Search

Scott G Pritzlaff,1 Johnathan H Goree,2 Jonathan M Hagedorn,3 David W Lee,4 Kenneth B Chapman,5 Sandy Christiansen,6 Andrew Dudas,7 Alexander Escobar,8 Christopher J Gilligan,9 Maged Guirguis,10 Amitabh Gulati,11 Jessica Jameson,12 Christopher J Mallard,13 Melissa Murphy,14 Kiran V Patel,15 Raj G Patel,16 Samir J Sheth,17 Stephanie Vanterpool,18 Vinita Singh,19 Gregory Smith,2 Natalie H Strand,20 Chau M Vu,21 Tolga Suvar,22 Krishnan Chakravarthy,23 Leonardo Kapural,24 Michael S Leong,25 Timothy R Lubenow,22 Alaa Abd-Elsayed,26 Jason E Pope,21 Dawood Sayed,27 Timothy R Deer28 1Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA; 3Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 4Fullerton Orthopedic Surgery Medical Group, Fullerton, CA, USA; 5The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New York, NY, USA; 6Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA; 7Mays & Schnapp Neurospine and Pain, Memphis, TN, USA; 8Department of Anesthesiology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA; 9Division of Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; 10Division of Pain Management, Ochsner Health, New Orleans, LA, USA; 11Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; 12Axis Spine Center, Coeur D’Alene, ID, USA; 13Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA; 14North Texas Orthopedics and Spine Center, Grapevine, TX, USA; 15Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Northwell Health, Hempstead, NY, USA; 16Capitol Pain Institute, Austin, TX, USA; 17Interventional Pain Management, Sutter Health, Roseville, CA, USA; 18Department of Anesthesiology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA; 19Department of Anesthesiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA; 20Interventional Pain Management, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA; 21Evolve Restorative Center, Santa Rosa, CA, USA; 22Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA; 23Coastal Pain and Spinal Diagnostics Medical Group, San Diego, CA, USA; 24Carolinas Pain Institute, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 25Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; 26Department of Anesthesiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; 27Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA; 28The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USACorrespondence: Scott G Pritzlaff, University of California, Davis, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3020, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA, Tel +1 916 734-6824, Fax +1 916 734-6827, Email spritzlaff@ucdavis.eduAbstract: The need to be competent in neuromodulation is and should be a prerequisite prior to completing a fellowship in interventional pain medicine. Unfortunately, many programs lack acceptable candidates for these advanced therapies, and fellows may not receive adequate exposure to neuromodulation procedures. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) desires to create a consensus of experts to set a minimum standard of competence for neurostimulation procedures, including spinal cord stimulation (SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S), and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). The executive board of ASPN accepted nominations for colleagues with excellence in the subject matter of neuromodulation and physician education. This diverse group used peer-reviewed literature and, based on grading of evidence and expert opinion, developed critical consensus guides for training that all accredited fellowship programs should adopt. For each consensus point, transparency and recusal were used to eliminate bias, and an author was nominated for evidence grading oversight and bias control. Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation sets a standard for neuromodulation training in pain fellowship training programs. The consensus panel has determined several recommendations to improve care in the United States for patients undergoing neuromodulation. As neuromodulation training in the United States has evolved dramatically, these therapies have become ubiquitous in pain medicine. Unfortunately, fellowship programs and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) pain program requirements have not progressed training to match the demands of modern advancements. PEAK sets a new standard for fellowship training and presents thirteen practice areas vital for physician competence in neuromodulation.Keywords: neuromodulation, pain education, spinal cord stimulation, dorsal root ganglion stimulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, fellowship training

Kenneth B Chapman,1– 3 Dawood Sayed,4 Tim Lamer,5 Corey Hunter,6 Jacqueline Weisbein,7 Kiran V Patel,1– 3 David Dickerson,8,9 Jonathan M Hagedorn,10 David W Lee,11 Kasra Amirdelfan,12 Timothy Deer,13 Krishnan Chakravarthy14,15 1The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New York, NY, USA; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, Manhasset, NY, USA; 3Department of Anesthesiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 4Department of Anesthesiology, The University of Kansas Medical Center (KUMC), Kansas City, KS, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 6Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, New York, NY, USA; 7Napa Valley Orthopedic Medical Group, Napa, CA, USA; 8Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA; 9Department of Anesthesia & Critical Care, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; 10iSpine Pain Physicians, Maple Grove, MN, USA; 11Fullerton Orthopedic Surgery Medical Group, Fullerton, CA, USA; 12IPM Medical Group, Inc., Walnut Creek, CA, USA; 13The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA; 14Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of California San Diego Health Sciences, San Diego, CA, USA; 15VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA, USACorrespondence: Kenneth B Chapman, NYU Langone Medical Center, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Pain Medicine at Staten Island University Hospital, 1360 Hylan Boulevard, Staten Island, NY, 10305, USA, Email chapmanken@spinepainny.comAbstract: With continued innovations in neuromodulation comes the need for evolving reviews of best practices. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) has significantly improved the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), and it has broad applicability across a wide range of other conditions. Through funding and organizational leadership by the American Society for Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN), this best practices consensus document has been developed for the selection, implantation, and use of DRG stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes. This document is composed of a comprehensive narrative literature review that has been performed regarding the role of the DRG in chronic pain and the clinical evidence for DRG-S as a treatment for multiple pain etiologies. Best practice recommendations encompass safety management, implantation techniques, and mitigation of the potential complications reported in the literature. Looking to the future of neuromodulation, DRG-S holds promise as a robust intervention for otherwise intractable pain.Keywords: dorsal root ganglion, neurostimulation, chronic pain, best practice, guidelines

Dawood Sayed,1 Ramana K Naidu,2,3 Kiran V Patel,4 Natalie H Strand,5 Pankaj Mehta,6 Christopher M Lam,1 Vinicius Tieppo Francio,7 Samir Sheth,8 Anthony Giuffrida,9 Brian Durkin,10 Nasir Khatri,11 Shashank Vodapally,12 Christopher O James,13 Benjamin D Westerhaus,9 Adam Rupp,7 Newaj M Abdullah,14 Kasra Amirdelfan,15 Erika A Petersen,16 Douglas P Beall,17 Timothy R Deer18 1Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 2Anesthesiology, California Orthopedics & Spine, Marin, CA, USA; 3Pain Management, MarinHealth Medical Center, Marin, CA, USA; 4Interventional Pain Management/ Anesthesiology, The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New York City, NY, USA; 5Interventional Pain Management, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA; 6Clinical Research, Pain Specialists of Austin, Austin, TX, USA; 7Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 8Interventional Pain Management, Sutter Health, Roseville, CA, USA; 9Cantor Spine Center, Paley Orthopedic and Spine Institute, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA; 10Pain Institute of Long Island, Port Jefferson, NY, USA; 11Interventional Pain Medicine, Novant Health, Charlotte, NC, USA; 12Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA; 13Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA; 14Pain Medicine and Anesthesiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 15Clinical Research, IPM Medical Group, Inc, Walnut Creek, CA, USA; 16Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, Little Rock, AR, USA; 17Comprehensive Specialty Care, Edmond, OK, USA; 18The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USACorrespondence: Dawood Sayed, The University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA, Tel +1 913-588-5521, Email dsayed1@yahoo.comAbstract: Chronic low back pain is a worldwide leading cause of pain and disability. Degenerative disc disease has been the presumptive etiology in the majority of cases of chronic low back pain (CLBP). More recent study and treatments have discovered that the vertebral endplates play a large role in CLBP in a term defined as vertebrogenic back pain. As the vertebral endplates are highly innervated via the basivertebral nerve (BVN), this has resulted in a reliable target in treating patients suffering from vertebrogenic low back pain (VLBP). The application of BVN ablation for patients suffering from VLBP is still in its early stages of adoption and integration into spine care pathways. BVN ablation is grounded in a solid foundation of both pre-clinical and clinical evidence. With the emergence of this therapeutic option, the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified the need for formal evidence-based guidelines for the proper identification and selection of patients for BVN ablation in patients with VLBP. ASPN formed a multidisciplinary work group tasked to examine the available literature and form best practice guidelines on this subject. Based on the United States Preventative Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for grading evidence, gives BVN ablation Level A grade evidence with high certainty that the net benefit is substantial in appropriately selected individuals.Keywords: back pain, vertebrogenic pain, lumbar degenerative disc, radiofrequency ablation, basivertebral nerve, guidelines

Introduction: Chronic pain is a personal experience influenced by multiple biopsychosocial factors. Using a pain intensity measure alone to assess the effectiveness of a chronic pain intervention fails to fully evaluate its impact on the multifaceted chronic pain experience. The holistic minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a composite outcome developed to provide a comprehensive assessment of chronic pain in response to intervention, across 5 outcome domains: pain intensity, health-related quality of life, sleep quality, physical, and emotional function. To focus on domains where the individual need is greatest, the holistic MCID reflects the cumulative MCID averaged over only the domains where subjects were impaired preintervention., Objectives: To assess the internal and construct validity of the Holistic MCID score to inform its future use as an evidence-based tool., Methods: This validation study was undertaken using data from the EVOKE trial with 111 patients up to 24-month follow-up. Internal consistency of the holistic MCID was assessed using Cronbach alpha statistic and dimensional exploration using principal component analysis., Results: The holistic MCID measure demonstrated strong internal consistency with Cronbach alpha >0.7 at all follow-ups. Principal component analysis showed one overarching holistic dimension to be present in the composite. Construct validity was demonstrated by an increase in the holistic MCID score being associated with both increased Patients' Global Impression of Change, EuroQol visual analogue scale score, and each of the outcome domains in a "leave-one-out" analysis (all P < 0.001)., Conclusion: The holistic MCID provides a valid measure for the comprehensive, personalized assessment of response after a chronic pain intervention. The validity of the holistic MCID requires further confirmation in other chronic pain populations and with different interventions., Competing Interests: R.S.T. reports consultancy fees from Medtronic, Nevro and Saluda Medical outside the submitted work. C.M.M. is employed by NAMSA, a company that provides consulting and testing services to medical device manufacturers. N.A.M. reports receiving grants from Neuros, Mesoblast, and Vivex Biologics, as well as consulting as a medical monitor for Saluda Medical, Nevro, Vivex Biologics, Mainstay, Sollis Therapeutics, and Vertos outside the submitted work. J.W.K. is an advisory board member for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott, and Saluda Medical. J.E.P. reports research and consulting fees from Saluda Medical during the conduct of the study; consultancy for Abbott, Medtronic, Saluda Medical, Flowonix, SpineThera, Vertos, Vertiflex, SPR Therapeutics, Tersera, Aurora, Spark, Ethos, Biotronik, Mainstay, WISE, Boston Scientific, and Thermaquil outside the submitted work; has received grant and research support from: Abbott, Flowonix, Aurora, Painteq, Ethos, Muse, Boston Scientific, SPR Therapeutics, Mainstay, Vertos, AIS, and Thermaquil outside the submitted work; and is a shareholder of Vertos, SPR Therapeutics, Painteq, Aurora, Spark, Celeri Health, Neural Integrative Solutions, Pacific Research Institute, Thermaquil, and Anesthetic Gas Reclamation. C.W.H. has received consultancy fees from Saluda Medical and Genecentrix outside the submitted work. S.J.C. reports receiving grants from Saluda Medical, Vertos, Mainstay, and Vivex outside the submitted work. L.K. reports receiving grants from Nevro, Neuros, Avanos, Medtronic, Neuralace, and Xalud Therapeutics and financial support from Nevro, Avanos, and Saluda Medical outside the submitted work. C.A.G. reports personal fees and other from SPR, and personal fees from Nevro, Nalu, Biotronik, Boston Scientific and Saluda Medical outside the submitted work. E.A.P. has received research support from Mainstay, Medtronic, Neuros Medical, Nevro Corp, ReNeuron, SPR, and Saluda Medical outside the submitted work, as well as personal fees from Abbott Neuromodulation, Biotronik, Medtronic Neuromodulation, Nalu, Neuros Medical, Nevro, Presidio Medical, Saluda Medical, and Vertos outside the submitted work. She holds stock options from SynerFuse and neuro42. K.V.P. is a consultant and speaker for Abbott. S.E. reports consultancy fees from Medtronic, and Mainstay Medical outside the submitted work. He has received department research funding from the National Institute of Health Research, Saluda Medical and Medtronic. R.M.L. is an uncompensated consultant for Biotronik, Abbott, Nalu, Saluda Medical, and Mainstay Medical and has stock options from Nalu and Saluda Medical. C.G. reports payment to his institution (for part of his salary) and stock options received from Mainstay, personal fees from Mainstay, Saluda Medical, Persica, and Iliad outside the submitted work, research funded by Sollis, expert witness testimony fees, and serves as Editor-in-Chief of Pain Practice. S.D. has received consulting payments from Averitas Pharma and Biotronik outside the submitted work. A.A. reports consultancy for Medtronic, Avanos, and StimWave outside the submitted work. P.B. reports consulting fees from Abbott and PainTEQ outside the submitted work. E.H., A.L., N.S. and R.V.D. are employees of Saluda Medical. R.V.D. has previously received consultancy fees from Mainstay Medical, Medtronic, and Saluda Medical. D.J.C. has consulted for AbbVie, Heron Therapeutics, Aptinyx, Neumentum, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Swing Therapeutics, Virios Therapeutics, Allergan Sales, Eli Lilly and Company, H. Lundback A/S, Pfizer, Samumed, Tonix Pharmaceuticals. T.J.N. has received consultancy fees from Saluda Medical outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Chronic pain affects a substantial portion of the population, posing a significant health challenge. Current treatments often come with limitations and side effects, necessitating novel therapeutic approaches. Our study focuses on disrupting the Cav3.2-USP5 interaction as a strategy for chronic pain management. Through structure-activity relationship studies of a tetrahydroquinoline (THQ) scaffold, we identified a family of lead molecules that demonstrated potent inhibition of the Cav3.2-USP5 interaction. In vitro pharmacokinetic assessments and in vivo studies support the efficacy and drug-like properties of the lead compounds in mouse models of acute and chronic pain. Dependence on the Cav3.2 channels was validated in Cav3.2 null mice, consistent with the proposed mode of action of these small molecules. These findings provide a novel chronic pain treatment strategy, highlighting the potential of these small molecules for further development.

