200mcg versus 400mcg every three hours buccal or vaginal for MAb from 24-27 weeks' gestation had overall similar outcomes. Although this single site retrospective study is underpowered to significantly differentiate between the two regimens, we observe that 200mcg dosing may be associated with higher risk of complications. Larger studies are needed to clarify optimal misoprostol dosing for 24-27 week MAb. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:For medication abortion from 24-27 weeks' gestation, serial doses of misoprostol 200mcg versus 400mcg every three hours have similar rates of complications, though there is a signal that 200mcg dosing may be associated with longer time to expulsion, higher blood loss, and more incidences of retained placenta.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate the safety of alopecia treatments during pregnancy, in-vitro fertilization (IVF), and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) workup, with a focus on potential maternal and fetal risks. DATA SOURCES/UNASSIGNED:A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from November 2024 to December 2024. Search terms included medication names in combination with "pregnancy," "IVF," "in-vitro fertilization," and "PCOS." STUDY SELECTION/UNASSIGNED:Peer-reviewed studies addressing the use of therapies for androgenetic alopecia, alopecia areata, and scarring alopecias in the contexts of pregnancy, IVF, and PCOS were included. Articles evaluating maternal safety, fetal risks, and treatment timing were prioritized. Only English-language publications were reviewed. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Despite increasing therapeutic options for alopecia, significant knowledge gaps remain regarding their safety during pregnancy. Pregnant women are often excluded from clinical trials, leading to a reliance on older treatments with limited data on dosing or pharmacokinetics in the pregnant population. Unfortunately, there are few alopecia medications with robust safety data in pregnancy, and many medications are contraindicated during this period. Some medications may be used with caution, while others require additional investigation. During IVF, there are alopecia medications with potential benefit in women experiencing implantation failure or PCOS. For patients undergoing PCOS workup, some alopecia medications may impact hormonal labs or mask PCOS symptoms. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:There is a critical need for more targeted research on alopecia treatments in pregnancy, IVF, and PCOS contexts. This review provides current evidence to guide clinicians and support informed, individualized treatment decisions during this vulnerable period.

OBJECTIVE:To report updated patient-reported (PRO) health-related quality of life (HRQOL) findings and evaluate the effect of disease progression on HRQOL using data from the final analysis of the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial. METHODS:Patients were randomized 2:1 to niraparib first-line maintenance or placebo. Longitudinal HRQOL was a prespecified secondary endpoint assessed via European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL-Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and -Ovarian Cancer module (EORTC QLQ-OV28), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Ovarian Cancer Symptom Index (FOSI), and EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire with visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). Post hoc analyses evaluated least-squares mean change from baseline or last on-treatment visit before disease progression (clinical cutoff: April 8, 2024). RESULTS:Questionnaire completion rates exceeded 89% through cycle 24 and were 80% at end of treatment. Early differences in gastrointestinal symptom scores between arms resolved over time, and no differences in overall HRQOL were observed. Disease progression reduced overall HRQOL across arms, with marked reductions in EORTC QLQ-C30 overall HRQOL, FOSI, and EQ-VAS scores that never recovered to pre-progression levels. Progression also resulted in sustained deterioration across all EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 functional scales and worsening symptom scores, particularly for fatigue, dyspnea, pain, and appetite loss. Similar results were observed when patients were evaluated by homologous recombination deficiency status. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In the final PRIMA PRO analysis, results confirmed that niraparib first-line maintenance did not negatively affect HRQOL versus placebo. Disease progression caused sustained HRQOL deterioration across arms, emphasizing the clinical importance of extending progression-free survival to preserve patient HRQOL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:NCT02655016.

INTRODUCTION/UNASSIGNED:There is uncertainty about the benefits of cerclage in patients with transvaginal cervical length (TVCL) ≤10 mm and no prior spontaneous preterm birth. Our aim was to assess whether cervical cerclage in these patients was associated with prolonged pregnancy latency. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:This was an observational study of asymptomatic singleton pregnancies without a history of spontaneous preterm birth with extremely short cervix (TVCL ≤10 mm) in the second trimester. Exposure and outcome data were extracted manually from medical charts by obstetric providers, with all outcomes occurring prior to study initiation. All patients were prescribed vaginal progesterone and those with a cervical dilation >1.5 cm were excluded. The primary outcome was time interval from diagnosis to delivery (or 37 weeks' gestation, whichever occurred first). Secondary outcomes included gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes. We adjusted for parity and used log-binomial regression to estimate the relative risk for categorical variables and linear regression to estimate mean differences for continuous variables. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:There were 247 patients with TVCL ≤10 mm during anatomy scan. After exclusions, 87 remained, of which 55 (63.2%) received cervical cerclage. At the time of diagnosis, the mean cervical length was 5.8 mm (cerclage group) versus 7.4mm (no cerclage group, difference: -1.6, 95% CI -0.6, -2.6) and the gestational age was 21.0 weeks (cerclage group) versus 22.1 weeks (no cerclage group, -1.1, 95% CI -1.8, -0.3). Mean pregnancy latency was longer in the cerclage group compared to the no cerclage group (13.4 vs 11.1 weeks, 2.2, 95% CI -0.3, 4.9), though there was a high level of uncertainty in the estimate. Term delivery occurred 30% more often in the cerclage group compared to the no cerclage group (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.96, 1.79). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:In our cohort, patients with extremely short cervix who received a cerclage had longer pregnancy latency than those who did not receive cerclage and more patients achieved term gestation, suggesting a potential benefit of cerclage in this population. However, given the high level of uncertainty of our estimates, additional research is needed to investigate these findings.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study evaluates how access to abortion training influenced OBGYN residents who selected residency programs before and after the Dobbs decision. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Current OBGYN residents completed a survey in January 2024 as part of their annual in-training exam. Residents rated the importance of abortion training and compared access to abortion training to other factors (e.g., residency culture and happiness, geographic location) when selecting and ranking programs. We computed the percentage of residents reporting abortion training as important and a top factor when ranking programs. We used chi-squared test to compare differences between cohorts. RESULTS:Of the 6,134 residents surveyed, 3,182 consented to participation and had complete responses (52%). Overall, 2,281 (72%) considered abortion training important when choosing programs and 2,179 (69%) when ranking programs; 1,105 (71%) of post-Dobbs and 1,074 (66%) of pre-Dobbs residents considered abortion training important when ranking programs (p<0.01). Access to abortion training was a top three factor for 741 (23%) respondents when ranking programs. More post-Dobbs (392, 25%) than pre-Dobbs residents (349, 21%) considered access to abortion training as a top factor when ranking programs (p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Applicants weigh a variety of factors when selecting programs and may match to abortion restricted environments - this includes the 23% who considered abortion training a top factor. Future work should continue to focus on the impact of the Dobbs decision on residency program selection and the ability of all residents to develop abortion-care skills. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Abortion training is an important consideration in residency program selection and essential for patient care. Without prioritization of abortion education, programs risk losing viable candidates and graduating residents without essential skills.