Abstract: Pragmatic, randomized, controlled trials hold the potential to directly inform clinical decision making and health policy regarding the treatment of people experiencing pain. Pragmatic trials are designed to replicate or are embedded within routine clinical care and are increasingly valued to bridge the gap between trial research and clinical practice, especially in multidimensional conditions, such as pain and in nonpharmacological intervention research. To maximize the potential of pragmatic trials in pain research, the careful consideration of each methodological decision is required. Trials aligned with routine practice pose several challenges, such as determining and enrolling appropriate study participants, deciding on the appropriate level of flexibility in treatment delivery, integrating information on concomitant treatments and adherence, and choosing comparator conditions and outcome measures. Ensuring data quality in real-world clinical settings is another challenging goal. Furthermore, current trials in the field would benefit from analysis methods that allow for a differentiated understanding of effects across patient subgroups and improved reporting of methods and context, which is required to assess the generalizability of findings. At the same time, a range of novel methodological approaches provide opportunities for enhanced efficiency and relevance of pragmatic trials to stakeholders and clinical decision making. In this study, best-practice considerations for these and other concerns in pragmatic trials of pain treatments are offered and a number of promising solutions discussed. The basis of these recommendations was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background: Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) prevent heart failure (HF) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) but prescription rates are low. The effect of an electronic health record (EHR) alert notifying providers of patients' estimated risk of developing HF on SGTL2i prescriptions is unknown., Methods: This was a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that compared an EHR alert and usual care among patients with T2DM and no history of HF or SGLT2i use at a single center. The EHR alert notified providers of their patient's HF risk and recommended HF prevention strategies. Randomization was performed at the provider level across general and subspecialty internal medicine as well as family medicine outpatient clinics. The primary outcome was proportion of SGLT2i prescriptions within 30 days. Proportion of natriuretic peptide (NP) tests within 90 days was also assessed., Results: A total of 1524 patients (median age 75 years, 45% women, 23% Black) were enrolled between September 28, 2021, and April 29, 2022 from 189 outpatient clinics. SGLT2i were prescribed to 1.2% (9/780) of patients in the EHR alert group and 0% (0/744) of those in the usual care group ( P value = 0.009). Natriuretic peptide testing was performed within 90 days among 10.8% (84/780) of patients in the EHR alert group and 7.3% (54/744) of patients in the usual care group ( P value = 0.02)., Conclusions: In a single-center trial with low overall SGLT2i use, an EHR alert incorporating HF risk information significantly increased SGLT2i prescriptions and NP testing although the absolute rates were low., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: MWS has received personal fees from Merck and serves on the advisory board at descendants DNA. KVP has received consultant fees from NovoNordisk. NK has received consultant fees from HeartSciences and Tricog Health. AP received grant funding outside this study from National Institute of Health, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Roche Diagnostics, and Applied Therapeutics; has received honoraria outside of this study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly, USA, Rivus, Roche Diagnostics, Axon Therapies, Semler Scientific, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Science37, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Merck, Sarfez Pharamcuticals, Emmi Solutions, Palomarin Inc (Stocks compensation) and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Aims: Abnormalities in specific echocardiographic parameters and cardiac biomarkers have been reported among individuals with diabetes. However, a comprehensive characterization of diabetic cardiomyopathy (DbCM), a subclinical stage of myocardial abnormalities that precede the development of clinical heart failure (HF), is lacking. In this study, we developed and validated a machine learning-based clustering approach to identify the high-risk DbCM phenotype based on echocardiographic and cardiac biomarker parameters., Methods and Results: Among individuals with diabetes from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) cohort who were free of cardiovascular disease and other potential aetiologies of cardiomyopathy (training, n = 1199), unsupervised hierarchical clustering was performed using echocardiographic parameters and cardiac biomarkers of neurohormonal stress and chronic myocardial injury (total 25 variables). The high-risk DbCM phenotype was identified based on the incidence of HF on follow-up. A deep neural network (DeepNN) classifier was developed to predict DbCM in the ARIC training cohort and validated in an external community-based cohort (Cardiovascular Health Study [CHS]; n = 802) and an electronic health record (EHR) cohort (n = 5071). Clustering identified three phenogroups in the derivation cohort. Phenogroup-3 (n = 324, 27% of the cohort) had significantly higher 5-year HF incidence than other phenogroups (12.1% vs. 4.6% [phenogroup 2] vs. 3.1% [phenogroup 1]) and was identified as the high-risk DbCM phenotype. The key echocardiographic predictors of high-risk DbCM phenotype were higher NT-proBNP levels, increased left ventricular mass and left atrial size, and worse diastolic function. In the CHS and University of Texas (UT) Southwestern EHR validation cohorts, the DeepNN classifier identified 16% and 29% of participants with DbCM, respectively. Participants with (vs. without) high-risk DbCM phenotype in the external validation cohorts had a significantly higher incidence of HF (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.61 [1.18-2.19] in CHS and 1.34 [1.08-1.65] in the UT Southwestern EHR cohort)., Conclusion: Machine learning-based techniques may identify 16% to 29% of individuals with diabetes as having a high-risk DbCM phenotype who may benefit from more aggressive implementation of HF preventive strategies., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: The objective was to examine the associations of number and type of chronic conditions with use of rehabilitation services among older adults with bothersome back pain., Methods: We conducted a cohort study using the National Health and Aging Trends Study, a longitudinal survey of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years. We included community-dwelling older adults with bothersome back pain in 2015. We assessed 12 self-reported chronic conditions, including arthritis, depression, and anxiety. We used 2016 data to ascertain self-reported use of any rehabilitation services in the prior year. We used weighted, logistic regression to examine the association of conditions with rehabilitation use., Results: The sample size was 2443. A majority were age ≥ 75 years (59%); female (62%); and White, non-Hispanic (71%). The median number of chronic conditions was 3 (interquartile range, 2-4). Arthritis was the most common chronic condition (73%); 14% had anxiety and 16% had depression. For every additional chronic condition, adjusted odds of any rehabilitation use increased 21% (Odds Ratio = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.11-1.31). Those with ≥4 chronic conditions had 2.13 times higher odds (95% CI: 1.36-3.34) of any rehabilitation use in the next year versus those with 0-1 condition. Participants with arthritis had 1.96 times higher odds (95% CI: 1.41-2.72) of any rehabilitation use versus those without arthritis. Anxiety and depression were not significantly associated with rehabilitation use., Conclusions: Among older adults with back pain, a greater number of chronic conditions and arthritis were associated with higher use of rehabilitation services. Those with anxiety or depression had no difference in their use of rehabilitation care versus those without these conditions., Impact Statement: This pattern suggests appropriate use of rehabilitation for patients with back pain and multiple chronic conditions based on greater need, but there may be potential underuse for those with back pain and psychological conditions., (© 2024 American Physical Therapy Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

There is growing evidence that a relationship exists between mental and emotional wellbeing and the gut microbiota. Little is known regarding how the microbiota reacts to repeated acute stress events in dogs, and whether it is a predictor of stress response. In this study, we explored the impact on the gut microbiota and digestive health with two common events many pet dogs find stressful. Twenty healthy adult dogs, living within a colony, were exposed to either car travel or separation three times across eight-week intervals. Faecal samples were collected 24 h before, within 24 h, and 24-48 h after. Faecal quality and pH, and microbiota diversity and composition were analysed in context with wider published work on physiological stress measures. No significant changes were observed in faecal quality or pH with either stress event at any timepoint, indicating all pets remained in good digestive health. Microbiota analysis demonstrated no significant impact on alpha or beta diversity with either stressor. Microbial signatures previously linked to stress were not identified in these dogs and no changes were observed in the functional gut composition. Irrespective of whether the pet was considered "stressed" (i.e., exhibited an increase in serum cortisol), there was no effect on the microbiota and no taxa were predictive of stress response. Collectively, this work demonstrates, for this population, certain acute stress events have no meaningful impact on the canine gut microbiota, and it has no impact on the associated stress response., (© 2024. Mars, Incorporated and its Affiliates.)

Many proteins undergo a post-translational lipid attachment, which increases their hydrophobicity, thus strengthening their membrane association properties or aiding in protein interactions. Geranylgeranyltransferase-I (GGTase-I) is an enzyme involved in a 3-step post-translational modification (PTM) pathway that attaches a 20-carbon lipid group called geranylgeranyl at the carboxy-terminal cysteine of proteins ending in a canonical CaaL motif (C-cysteine, a-aliphatic, L-often leucine, but can be phenylalanine, isoleucine, methionine, or valine). Genetic approaches involving 2 distinct reporters were employed in this study to assess Saccharomyces cerevisiae GGTase-I specificity, for which limited data exist, toward all 8,000 CXXX combinations. Orthogonal biochemical analyses and structure-based alignments were also performed to better understand the features required for optimal target interaction. These approaches indicate that yeast GGTase-I best modifies the Cxa[L/F/I/M/V] sequence that resembles but is not an exact match for the canonical CaaL motif. We also observed that minor modification of noncanonical sequences is possible. A consistent feature associated with well-modified sequences was the presence of a nonpolar a2 residue and a hydrophobic terminal residue, which are features recognized by mammalian GGTase-I. These results thus support that mammalian and yeast GGTase-I exhibit considerable shared specificity., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The author(s) declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Genetics Society of America.)

The leading intent of the present questionnaire is to assess the ratio of the concerned population as well as the treatment approach of craniofacial deformities among Gujarat citizenry. The theme of Google Form was used for 100 partakers to record responses via sending the questionnaire in English and Gujarati languages through WhatsApp and Emails. From the 100 respondents which are from laymen of Gujarat, 62.25% of inhabitants are acquainted with craniofacial syndromes, 15% of residents have craniofacial deformities as their family history, 51.66% of denizens have some idea for the treatment approach of craniofacial malformations. A good number of Gujarat laymen have some clear concept for craniofacial syndromes., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of int erest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Aims and Objectives: The purpose of this survey was to assess postgraduate students' knowledge of orthodontic direct printed aligners and their opinions of the treatment modalities that can be used with them., Materials and Methods: 198 postgraduate learners were given a questionnaire consisting of 25 questions via Google Forms as part of this web-based survey. Results: Compared to their male counterparts, women were more knowledgeable about direct printed aligners., Conclusion: The survey concluded that most postgraduate students have knowledge about direct printed aligners. Females are more aware about direct printed aligners than males. Orthodontists were the predominant source of knowledge regarding direct printed aligners., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Background: Orthodontic correction of dentofacial abnormalities is a crucial component of oral health because it enhances overall oral health-related quality of life, optimal function, periodontal health, and aesthetics. This study sought to determine whether otolaryngologists recommend patients to orthodontists, whether they are adequately knowledgeable about the fundamentals of orthodontics, and whether they check for orthodontic problems in their patients., Materials and Method: We conducted a survey study of otolaryngologists in Gujarat, India. Questionnaires were completed by 47 out of 60 otolaryngologists (response rate 78%)., Results: In the assessment of the mouth breathers, a very low frequency of "always" examining the extra-oral features (18%) was found. Reasons otolaryngologists referred patients to orthodontists varied from mouth breathing 48% (23/47) to face or teeth asymmetry 87% (41/47). In the multivariable analyses for the effect of gender, work sector, or years of experience in the decision for orthodontic referral, we could not identify any significant predictors. A low frequency of awareness of orthodontists' role in obstructive sleep apnoea, 48% (23/47) was found., Conclusion: In conclusion, the survey of otolaryngologists in Gujarat, India, revealed areas for improvement in awareness and practices related to orthodontic issues, particularly in cases of mouth breathing. The study highlighted a low frequency of examination of extraoral features and variability in referral patterns, emphasizing potential gaps in knowledge. Additionally, a low awareness of orthodontists' role in treating obstructive sleep apnea was identified. Targeted educational interventions are recommended to enhance interdisciplinary communication and collaboration between otolaryngologists and orthodontists, ultimately fostering a more comprehensive approach to patient care for individuals with dentofacial deformities in Gujarat and potentially influencing practices on a broader scale., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Background: Because orthodontists work long hours and maintain a relationship with each patient for many years prior to the end of treatment, they may encounter unusually stressful situations., Materials and Methods: A self-administered, anonymous survey was disseminated to orthodontic residents and practitioners in India. The survey includes 29 probable stressors., Result: Over 61% of respondents opined that these factors are the most stressful in orthodontic practice., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Background: High-density lipoprotein (HDL) is commonly characterized by its cholesterol concentration (HDL-C) and inverse association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease., Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the association of HDL particle concentration (HDL-P), HDL particle size (HDL-size), HDL-C, and cholesterol content per particle (HDL-C/HDL-P) with risk of overall heart failure (HF) and subtypes., Methods: Participants from the Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities Study, Dallas Heart Study, Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, and Prevention of Renal and Vascular End-stage Disease studies without HF history were included. Associations of HDL-P, HDL-size, HDL-C, and HDL-C/HDL-P with risk of overall HF, HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction were assessed using adjusted Cox models., Results: Among 16,925 participants (53.5% women; 21.8% Black), there were 612 incident HF events (3.6%) (HF with reduced ejection fraction, 309 [50.5%]; HF preserved ejection fraction, 303 [49.5%]) over median follow-up of 11.4 years. In adjusted models, higher HDL-P was significantly associated with lower HF risk (HR of highest vs lowest tertile of HDL-P: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.62-0.93]). Larger HDL-size was significantly associated with higher overall HF risk (HR of largest vs smallest tertile of HDL-size: 1.27 [95% CI: 1.03-1.58]). HF risk associated with HDL-P and HDL-size was similar for HF subtypes. In adjusted analyses, there was no significant association between HDL-C and HF risk. Higher HDL-C/HDL-P was significantly associated with higher overall HF risk (HR of highest vs lowest tertile of HDL-C/HDL-P: 1.29 [95% CI: 1.04-1.60])., Conclusions: Higher HDL-P was associated with a lower risk of HF. In contrast, larger HDL-size was associated with higher risk of HF and there was no significant association observed between HDL-C and HF risk after accounting for cardiovascular risk factors., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The ARIC study has been funded in whole or in part with federal funds from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under contracts HHSN268201700001I, HHSN268201700002I, HHSN268201700003I, HHSN268201700005I, and HHSN268201700004I. The Dallas Heart Study was funded by a grant from the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation. The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01 HL071739 and contracts N01-HC-95159, N01-HC-95160, N01-HC-95161, N01-HC-95162, N01-HC-95163, N01-HC-95164, N01-HC-95165, and N01-C-95169). The PREVEND cohort study was supported by The Dutch Kidney Foundation which supported the infrastructure of the PREVEND program from 1997 to 2003 (Grant E.033). The University Medical Center Groningen supported the infrastructure from 2003 to 2006. Dr Pandey is supported by the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, the Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, the National Institute of Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), and Applied Therapeutics; has served on the advisory board for Roche Diagnostics; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Segar has received speaker fees from Merck and is on the advisory board of descendantsDNA. Dr Shapiro has received grants from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, 89Bio, Esperion, Novartis, Ionis, Merck, and New Amsterdam; has served on scientific advisory boards for Amgen, Agepha, Ionis, Novartis, Precision BioScience, New Amsterdam, and Merck; and has served as a consultant to Ionis, Novartis, Regeneron, Aidoc, Shanghai Pharma Biotherapeutics, Kaneka, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Connelly is an employee of Labcorp. Dr Rohatgi has received a research grant from CSL Behring; has served as a collaborator to Quest; has served as a consultant to HDL Diagnostics, JP Morgan, Johnson and Johnson, and Raydel. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Excess muscle fat is observed in obesity and associated with greater burden of cardiovascular risk factors and higher risk of mortality. Liraglutide reduces total body weight and visceral fat but its effect on muscle fat and adverse muscle composition is unknown., Methods: This is a pre-specified secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that examined the effects of liraglutide plus a lifestyle intervention on visceral adipose tissue and ectopic fat among adults without diabetes with body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 or ≥27 kg/m 2 and metabolic syndrome. Participants were randomly assigned to a once-daily subcutaneous injection of liraglutide (target dose 3.0 mg) or matching placebo for 40 weeks. Body fat distribution and muscle composition was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging at baseline and 40-week follow-up. Muscle composition was described by the combination of thigh muscle fat and muscle volume. Treatment difference (95% confidence intervals [CI]) was calculated by least-square means adjusted for baseline thigh muscle fat. The association between changes in thigh muscle fat and changes in body weight were assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients. The effect of liraglutide versus placebo on adverse muscle composition, denoted by high thigh muscle fat and low thigh muscle volume, was explored., Results: Among the 128 participants with follow-up imaging (92.2% women, 36.7% Black), median muscle fat at baseline was 7.8%. The mean percent change in thigh muscle fat over median follow-up of 36 weeks was -2.87% among participants randomized to liraglutide (n = 73) and 0.05% in the placebo group (absolute change: -0.23% vs. 0.01%). The estimated treatment difference adjusted for baseline thigh muscle fat was -0.24% (95% CI, -0.41 to -0.06, P-value 0.009). Longitudinal change in thigh muscle fat was significantly associated with change in body weight in the placebo group but not the liraglutide group. The proportion of participants with adverse muscle composition decreased from 11.0% to 8.2% over follow-up with liraglutide, but there was no change with placebo., Conclusions: In a cohort of predominantly women with overweight or obesity in the absence of diabetes, once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide was associated with a reduction in thigh muscle fat and adverse muscle composition compared with placebo. The contribution of muscle fat improvement to the cardiometabolic benefits of liraglutide requires further study., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose of Review: This narrative review seeks to elucidate clinical and social factors influencing cardiovascular health, explore the challenges and potential solutions for enhancing cardiovascular health, and identify areas where further research is needed to better understand cardiovascular issues in native and American Pakistani populations., Recent Findings: The prevalence of cardiometabolic disease is high not only in Pakistan but also among its global diaspora. This situation is further complicated by the inadequacy of current cardiovascular risk assessment tools, which often fall short of accurately gauging the risk among Pakistani individuals, underscoring the urgent need for more tailored and effective assessment methodologies. Moreover, social determinants play a crucial role in shaping cardiovascular health. The burden of cardiovascular disease and upstream risk factors is high among American Pakistani individuals. Future research is needed to better understand the heightened risk of cardiovascular disease among Pakistani individuals., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