BACKGROUND:Preterm birth (PTB, < 37 weeks of gestation) is the leading cause of child mortality in the United States (U.S.) and worldwide, and has substantial short- and long-term health consequences for mothers and infants. Each year, > 350,000 infants in the U.S. are born preterm, and rates continue to rise in parallel with maternal risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, anemia, asthma, and mental health conditions. Evidence-based interventions exist for many of these conditions and are associated with improved pregnancy outcomes, including low-dose aspirin for preeclampsia prevention in individuals with chronic hypertension or pregestational diabetes, inhalers for asthma, iron for anemia, and therapy or medication for mental health disorders, but fewer than half of eligible individuals receive them, reflecting persistent gaps in use. To address this, we developed the PTB Actionable Risk Index (PTB-ARIx), which leverages factors with known evidence-based interventions to identify individuals who are pregnant and are at increased risk for PTB. This study evaluates performance of the PTB-ARIx throughout pregnancy with respect to risk determination and characterization of actionable risk factors, including their combined contributions to PTB. METHODS:A retrospective cohort study was conducted using linked data for 1.9 million singleton live births in California in 2016-2020, divided into training and testing sets. Poisson regression estimated associations between 18 candidate risk factors for PTB with evidence-based interventions spanning clinical, behavioral, and social risks, including preeclampsia risk composites (≥ 1 high-risk or ≥ 2 moderate-risk factors based on U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria), maternal conditions (e.g., gestational hypertension, asthma), substance use, and social adversity. Beta coefficients were combined to construct the PTB-ARIx, evaluated by per-unit associations with PTB and by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) overall, by early (< 32 weeks), late (32-36 weeks), spontaneous, and medically-indicated PTB, and by PTB co-occurring with preeclampsia. FINDINGS/RESULTS:All risk factors were found to be associated with increased PTB risk. Having ≥ 1 high-risk or ≥ 2 moderate-risk factors for preeclampsia (based on composites) was most strongly related to PTB (relative risk (RR) 6.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.57, 6.89). Each unit increase in PTB-ARIx was associated with > 60% higher PTB risk (RRs 1.66-1.72) across training and testing samples, with consistent findings across PTB and race/ethnicity-insurance subgroups. Model performance was modest for late PTB (AUC ≈ 0.63), stronger for early PTB (0.69-0.72), and especially high for early PTB with preeclampsia (AUCs up to 0.97). Over 70% of individuals with PTB-ARIx scores ≥ 3.00 experienced PTB or another adverse outcome such as low birth weight (< 2,500 grams). CONCLUSIONS:The PTB-ARIx is a well-performing metric for identifying individuals at increased risk for PTB and other adverse pregnancy outcomes. By centering on modifiable risks, the PTB-ARIx combines risk identification with opportunities for intervention. Demonstrating strong performance across subgroups, including for early PTB and PTB with preeclampsia, the PTB-ARIx provides a potential pathway to improve patient-provider communication and uptake of equitable, evidence-based care. Further validation, including integration with treatment data, is needed to confirm its potential to reduce PTB risk and rates.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:. those who proceeded directly to mTESE. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective cohort study of 73 male patients with NOA or cryptozoospermia severe enough to qualify for mTESE at NYU Langone Fertility Center between 2018 and 2024. Patients were categorized based on their initial intervention: ESSM-first group (n=45), in which ESSM was attempted prior to surgical retrieval, and an mTESE-first group (n=28), in which patients proceeded directly to surgery. The primary outcome was overall sperm identification rate per patient. Secondary outcomes included sperm retrieval success from mTESE after failed ESSM, and among patient proceeding to in vitro fertilization (IVF) with ICSI, fertilization rate, blastocyst formation rate, euploid rate, and live birth rate. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:. 46%, P=0.66). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:In men with NOA or cryptozoospermia eligible for surgical sperm retrieval, an ESSM-first strategy was associated with higher overall sperm identification rates while preserving comparable reproductive outcomes among those proceeding to IVF with ICSI. These findings support consideration of ESSM as an initial, non-invasive strategy prior to mTESE in appropriately selected patients.