N-Heterocyclic ylides are important synthetic precursors to rapidly build molecular complexity. Pyrazolium ylides have largely been unexplored, and we demonstrate their diverse utility in this report. We show that these readily accessible building blocks can be used to construct different heterocyclic skeletons by varying the coupling partner. Indolizines can be formed via an N-deletion type mechanism when reacting pyrazolium salts with electron deficient alkynes. 1,2-Dihydropyrimidines can be formed via a rearrangement mechanism when reacting pyrazolium ylides with isocyanates. These reactions enable access to valuable heteroarenes without the need for transition metal catalysis, high temperatures, or strong bases., (© 2024 The Authors. Chemistry - A European Journal published by Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Background: Clinical practice guidelines encourage primary care providers (PCPs) to recommend nonpharmacologic treatment as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP). However, the determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use for LBP in primary care remain unclear, particularly in low-income settings., Objective: To pilot a framework-informed interview guide and codebook to explore determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use in primary care., Methods: In this qualitative interview study, we enrolled PCPs and community health workers (CHWs) from four primary care clinics at a safety net hospital. A semistructured interview guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided inquiry on barriers/facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP (eg, acupuncture, chiropractic care, physical therapy). We included questions on whether current CHW roles may address barriers to nonpharmacologic treatment use. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and independently coded by four investigators. An a priori codebook composed of CFIR determinants and known CHW roles guided deductive content analysis to identify major themes., Results: Eight individuals (six PCPs, two CHWs; age range: 32-51 years, five female) participated in hour-long interviews. Half had worked at the hospital for ≥15 years and all reported seeing patients with LBP (range: 2-20 patients per week). All participants identified the following CFIR factors as barriers/facilitators: nonpharmacologic treatment characteristics (perceived cost, relative advantage compared to other treatments); outer setting (patient needs/resources, limited connections with community-based nonpharmacologic treatment) and PCP characteristics (attitudes/beliefs about nonpharmacologic treatments). Although participants indicated several CHW roles could be adapted to address barriers (eg, care coordination, resource linking, case management), other roles seemed less feasible (eg, targeted health education) in our health care system., Conclusions: Preliminary insight on key determinants of nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP should be further examined in large multisite studies. Future studies may also determine whether a CHW-led strategy can improve nonpharmacologic treatment access and clinical outcomes in primary care., (© 2024 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Background: Management strategies and clinical outcomes vary substantially in patients newly diagnosed with Crohn's disease. We evaluated the use of a putative prognostic biomarker to guide therapy by assessing outcomes in patients randomised to either top-down (ie, early combined immunosuppression with infliximab and immunomodulator) or accelerated step-up (conventional) treatment strategies., Methods: PROFILE (PRedicting Outcomes For Crohn's disease using a moLecular biomarker) was a multicentre, open-label, biomarker-stratified, randomised controlled trial that enrolled adults with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease (Harvey-Bradshaw Index ≥7, either elevated C-reactive protein or faecal calprotectin or both, and endoscopic evidence of active inflammation). Potential participants had blood drawn to be tested for a prognostic biomarker derived from T-cell transcriptional signatures (PredictSURE-IBD assay). Following testing, patients were randomly assigned, via a secure online platform, to top-down or accelerated step-up treatment stratified by biomarker subgroup (IBDhi or IBDlo), endoscopic inflammation (mild, moderate, or severe), and extent (colonic or other). Blinding to biomarker status was maintained throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission to week 48. Remission was defined by a composite of symptoms and inflammatory markers at all visits. Flare required active symptoms (HBI ≥5) plus raised inflammatory markers (CRP >upper limit of normal or faecal calprotectin ≥200 μg/g, or both), while remission was the converse-ie, quiescent symptoms (HBI <5) or resolved inflammatory markers (both CRP ≤ the upper limit of normal and calprotectin <200 μg/g) or both. Analyses were done in the full analysis (intention-to-treat) population. The trial has completed and is registered (ISRCTN11808228)., Findings: Between Dec 29, 2017, and Jan 5, 2022, 386 patients (mean age 33·6 years [SD 13·2]; 179 [46%] female, 207 [54%] male) were randomised: 193 to the top-down group and 193 to the accelerated step-up group. Median time from diagnosis to trial enrolment was 12 days (range 0-191). Primary outcome data were available for 379 participants (189 in the top-down group; 190 in the accelerated step-up group). There was no biomarker-treatment interaction effect (absolute difference 1 percentage points, 95% CI -15 to 15; p=0·944). Sustained steroid-free and surgery-free remission was significantly more frequent in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (149 [79%] of 189 patients vs 29 [15%] of 190 patients, absolute difference 64 percentage points, 95% CI 57 to 72; p<0·0001). There were fewer adverse events (including disease flares) and serious adverse events in the top-down group than in the accelerated step-up group (adverse events: 168 vs 315; serious adverse events: 15 vs 42), with fewer complications requiring abdominal surgery (one vs ten) and no difference in serious infections (three vs eight)., Interpretation: Top-down treatment with combination infliximab plus immunomodulator achieved substantially better outcomes at 1 year than accelerated step-up treatment. The biomarker did not show clinical utility. Top-down treatment should be considered standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed active Crohn's disease., Funding: Wellcome and PredictImmune Ltd., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests NMN reports personal fees from Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, SBK Healthcare, and Takeda outside the submitted work; and grants from Dr Falk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, and Tillotts Pharma outside the submitted work. JCL reports consultancy fees from AbbVie, AgPlus Diagnostics, PredictImmune, and C4X Discover outside the submitted work; and grants from GSK outside the submitted work. KVP reports personal fees from AbbVie, DrFalk, Galapagos, Janssen, PredictImmune, Pfizer, and Takeda outside the submitted work; grants from AbbVie, Celltrion, Dr Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Takeda, and Tillotts Pharma outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AbbVie, Galapagos, Janssen, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. TA reports personal fees from Amgen, Celltrion, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, and Tillotts Pharma; and grants from Biogen, Celltrion, Galapagos, Nova Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda outside the submitted work. JWB reports personal fees from Janssen outside the submitted work. RC reports personal fees from AbbVie, Galapagos, and Lilly outside the submitted work, grants from Celltrion, Ferring, and Tillotts Pharma outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AbbVie and Bristol Myers Squibb outside the submitted work. SD reports personal fees from AbbVie, Ferring, Janssen, and Takeda outside the submitted work; grants from AbbVie, Dr Falk, and Janssen, outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AbbVie outside the submitted work. DD reports personal fees from Takeda outside the submitted work; and grants from AbbVie and Janssen outside the submitted work. PMI reports personal fees from AbbVie, Arena, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Prometheus, Sandoz, Samsung Bioepis, Sapphire Medical, Takeda, Topivert, VH2, Vifor Pharma, and Warner Chilcott outside the submitted work; and grants from AbbVie and Takeda outside the submitted work. AJK reports personal fees from AbbVie, Galapagos, and Takeda outside the submitted work; grants from AbbVie, Janssen, and Tillotts Pharma outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AbbVie and Janssen outside the submitted work. CM reports grants from Janssen outside the submitted work. CSP reports personal fees from Dr Falk outside the submitted work. TR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Arena, Aslan, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Heptares, LabGenius, Novartis, Numab, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, UCB, and XAP therapeutics outside the submitted work; grants from AbbVie outside the submitted work; and fees from data monitoring board membership of UCB outside the submitted work. SS reports personal fees from AbbVie, Celltrion, Dr Falk, Ipsen, Janssen, and Takeda outside the submitted work. HRTW reports fees from advisory board membership of Pfizer outside the submitted work. SV reports personal fees from AbbVie, Abivax, AbolerISPharma, AgomAb, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cytoki Pharma, Dr Falk Pharma, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech-Roche, Gilead, GSK, Hospira, Imidomics, Janssen, J&J, Lilly, Materia Prima, Mestag Therapeutics, MiroBio, Morphic, MrMHealth, MSD, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Prodigest, Progenity, Prometheus, Surrozen, Takeda, Theravance, Tillotts Pharma, VectivBio, Ventyx, and Zealand Pharma outside the submitted work; and grants from AbbVie, Galapagos, J&J, Pfizer, and Takeda outside the submitted work. VJ reports personal fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, AstraZeneca, Avoro Capital, BMS, Celltrion, Endpoint Health, Enthera, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilde Healthcare, GSK, Genentech, Gilead, Innomar, JAMP, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Metacrine, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Prometheus, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Roivant, Sandoz, SCOPE, Second Genome, Sorriso Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, and Vividion outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AbbVie, Alimentiv (formerly Robarts Clinical Trials), Arena Pharmaceuticals, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Asieris, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celltrion, Ferring, Flagship Pioneering, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Gilde Healthcare, GSK, Genentech, Gilead, Innomar, JAMP, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Metacran, Mylan, Pandion, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Protagonist, Prometheus, Reistone Biopharma, Roche, Sandoz, SCOPE, Second Genome, Sorriso Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Teva, Topivert, Ventyx, and Vividion outside the submitted work. GRDH reports personal fees from AbbVie, Alimentiv, AstraZeneca, Immunic, J&J, Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda, Tillotts, and Ventyx outside the submitted work; grants from AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, Pfizer, and Takeda outside the submitted work; and fees from advisory board membership of AstraZeneca, Galapagos, and Seres Health outside the submitted work. EFM reports being a co-founder and receiving consultancy fees from PredictImmune; and holds PredictImmune stock or stock options. PAL reports being a co-founder and receiving consultancy fees from PredictImmune; and holds PredictImmune stock or stock options. JOL reports personal fees from AbbVie, Atlantic Healthcare, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Engytix, Eli Lilly, Ferring, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, MSD, Norgine, Pfizer, Shire, and Takeda outside the submitted work; and grants from AbbVie, Ferring, Gilead, Takeda, and Shire outside the submitted work. NAK reports personal fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Falk, Galapagos, Janssen, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Takeda, and Tillotts Pharma outside the submitted work; and reports data monitoring board membership for the BEACON study outside the submitted work. KGCS reports being a co-founder and receiving consultancy fees from Predictimmune; consultancy fees from GSK outside the submitted work; and holds PredictImmune stock or stock options. MP reports personal fees from Janssen and Takeda outside the submitted work; and grants from AstraZeneca, Galapagos, Gilead, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: In the traditional clinical research model, patients are typically involved only as participants. However, there has been a shift in recent years highlighting the value and contributions that patients bring as members of the research team, across the clinical research lifecycle. It is becoming increasingly evident that to develop research that is both meaningful to people who have the targeted condition and is feasible, there are important benefits of involving patients in the planning, conduct, and dissemination of research from its earliest stages. In fact, research funders and regulatory agencies are now explicitly encouraging, and sometimes requiring, that patients are engaged as partners in research. Although this approach has become commonplace in some fields of clinical research, it remains the exception in clinical pain research. As such, the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials convened a meeting with patient partners and international representatives from academia, patient advocacy groups, government regulatory agencies, research funding organizations, academic journals, and the biopharmaceutical industry to develop consensus recommendations for advancing patient engagement in all stages of clinical pain research in an effective and purposeful manner. This article summarizes the results of this meeting and offers considerations for meaningful and authentic engagement of patient partners in clinical pain research, including recommendations for representation, timing, continuous engagement, measurement, reporting, and research dissemination., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background and Aims: We sought to determine whether six commonly used immunosuppressive regimens were associated with lower antibody responses after seasonal influenza vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]., Methods: We conducted a prospective study including 213 IBD patients and 53 healthy controls: 165 who had received seasonal influenza vaccine and 101 who had not. IBD medications included infliximab, thiopurines, infliximab and thiopurine combination therapy, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib. The primary outcome was antibody responses against influenza/A H3N2 and A/H1N1, compared to controls, adjusting for age, prior vaccination, and interval between vaccination and sampling., Results: Lower antibody responses against influenza A/H3N2 were observed in patients on infliximab (geometric mean ratio 0.35 [95% confidence interval 0.20-0.60], p = 0.0002), combination of infliximab and thiopurine therapy (0.46 [0.27-0.79], p = 0.0050), and tofacitinib (0.28 [0.14-0.57], p = 0.0005) compared to controls. Lower antibody responses against A/H1N1 were observed in patients on infliximab (0.29 [0.15-0.56], p = 0.0003), combination of infliximab and thiopurine therapy (0.34 [0.17-0.66], p = 0.0016), thiopurine monotherapy (0.46 [0.24-0.87], p = 0.017), and tofacitinib (0.23 [0.10-0.56], p = 0.0013). Ustekinumab and vedolizumab were not associated with reduced antibody responses against A/H3N2 or A/H1N1. Vaccination in the previous year was associated with higher antibody responses to A/H3N2. Vaccine-induced anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody concentration weakly correlated with antibodies against H3N2 [r = 0.27; p = 0.0004] and H1N1 [r = 0.33; p < 0.0001]., Conclusions: Vaccination in both the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 seasons was associated with significantly higher antibody responses to influenza/A than no vaccination or vaccination in 2021-2022 alone. Infliximab and tofacitinib are associated with lower binding antibody responses to influenza/A, similar to COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation.)

Patients with type 2 diabetes face an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease. This review centers on sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, a class of drugs that, according to a growing body of evidence, may have major potential for managing cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. This review presents findings from multiple clinical trials suggesting that SGLT2 inhibitors can not only serve as preventive therapeutic agents but also play a role in the active management of heart failure. The discussion includes the mechanism of action of SGLT2 inhibitors, emphasizing that they enhance urinary glucose excretion, which could lead to improved glycemic control and contribute to metabolic shifts beneficial to cardiac function. Alongside these cardiometabolic effects, safety concerns and practical considerations for prescribing these agents are addressed, taking into account potential adverse effects such as genitourinary infections and diabetic ketoacidosis as well as the financial implications for patients. Despite these drawbacks, therapeutic indications for SGLT2 inhibitors continue to expand, including for kidney protection, although further research is necessary to fully understand the mechanisms driving the cardioprotective and kidney-protective effects of SGLT2 inhibitors. By synthesizing current knowledge, this review intends to inform and guide clinical decision-making, thereby enhancing cardiovascular disease outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes., (© 2024 The Authors. Published by The Texas Heart Institute®.)

Purpose: The study aimed to determine the feasibility of remotely delivered exercise (tele-exercise) for older, rural cancer survivors and to explore the effects of tele-exercise on physical function, physical activity, and patient-reported outcomes., Methods: Participants were rural cancer survivors age ≥ 60 years (79% female; mean age 70.4 ± 5.7) randomly assigned to the remotely delivered EnhanceFitness (tele-EF) exercise program, inclusive of aerobic, strength, and balance training and led by American Council on Exercise certified instructors for 1 h, 3 days/week for 16 weeks (n = 20) or to a waitlist control group (n = 19). We assessed feasibility, physical function, accelerometer-measured physical activity, and patient-reported outcomes at baseline and post intervention., Results: Among those screened as eligible, 44 (64%) consented to participate with 39 randomized after completing baseline measures. Attrition was equivalent between groups (n = 1, each) with 95% completing the study. The median class attendance rate was 86.9% (interquartile range: 79-94%). Compared to controls, tele-EF participants had statistically significant improvement in the five-time sit-to-stand test (- 3.4 vs. - 1.1 s, p = 0.03, effect size = 0.44), mean daily light physical activity (+ 38.5 vs 0.5 min, p = 0.03, effect size = 0.72) and step counts (+ 1977 vs. 33, p = 0.01, effect size = 0.96). There were no changes in self-efficacy for exercise, fatigue, or sleep disturbance between groups., Conclusions: Findings indicate that tele-EF is feasible in older, rural cancer survivors and results in positive changes in physical function and physical activity., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Tele-EF addresses common barriers to exercise for older, rural cancer survivors, including limited accessible opportunities for professional instruction and supervision., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: To describe the epidemiology and prognostic value of coronary artery calcium (CAC) in individuals with prediabetes., Research Design and Methods: We pooled participants free of clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) from four prospective cohorts: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study, Framingham Heart Study, and Jackson Heart Study. Two definitions were used for prediabetes: inclusive (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ≥100 to <126 mg/dL and hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥5.7% to <6.5%, if available, and no glucose-lowering medications) and restrictive (FPG ≥110 to <126 mg/dL and HbA1c ≥5.7% to <6.5%, if available, among participants not taking glucose-lowering medications)., Results: The study included 13,376 participants (mean age 58 years; 54% women; 57% White; 27% Black). The proportions with CAC ≥100 were 17%, 22%, and 37% in those with euglycemia, prediabetes, and diabetes, respectively. Over a median (25th-75th percentile) follow-up time of 14.6 (interquartile range 7.8-16.4) years, individuals with prediabetes and CAC ≥100 had a higher unadjusted 10-year incidence of ASCVD (13.4%) than the overall group of those with diabetes (10.6%). In adjusted analyses, using the inclusive definition of prediabetes, compared with euglycemia, the hazard ratios (HRs) for ASCVD were 0.79 (95% CI 0.62, 1.01) for prediabetes and CAC 0, 0.70 (0.54, 0.89) for prediabetes and CAC 1-99, 1.54 (1.27, 1.88) for prediabetes and CAC ≥100, and 1.64 (1.39, 1.93) for diabetes. Using the restrictive definition, the HR for ASCVD was 1.63 (1.29, 2.06) for prediabetes and CAC ≥100., Conclusions: CAC ≥100 is frequent among individuals with prediabetes and identifies a high ASCVD risk subgroup in which the adjusted ASCVD risk is similar to that in individuals with diabetes., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Antibiotic resistance is recognised as one of the biggest global threats to human and animal health. Understanding the influence of antibiotics on the canine microbiome is important to know the potential mid-to-long term effects on dysbiosis and mitigate side-effects such as antibiotic-associated diarrhoea. In this study, metronidazole was prescribed to 22 dogs for suspected giardiasis after exhibiting gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhoea and/or vomiting. Faecal samples were collected before, during seven days of treatment, and six months post-cessation. Faecal microbiota was assessed with 16S rRNA sequencing. Shannon diversity was reduced for up to three days after the treatment ended, and an altered community persisted for four to six weeks. All dogs recovered to a similar microbiome composition as pre-treatment. Immediately after receiving metronidazole, an increase in the relative abundance of the genera Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Enterococcus was observed. This may be due to antibiotic resistance commonly exhibited by these organisms. One-to-two weeks post-cessation, several other genera that were sensitive to the antibiotic recovered in abundances, with taxa belonging to the Erysipelotrichaceae family particularly driving composition change. Many of the bacteria initially reduced were associated with carbohydrate fermentation. This suggests scope exists to explore interventions to augment gastrointestinal health and support the re-establishment of the microbiome., (© 2024. Mars and Affiliates.)

Background: Individuals with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) have a varying response to diuretic therapy. Strategies for the early identification of low diuretic efficiency to inform decongestion therapies are lacking., Objectives: The authors sought to develop and externally validate a machine learning-based phenomapping approach and integer-based diuresis score to identify patients with low diuretic efficiency., Methods: Participants with ADHF from ROSE-AHF, CARRESS-HF, and ATHENA-HF were pooled in the derivation cohort (n = 794). Multivariable finite-mixture model-based phenomapping was performed to identify phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency (urine output over the first 72 hours per total intravenous furosemide equivalent loop diuretic dose). Phenogroups were externally validated in other pooled ADHF trials (DOSE/ESCAPE). An integer-based diuresis score (BAN-ADHF score: blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, natriuretic peptide levels, atrial fibrillation, diastolic blood pressure, hypertension and home diuretic, and heart failure hospitalization) was developed and validated based on predictors of the diuretic efficiency phenogroups to estimate the probability of low diuretic efficiency using the pooled ADHF trials described earlier. The associations of the BAN-ADHF score with markers and symptoms of congestion, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and global well-being were assessed using adjusted regression models., Results: Clustering identified 3 phenogroups based on diuretic efficiency: phenogroup 1 (n = 370; 47%) had lower diuretic efficiency (median: 13.1 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 7.7-19.4 mL/mg) than phenogroups 2 (n = 290; 37%) and 3 (n = 134; 17%) (median: 17.8 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 10.8-26.1 mL/mg and median: 35.3 mL/mg; Q1-Q3: 17.5-49.0 mL/mg, respectively) (P < 0.001). The median urine output difference in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide between the lowest and highest diuretic efficiency group (phenogroup 1 vs 3) was 3,520 mL/d. The BAN-ADHF score demonstrated good model performance for predicting the lowest diuretic efficiency phenogroup membership (C-index: 0.92 in DOSE/ESCAPE validation cohort) that was superior to measures of kidney function (creatinine or blood urea nitrogen), natriuretic peptide levels, or home diuretic dose (DeLong P < 0.001 for all). Net urine output in response to 80 mg intravenous twice-daily furosemide among patients with a low vs high (5 vs 20) BAN-ADHF score was 2,650 vs 660 mL per 24 hours, respectively. Participants with higher BAN-ADHF scores had significantly lower global well-being, higher natriuretic peptide levels on discharge, a longer in-hospital stay, and a higher risk of in-hospital mortality in both derivation and validation cohorts., Conclusions: The authors developed and validated a phenomapping strategy and diuresis score for individuals with ADHF and differential response to diuretic therapy, which was associated with length of stay and mortality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute of Health (5R01MD017529, R21HL169708) and grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Axon Therapies, Medtronic, Edward Lifesciences, Science37, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Merck, Sarfez Pharmaceuticals, and Emmi Solutions; has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck; and is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. Dr Segar has received honoraria from Merck. Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Fonarow has done consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. Dr Mentz has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Allen reports grant funding from American Heart Association, National Institutes of Health, and PCORI; and consulting fees from Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Novartis, and WCG ACI Clinical. Dr Pandey has received grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Bayer, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Sarfez Pharmacuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Roche Diagnostics; has received support from Pfizer and Merck; and is a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. Dr Khan serves as an advisory board member for Bayer. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: While nonpharmacologic treatments are increasingly endorsed as first-line therapy for low back pain (LBP) in clinical practice guidelines, it is unclear if use of these treatments is increasing or equitable., Objective: Examine national trends in chiropractic care and physical rehabilitation (occupational/physical therapy (OT/PT)) use among adults with LBP., Design/setting: Serial cross-sectional analysis of the National Health Interview Survey, 2002 to 2018., Participants: 146,087 adults reporting LBP in prior 3 months., Methods: We evaluated the association of survey year with chiropractic care or OT/PT use in prior 12 months. Logistic regression with multilevel linear splines was used to determine if chiropractic care or OT/PT use increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines. We also examined trends in use by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. When trends were similar over time, we present differences by these demographic characteristics as unadjusted ORs using data from all respondents., Results: Between 2002 and 2018, less than one-third of adults with LBP reported use of either chiropractic care or OT/PT. Rates did not change until 2016 when uptake increased with the introduction of clinical guidelines (2016-2018 vs 2002-2015, OR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.10-1.19). Trends did not differ significantly by sex, race, or ethnicity (p for interactions > 0.05). Racial and ethnic disparities in chiropractic care or OT/PT use were identified and persisted over time. For example, compared to non-Hispanic adults, either chiropractic care or OT/PT use was lower among Hispanic adults (combined OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.65-0.73). By contrast, compared to White adults, Black adults had similar OT/PT use (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.94-1.03) but lower for chiropractic care use (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.47-0.53)., Conclusions: Although use of chiropractic care or OT/PT for LBP increased after the introduction of clinical guidelines in 2016, only about a third of US adults with LBP reported using these services between 2016 and 2018 and disparities in use have not improved., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Aim: The current study's objective was to find out the prevalence of malocclusion and the need for orthodontic treatment in 13- to 15-year-old school students in the Mehsana District of Gujarat using the IOTN., Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional epidemiological survey was planned among 13- to 15-year-old school-going children of Mehsana district. The sample comprised of 1290 school children. DHC-IOTN was applied to evaluate normative need for orthodontic treatment. Perceived orthodontic treatment was described by the Aesthetic component of the IOTN index., Results: Results showed that 33.7 percent of participants required little/no treatment need, 43.9 percent of participants required moderate orthodontic treatment need, and 22.4 percent of participants required severe orthodontic treatment need in the district., Conclusion: To prepare for public orthodontic and dental services, the current study provides baseline data on the need for orthodontic treatment among school-aged children., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2023 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Background: Utilization patterns of bariatric surgery among older patients with heart failure (HF), and the associations with cardiovascular outcomes, are not well known., Methods: Medicare beneficiaries with HF and at least class II obesity from 2013 to 2020 were identified with Medicare Provider Analysis and Review 100% inpatient files and Medicare 5% outpatient files. Patients who underwent bariatric surgery were matched to controls in a 1:2 ratio (matched on exact age, sex, race, body mass index, HF encounter year, and HF hospitalization rate pre-surgery/matched period). In an exploratory analysis, patients prescribed pharmacotherapies with weight loss effects (semaglutide, liraglutide, naltrexone-bupropion, or orlistat) were identified and matched to controls with a similar strategy in addition to HF medical therapy data. Cox models evaluated associations between weight loss therapies (as a time-varying covariate) and mortality risk and HF hospitalization rate (calculated as the rate of HF hospitalizations following index HF encounter per 100 person-months) during follow-up., Results: Of 298 101 patients with HF and body mass index ≥35 kg/m 2 , 2594 (0.9%) underwent bariatric surgery (45% men; mean age, 56.2 years; mean body mass index, 51.5 kg/m 2 ). In propensity-matched analyses over a median follow-up of 4.7 years, bariatric surgery was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.49-0.63]; P <0.001), greater reduction in HF hospitalization rate (rate ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.67-0.77]; P <0.001), and lower atrial fibrillation risk (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.65-0.93]; P =0.006). Use of pharmacotherapies with weight loss effects was low (4.8%), with 96.3% prescribed GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) agonists (semaglutide, 23.6%; liraglutide, 72.7%). In propensity-matched analysis over a median follow-up of 2.8 years, patients receiving pharmacotherapies with weight loss effects (versus matched controls) had a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71-0.95]; P =0.007) and HF hospitalization rate (rate ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.77-0.99]; P =0.04)., Conclusions: Bariatric surgery and pharmacotherapies with weight loss effects are associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes among older patients with HF and obesity; however, overall utilization remains low., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Desai is a consultant at Medtronic, Cytokinetics, Tenaya, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Patel has served as a consultant at Novo Nordisk. Dr Aminian received research support and honorarium from Medtronic and Ethicon. He is on the executive steering committee of a trial sponsored by Eli Lilly. Dr Keshvani has served as a consultant for HeartSciences and Tricog Inc. Dr Verma holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery and reports receiving research grants and/or speaking honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, S & L Solutions Event Management Inc, and Sanofi. He is the President of the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, a federally incorporated not-for-profit physician organization. Dr Lincoff has received honoraria or served as a consultant for Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Akebia, Alnylam, Ardelyx, Becton Dickinson, Brainstorm Cell, Cadrenal, Endologix, Fibrogen, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Medtronic, Neovasc, Provention Bio, and ReCor and has received research funding to his institution from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Esperion, and Novartis. Dr Van Spall receives research funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and education program funding from Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis. Dr Lam is supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the National Medical Research Council of Singapore; has received research support from Novo Nordisk and Roche Diagnostics; has served as consultant or on the Advisory Board/Steering Committee/Executive Committee for Alleviant Medical, Allysta Pharma, AnaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biopeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardioRenal, Cytokinetics, Darma Inc, EchoNous Inc, Eli Lilly, Impulse Dynamics, Intellia Therapeutics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Medscape/WebMD Global LLC, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prosciento Inc, Quidel Corporation, Radcliffe Group Ltd, Recardio Inc, ReCor Medical, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Siemens Healthcare Diagnosticsand Us2.ai; and serves as cofounder and non-executive director of Us2.ai. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Roche, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, and Vifor. Dr Nissen reports that the Cleveland Clinic Center for Clinical Research has received funding to perform clinical trials from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Arrowhead, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Medtronic, MyoKardia, New Amsterdam Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, and Silence Therapeutics. Dr Nissen is involved in these clinical trials but receives no personal remuneration for his participation. Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute of Health. Dr Pandey has received grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Axon Therapies, Medtronic, Edward Lifesciences, Science37, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Merck, Sarfez Pharmaceuticals, and Emmi Solutions; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr Pandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stock compensation. The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: The optimal approach to identify individuals with diabetes who are at a high risk for developing heart failure (HF) to inform implementation of preventive therapies is unknown, especially in those without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)., Methods: Adults with diabetes and no HF at baseline from 7 community-based cohorts were included. Participants without ASCVD who were at high risk for developing HF were identified using 1-step screening strategies: risk score (WATCH-DM [Weight, Age, Hypertension, Creatinine, HDL-C, Diabetes Control, QRS Duration, MI, and CABG] ≥12), NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥125 pg/mL), hs-cTn (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T ≥14 ng/L; hs-cTnI ≥31 ng/L), and echocardiography-based diabetic cardiomyopathy (echo-DbCM; left atrial enlargement, left ventricular hypertrophy, or diastolic dysfunction). High-risk participants were also identified using 2-step screening strategies with a second test to identify residual risk among those deemed low risk by the first test: WATCH-DM/NT-proBNP, NT-proBNP/hs-cTn, NT-proBNP/echo-DbCM. Across screening strategies, the proportion of HF events identified, 5-year number needed to treat and number needed to screen to prevent 1 HF event with an SGLT2i (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor) among high-risk participants, and cost of screening were estimated., Results: The initial study cohort included 6293 participants (48.2% women), of whom 77.7% without prevalent ASCVD were evaluated with different HF screening strategies. At 5-year follow-up, 6.2% of participants without ASCVD developed incident HF. The 5-year number needed to treat to prevent 1 HF event with an SGLT2i among participants without ASCVD was 43 (95% CI, 29-72). In the cohort without ASCVD, high-risk participants identified using 1-step screening strategies had a low 5-year number needed to treat (22 for NT-proBNP to 37 for echo-DbCM). However, a substantial proportion of HF events occurred among participants identified as low risk using 1-step screening approaches (29% for echo-DbCM to 47% for hs-cTn). Two-step screening strategies captured most HF events (75-89%) in the high-risk subgroup with a comparable 5-year number needed to treat as the 1-step screening approaches (30-32). The 5-year number needed to screen to prevent 1 HF event was similar across 2-step screening strategies (45-61). However, the number of tests and associated costs were lowest for WATCH-DM/NT-proBNP ($1061) compared with other 2-step screening strategies (NT-proBNP/hs-cTn: $2894; NT-proBNP/echo-DbCM: $16 358)., Conclusions: Selective NT-proBNP testing based on the WATCH-DM score efficiently identified a high-risk primary prevention population with diabetes expected to derive marked absolute benefits from SGLT2i to prevent HF., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Segar has received honoraria from Merck. Dr Klonoff has served as a consultant for Afon, Atropos Health, Better Therapeutics, Glucotrack, Lifecare, Novo, Samsung, and Thirdwayv. Dr Khan has received personal fees from Merck. Dr Lam has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, and Roche Diagnostics; has served as a consultant or on advisory boards/steering committees/executive committees for Actelion, Alleviant Medical, Allysta, Amgen, ANaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Darma, EchoNous, Impulse Dynamics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research and Development, Medscape, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Radcliffe Group, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Us2.ai, and WebMD Global; and has served as cofounder and nonexecutive director of Us2.ai. Dr Verma holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery; has received research grants and honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, and Pfizer; has received honoraria from Sanofi, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and the Toronto Knowledge Translation Working Group; is a member of the scientific excellence committee of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction); has served as a national lead investigator of the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and EMPEROR-Reduced trials; and is the president of the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, a federally incorporated not-for-profit physician organization. Dr Nasir is on the advisory board of Amgen, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk, and his research is partly supported by the Jerold B. Katz Academy of Translational Research. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Roche, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, and Vifor. Dr Vaduganathan is supported by the KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training award from Harvard Catalyst (National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Award UL 1TR002541) and has served on advisory boards or has received research grant support from American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxter Healthcare, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Relypsa. Dr Pandey has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01) and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529). Dr Pandey has received grant funding (to the institution) from Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Myovista, and Roche; has served as a consultant for and/or has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sarfez Therapeutics, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Alleviant, Axon Therapies; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr Pandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc with stocks compensation. The other authors report no conflicts.

Introduction: Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DbCM) is characterized by subclinical abnormalities in cardiac structure/function and is associated with a higher risk of overt heart failure (HF). However, there are limited data on optimal strategies to identify individuals with DbCM in contemporary health systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of DbCM in a health system using existing data from the electronic health record (EHR)., Methods: Adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) with available data on HF risk in a single-center EHR were included. The presence of DbCM was defined using different definitions: (1) least restrictive: ≥1 echocardiographic abnormality (left atrial enlargement, left ventricle hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction); (2) intermediate restrictive: ≥2 echocardiographic abnormalities; (3) most restrictive: 3 echocardiographic abnormalities. DbCM prevalence was compared across age, sex, race, and ethnicity-based subgroups, with differences assessed using the chi-squared test. Adjusted logistic regression models were constructed to evaluate significant predictors of DbCM., Results: Among 1921 individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus, the prevalence of DbCM in the overall cohort was 8.7% and 64.4% in the most and least restrictive definitions, respectively. Across all definitions, older age and Hispanic ethnicity were associated with a higher proportion of DbCM. Females had a higher prevalence than males only in the most restrictive definition. In multivariable-adjusted logistic regression, higher systolic blood pressure, higher creatinine, and longer QRS duration were associated with a higher risk of DbCM across all definitions., Conclusions: In this single-center, EHR cohort, the prevalence of DbCM varies from 9% to 64%, with a higher prevalence with older age and Hispanic ethnicity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: MWS has received personal fees from Merck & Co. NK has received consultant fees from HeartSciences and Tricog Health. KP has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. AP has received research support from the National Institute of Health (5R01MD017529, R21HL169708), grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Axon therapies, Medtronic, Edward Lifesciences, Science37, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Merck, Sarfez Pharmaceuticals, Emmi Solutions; and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr. Pandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc. with stock compensation. All other authors declare no competing interests.

The functional role of CD8+ lymphocytes in tuberculosis remains poorly understood. We depleted innate and/or adaptive CD8+ lymphocytes in macaques and showed that loss of all CD8α+ cells (using anti-CD8α antibody) significantly impaired early control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection, leading to increased granulomas, lung inflammation, and bacterial burden. Analysis of barcoded Mtb from infected macaques demonstrated that depletion of all CD8+ lymphocytes allowed increased establishment of Mtb in lungs and dissemination within lungs and to lymph nodes, while depletion of only adaptive CD8+ T cells (with anti-CD8β antibody) worsened bacterial control in lymph nodes. Flow cytometry and single-cell RNA sequencing revealed polyfunctional cytotoxic CD8+ lymphocytes in control granulomas, while CD8-depleted animals were unexpectedly enriched in CD4 and γδ T cells adopting incomplete cytotoxic signatures. Ligand-receptor analyses identified IL-15 signaling in granulomas as a driver of cytotoxic T cells. These data support that CD8+ lymphocytes are required for early protection against Mtb and suggest polyfunctional cytotoxic responses as a vaccine target., (© 2023 Winchell et al.)

Background: Previous studies identified physical function limitations in older cancer survivors, but few have included objective measures and most focused on breast and prostate cancer survivors. The current study compared patient-reported and objective physical function measures between older adults with and without a cancer history., Methods: Our cross-sectional study used a nationally representative sample of community-dwelling, Medicare beneficiaries from the 2015 National Health and Aging Trends Study (n = 7495). Data collected included patient-reported physical function, including a composite physical capacity score and limitations in strength, mobility, and balance, and objectively measured physical performance metrics, including gait speed, five time sit-to-stand, tandem stand, and grip strength. All analyses were weighted to account for the complex sampling design., Results: Thirteen percent of participants (n = 829) reported a history of cancer, of which more than half (51%) reported a diagnosis other than breast or prostate cancer. In models adjusted for demographics and health history, older cancer survivors had lower Short Physical Performance Battery scores (unstandardized beta [B] = -0.36; 95% CI: -0.64, -0.08), slower gait speed (B = -0.03; 95% CI: -0.05, -0.01), reduced grip strength (B = -0.86; 95% CI: -1.44, -0.27), worse patient-reported composite physical capacity (B = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.67, -0.18) and patient-reported upper extremity strength (B = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.50) compared to older adults without cancer. Additionally, the burden of physical function limitations was greater in women than in men, which may be explained by cancer type., Conclusions: Our results extend studies in breast and prostate cancer to show worse objective and patient-reported physical function outcomes in older adults with a range of cancer types compared to those without a cancer history. Moreover, these burdens seem to disproportionately affect older adult women, underscoring the need for interventions to address functional limitations and prevent further health consequences of cancer and its treatment., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving anti-TNF and JAK-inhibitor therapy have attenuated responses to COVID-19 vaccination. We aimed to determine how IBD treatments affect neutralising antibody responses against the Omicron BA.4/5 variant., Methods: In this multicentre cohort study, we prospectively recruited 340 adults (69 healthy controls and 271 IBD) at nine UK hospitals between May 28, 2021 and March 29, 2022. The IBD study population was established (>12 weeks therapy) on either thiopurine (n = 63), infliximab (n = 45), thiopurine and infliximab combination therapy (n = 48), ustekinumab (n = 45), vedolizumab (n = 46) or tofacitinib (n = 24). Patients were excluded if they were being treated with any other immunosuppressive therapies. Participants had two doses of either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 vaccines, followed by a third dose of either BNT162b2 or mRNA1273. Pseudo-neutralisation assays against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and BA.4/5 were performed. The half maximal inhibitory concentration (NT50) of participant sera was calculated. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralising response against wild-type virus and Omicron BA.4/5 variant after the second and third doses of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, stratified by immunosuppressive therapy, adjusting for prior infection, vaccine type, age, and interval between vaccination and blood collection. This study is registered with ISRCTN (No. 13495664)., Findings: Both heterologous (first two doses adenovirus vaccine, third dose mRNA vaccine) and homologous (three doses mRNA vaccine) vaccination strategies significantly increased neutralising titres against both wild-type SARS-CoV-2 virus and the Omicron BA.4/5 variant in healthy participants and patients with IBD. Antibody titres against BA.4/5 were significantly lower than antibodies against wild-type virus in both healthy participants and patients with IBD (p < 0.0001). Multivariable models demonstrated that neutralising antibodies against BA.4/5 after three doses of vaccine were significantly lower in patients with IBD on infliximab (Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) 0.19 [0.10, 0.36], p < 0.0001), infliximab and thiopurine combination (GMR 0.25 [0.13, 0.49], p < 0.0001) or tofacitinib (GMR 0.43 [0.20, 0.91], p = 0.028), but not in patients on thiopurine monotherapy, ustekinumab, or vedolizumab. Breakthrough infection was associated with lower neutralising antibodies against wild-type (p = 0.037) and BA.4/5 (p = 0.045)., Interpretation: A third dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine based on the wild-type spike glycoprotein significantly boosts neutralising antibody titres in patients with IBD. However, responses are lower against the Omicron variant BA.4/5, particularly in patients taking anti-TNF and JAK-inhibitor therapy. Breakthrough infections are associated with lower neutralising antibodies and immunosuppressed patients with IBD may receive additional benefit from bivalent vaccine boosters which target Omicron variants., Funding: Pfizer., Competing Interests: ALH reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Arena, Atlantic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Ferring, Dr Falk, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Shire, and Takeda; participation on the Global Steering Committee for Genentech. AJK reports consulting fees from Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, Tillotts, and Norgine; and participation in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie. CWL received personal consulting fees from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen and Iterative Scopes; institutional consulting fees from Trellus Health; and support for attending meetings from Galapagos, AbbVie, Takeda, Pfizer, Janssen, GSK, Gilead, Fresenius Kabi, Ferring, and Dr Falk. GRJ received speaker fees from Takeda, Ferring, Janssen, AbbVie and Fresenius Kabi. JLA received support for attending meetings from Takeda. JRG reports grants from Roche, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, Takeda and Galapagos. KVP received consulting fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Galapagos and Pfizer; reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, Dr Falk, Janssen, Galapagos, Pfizer, Takeda, Tillotts and Ferring; support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie, Dr Falk, Janssen, Galapagos, Pfizer, Takeda, Tillotts and Ferring; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Galapagos, Pfizer and Janssen. SB received research grant from Bowel Research UK and support for attending conferences from Ferring and Dr Falk, outside the submitted work. KMP is a member of the data safety monitoring board for NCT05249829 and NCT05575492; has received a fee for speaking from Seqirus and Sanofi Pasteur, and has research funding from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the MRC/UKRI, the Vaccine Task Force, and NIHR Imperial BRC outside the submitted work. KK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Ferring; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen and Takeda; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Janssen and PredictImmune. MP received research grant from Pfizer and speaker fees from Janssen. NAK reports grants from AbbVie, Biogen, Celgene, Celltrion, Galapagos, MSD, Napp, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Roche, and Takeda; consulting fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dr Falk, Janssen, Mylan, Pharmacosmos, Galapagos, Takeda, and Tillotts; personal fees from Allergan, Celltrion, Dr Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Pharmacosmos, Takeda, Tillotts, and Galapagos; and support for attending meetings from AbbVie, Dr Falk, Tillotts and Janssen, outside the submitted work. PMI reports grants from Celltrion, Takeda, MSD, Pfizer, and Galapagos; personal fees from Gilead, Pfizer, Galapagos, Takeda, AbbVie, Celltrion, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Arena; speaker fees from Pfizer, Galapagos, Takeda, AbbVie, Celltrion, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Arena, outside the submitted work. SS reports grants from Tillotts, Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer and AbbVie; received personal fees from AbbVie, Tillotts, Janssen, Takeda, Dr Falk, Lilly and Bristol Myers Squibb; received support for attending meetings from Janssen, AbbVie and Celltrion; and serves as a member of the data safety monitoring board for AbbVie, Janssen, Takeda, Celltrion, Lilly and Bristol Myers Squibb. TA reports grant funding from Pfizer to deliver this study; grants from Celltrion, Roche, Takeda, Biogen, and Galapagos; and honoraria for lectures from Takeda and Roche, outside the submitted work. NP is the principal investigator on the research grant from Pfizer that funded the VIP study; has received research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Biogen, Celltrion Healthcare, Takeda, Galapagos, CCUK, AstraZeneca, Helmsley Charitable Trust, outside the submitted work; reports personal fees from Takeda, Janssen, Pfizer, Galapagos, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Roche, Lilly, Allergan, Celgene and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work; and has served as a speaker or advisory board member for AbbVie, Allergan, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Dr Falk, AstraZeneca, Galapagos and Vifor; and serves as a member of the data safety monitoring board for Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background: The contemporary burden and characteristics of coronary atherosclerosis, assessed using coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), is unknown among asymptomatic adults with diabetes and prediabetes in the United States. The pooled cohort equations and coronary artery calcium (CAC) score stratify atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk, but their association with CCTA findings across glycemic categories is not well established., Methods: Asymptomatic adults without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease enrolled in the Miami Heart Study were included. Participants underwent CAC and CCTA testing and were classified into glycemic categories. Prevalence of coronary atherosclerosis (any plaque, noncalcified plaque, plaque with ≥1 high-risk feature, maximal stenosis ≥50%) assessed by CCTA was described across glycemic categories and further stratified by pooled cohort equations-estimated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk and CAC score. Adjusted logistic regression was used to evaluate the associations between glycemic categories and coronary outcomes., Results: Among 2352 participants (49.5% women), the prevalence of euglycemia, prediabetes, and diabetes was 63%, 30%, and 7%, respectively. Coronary plaque was more commonly present across worsening glycemic categories (euglycemia, 43%; prediabetes, 58%; diabetes, 69%), and similar pattern was observed for other coronary outcomes. In adjusted analyses, compared with euglycemia, prediabetes and diabetes were each associated with higher odds of any coronary plaque (OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.05-1.60] and 1.75 [1.17-2.61], respectively), noncalcified plaque (OR, 1.47 [1.19-1.81] and 1.99 [1.38-2.87], respectively), and plaque with ≥1 high-risk feature (OR, 1.65 [1.14-2.39] and 2.53 [1.48-4.33], respectively). Diabetes was associated with stenosis ≥50% (OR, 3.01 [1.79-5.08]; reference=euglycemia). Among participants with diabetes and estimated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk <5%, 46% had coronary plaque and 10% had stenosis ≥50%. Among participants with diabetes and CAC=0, 30% had coronary plaque and 3% had stenosis ≥50%., Conclusions: Among asymptomatic adults, worse glycemic status is associated with higher prevalence and extent of coronary atherosclerosis, high-risk plaque, and stenosis. In diabetes, CAC was more closely associated with CCTA findings and informative in a larger population than the pooled cohort equations., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Patel has received research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL169708); has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr Blankstein receives research support from Amgen Inc and Novartis Inc and is a consultant to Caristo Diagnostics, Silence Therapeutics, and Roivant Sciences Inc. Dr Shapiro is on the advisory boards of Amgen, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk and is a consultant for Regeneron. Dr. Pandey has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529), and the National Institute of Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL169708). Dr. Pandey has received grant funding (to the institution) from Applied Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Ultromics, Myovista, and Roche; has served as a consultant for and/or received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, Sarfez Therapeutics, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Alleviant, Axon Therapies, and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. Dr. Pandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc. with stocks compensation. Dr Cury declares that he is a consultant to GE Healthcare, Covera Health, and Cleerly. Dr Nasir is on the advisory board of Amgen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and his research is partly supported by the Jerold B. Katz Academy of Translational Research. Dr Cainzos-Achirica and Dr Nasir are part of the steering committee of the PAK-SEHAT study, which is partly funded by Getz Pharma. The other authors report no conflicts.

Aim: To enhance ultrasound teaching delivery to radiology trainees using a simulation course matched to the 2021 Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) curriculum., Material and Methods: An ultrasound simulation training course was designed for specialty trainees (ST) 1 in radiology, which was based on the 2021 RCR curriculum and covered the top ultrasound training priorities. The course was piloted initially on two occasions in a 1-day format to the August 2021 and the March 2022 ST1 intake trainees. Based on the feedback, a comprehensive 4-day course was developed and delivered between October and December 2022 for the August 2022 ST1 intake, funded by Health Education England. The outcomes measured were subjective trainee feedback using numerical scores and free text., Results: All King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust radiology ST1 trainees from the August 2021 to the August 2022 intake participated in ultrasound simulation training. The training matched the RCR curriculum and increased the trainees' confidence and competency in medical ultrasound., Conclusions: Ultrasound simulation training can be successfully delivered to ST1 trainees to match the 2021 RCR curriculum and enhance training in medical ultrasound for radiologists., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The burden of heart failure among people with type 2 diabetes is increasing globally. People with comorbid type 2 diabetes and heart failure often have worse outcomes than those with only one of these conditions-eg, higher hospitalisation and mortality rates. Therefore, it is essential to implement optimal heart failure prevention strategies for people with type 2 diabetes. A detailed understanding of the pathophysiology underlying the occurrence of heart failure in type 2 diabetes can aid clinicians in identifying relevant risk factors and lead to early interventions that can help prevent heart failure. In this Review, we discuss the pathophysiology and risk factors of heart failure in type 2 diabetes. We also review the risk assessment tools for predicting heart failure incidence in people with type 2 diabetes as well as the data from clinical trials that have assessed the efficacy of lifestyle and pharmacological interventions. Finally, we discuss the potential challenges in implementing new management approaches and offer pragmatic recommendations to help overcome these challenges., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AP has received research support from the National Institute on Aging (GEMSSTAR grant: 1R03AG067960-01) and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529); grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor or consultant for Tricog Health, Eli Lilly, Rivus, Cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics; has received non-financial support from Pfizer and Merck; and is also a consultant for Palomarin with stocks compensation. KVP has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. DLB sits on the advisory board of Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; and on the board of directors of Angiowave (with stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (with stock), DRS.LINQ (with stock options), High Enroll (with stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft. DLB was the inaugural chair of the American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee. DLB is a consultant for Broadview Ventures and Hims; and sits on data monitoring committees for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute) for the PORTICO trial funded by St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Boston Scientific (chair for PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (chair for PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine for the ENVISAGE trial funded by Daiichi Sankyo and for the ABILITY-DM trial funded by Concept Medical, Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University for the National Institutes of Health-funded MINT Trial. DLB reports honoraria from the American College of Cardiology as Senior Associate Editor of Clinical Trials and News and chair of American College of Cardiology Accreditation Oversight Committee; Arnold and Porter law firm for work related to Sanofi–Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation; Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute) for the RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring; Belvoir Publications as Editor in Chief of Harvard Heart Letter; Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group for clinical trial steering committees; Cowen and Company; Duke Clinical Research Institute for clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals; HMP Global as Editor in Chief of the Journal of Invasive Cardiology; Journal of the American College of Cardiology as Guest Editor and Associate Editor; K2P as co-chair of interdisciplinary curriculum; Level Ex; Medtelligence–ReachMD for continuing medical education steering committees; MJH Life Sciences; Oakstone CME as Course Director of the Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology; Piper Sandler; Population Health Research Institute for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer; Slack Publications as Chief Medical Editor of Cardiology Intervention Today; Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care as secretary and treasurer; WebMD for continuing medical education steering committees; Wiley for steering committee. DLB reports non-financial relationships as Deputy Editor of Clinical Cardiology; as chair of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry–Acute Coronary Intervention and Outcomes Network Registry steering committee; as chair of the Veterans Affairs Cardiovascular Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Research and publications committee. DLB reports a patent for sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; however, neither DLB or Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent). DLB reports research funding for Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio. DLB reports royalties from Elsevier as Editor of Braunwald's Heart Disease; as site co-investigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; as trustee for the American College of Cardiology; and for unfunded research of FlowCo and Takeda. SV holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery; and reports receiving research grants or speaking honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical, and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, S & L Solutions Event Management, and Sanofi. SV is the President of the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, a federally incorporated not-for-profit physician organisation. MSK declares no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Diabetes Technology Society assembled a panel of clinician experts in diabetology, cardiology, clinical chemistry, nephrology, and primary care to review the current evidence on biomarker screening of people with diabetes (PWD) for heart failure (HF), who are, by definition, at risk for HF (Stage A HF). This consensus report reviews features of HF in PWD from the perspectives of 1) epidemiology, 2) classification of stages, 3) pathophysiology, 4) biomarkers for diagnosing, 5) biomarker assays, 6) diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers, 7) benefits of biomarker screening, 8) consensus recommendations for biomarker screening, 9) stratification of Stage B HF, 10) echocardiographic screening, 11) management of Stage A and Stage B HF, and 12) future directions. The Diabetes Technology Society panel recommends 1) biomarker screening with one of two circulating natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide or N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide), 2) beginning screening five years following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and at the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2D), 3) beginning routine screening no earlier than at age 30 years for T1D (irrespective of age of diagnosis) and at any age for T2D, 4) screening annually, and 5) testing any time of day. The panel also recommends that an abnormal biomarker test defines asymptomatic preclinical HF (Stage B HF). This diagnosis requires follow-up using transthoracic echocardiography for classification into one of four subcategories of Stage B HF, corresponding to risk of progression to symptomatic clinical HF (Stage C HF). These recommendations will allow identification and management of Stage A and Stage B HF in PWD to prevent progression to Stage C HF or advanced HF (Stage D HF)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests APandey has received research support from the National Institute on Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01), and the National Institute on Minority Health and Disparities (R01MD017529). APandey has received grant funding from Applied Therapeutics and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc., Lilly USA, Rivus, Cytokinetics, Pieces Technologies, and Roche Diagnostics, and has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck. APandey is also a consultant for Palomarin Inc. with stock compensation. CMR has received funding from AstraZeneca, Dexcom Inc., Fresenius, Nutricia, and Recor. VNS' employer, University of Colorado, receives research support from Sanofi, NovoNordisk, Insulet, Dexcom, Tandem Diabetes Care, JDRF and NIH, and received honorarium from Dexcom, Insulet, NovoNordisk, Medscape, Lifescan and Tandem Diabetes Care for speaking or advisory role. ABG has received honoraria for lectures/ advisory boards from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehirnger Ingelheim, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. JB is a consultant for Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, American Regent, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharma, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Occlutech, Relypsa, Roche, Sequana, and Vifor. RMB has received research support, has acted as a consultant, or has been on the scientific advisory board for Abbott Diabetes Care, Ascensia, Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc., CeQur, DexCom, Eli Lilly, Hygieia, Insulet, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Onduo, Roche Diabetes Care, Sanofi, United Healthcare, Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Zealand Pharma. RMB's employer, non-profit HealthPartners Institute, contracts for his services for which he receives no personal income. SJG has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair's Research Award, American Heart Association (#929502), Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, scPharmaceuticals, and Sanofi; has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Cytokinetics; and serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Merck, PharmaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals. MNK is a consultant or on the advisory board for Alnylam, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Janssen, Lexicon, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Pfizer, Sanofi, Vifor Pharma, and Youngene. MNK received other research support from Astra Zeneca. MNK received honorariums from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk. LAL has received research funding from, has provided CME on behalf of and/or has acted as an advisor to Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Esperion, HLS, Kowa, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi and Servier and is on a DSMB for Applied Therapeutics. BM was speaker honorarium and member of advisory board of Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk. CM serves or has served on the advisory panel for Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Merck Sharp and Dohme Ltd., Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Medtronic, ActoBio Therapeutics, Pfizer, Imcyse, Insulet, Zealand Pharma, Avotres, Mannkind, Sandoz and Vertex. Financial compensation for these activities has been received by KU Leuven; KU Leuven has received research support for CM from Medtronic, Imcyse, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and ActoBio Therapeutics; CM serves or has served on the speakers bureau for Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Eli Lilly and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca and Novartis. Financial compensation for these activities has been received by KU Leuven. TWM provides research support and speaking support for Abbott Diabetes Care, Dexcom, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Lilly Diabetes, and Sanofi; research support for Insulet Corporation and Novo Nordisk; and is on the advisory panel for Dexcom and Medscape. All funds from all activities are managed by his employer, non-profit HealthPartners Institute dba International Diabetes Center and TWM receives no personal income from these activities. VM has acted as consultant and speaker, received research or educational grants from Sanofi, Novo Nordisk, MSD, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lifescan J & J, Roche Diagnostics, Abbott, USV, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Sun Pharma and from several Indian pharmaceutical companies. KVP has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. APeters received research support from Abbott, Dexcom, and Insulet; was on the advisory board for Zealand, Vertez, and Medscape; and has stock options in Omada/Teladoc. YS was on the advisory board for Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Diagnostics and was a a speaker for Roche Diagnostics. YS has a patent: 20210401347. JJS is faculty at Lifescan Diabetes Institute. GU has received research grant support from Dexcom and Abbott. GU's employer, Emory University, has received funding from Bayer. DCK is a consultant for EOFlow, Integrity, Lifecare, Rockley Photonics, and Thirdwayv. AMY, JH, DK, RP-B, LB, YMB, GAF, GG, ER, GMCR, DBS, KW, EEW, and AHBW have nothing relevant to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Many questions regarding the clinical management of people experiencing pain and related health policy decision-making may best be answered by pragmatic controlled trials. To generate clinically relevant and widely applicable findings, such trials aim to reproduce elements of routine clinical care or are embedded within clinical workflows. In contrast with traditional efficacy trials, pragmatic trials are intended to address a broader set of external validity questions critical for stakeholders (clinicians, healthcare leaders, policymakers, insurers, and patients) in considering the adoption and use of evidence-based treatments in daily clinical care. This article summarizes methodological considerations for pragmatic trials, mainly concerning methods of fundamental importance to the internal validity of trials. The relationship between these methods and common pragmatic trials methods and goals is considered, recognizing that the resulting trial designs are highly dependent on the specific research question under investigation. The basis of this statement was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) systematic review of methods and a consensus meeting. The meeting was organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership. The consensus process was informed by expert presentations, panel and consensus discussions, and a preparatory systematic review. In the context of pragmatic trials of pain treatments, we present fundamental considerations for the planning phase of pragmatic trials, including the specification of trial objectives, the selection of adequate designs, and methods to enhance internal validity while maintaining the ability to answer pragmatic research questions., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background: In the CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) program, canagliflozin reduced the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalization among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate heterogeneity in absolute and relative treatment effects of canagliflozin on HF hospitalization according to baseline HF risk as assessed by diabetes-specific HF risk scores (WATCH-DM [Weight (body mass index), Age, hyperTension, Creatinine, HDL-C, Diabetes control (fasting plasma glucose) and QRS Duration, MI and CABG] and TRS-HF DM [TIMI Risk Score for HF in Diabetes])., Methods: Participants in the CANVAS trial were categorized into low, medium, and high risk for HF using the WATCH-DM score (for participants without prevalent HF) and the TRS-HF DM score (for all participants). The outcome of interest was time to first HF hospitalization. The treatment effect of canagliflozin vs placebo for HF hospitalization was compared across risk strata., Results: Among 10,137 participants with available HF data, 1,446 (14.3%) had HF at baseline. Among participants without baseline HF, WATCH-DM risk category did not modify the treatment effect of canagliflozin (vs placebo) on HF hospitalization (P interaction = 0.56). However, the absolute and relative risk reduction with canagliflozin was numerically greater in the high-risk group (cumulative incidence, canagliflozin vs placebo: 8.1% vs 12.7%; HR: 0.62 [95% CI: 0.37-0.93]; P = 0.03; number needed to treat: 22) than in the low- and intermediate-risk groups. When overall study participants were categorized according to the TRS-HF DM score, a statistically significant difference in the treatment effect of canagliflozin across risk strata was observed (P interaction = 0.04). Canagliflozin significantly reduced the risk of HF hospitalization by 39% in the high-risk group (HR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.48-0.78]; P < 0.001; number needed to treat: 20) but not in the intermediate- or low-risk groups., Conclusions: Among participants with T2DM, the WATCH-DM and TRS-HF DM can reliably identify those at high risk for HF hospitalization and most likely to benefit from canagliflozin., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study, carried out under YODA Project # 2020-4213, used data obtained from the Yale University Open Data Access Project, which has an agreement with Janssen Research and Development, LLC. The interpretation and reporting of research using this data are solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the Yale University Open Data Access Project or Janssen Research and Development, LLC. Dr Khan has received personal fees from Merck. Dr Patel has served as a consultant to Novo Nordisk. Dr DeVore has received research funding through his institution from the American Heart Association, Biofourmis, Bodyport, Cytokinetics, American Regent Inc, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Novartis, and Story Health; has provided consulting services for and/or received honoraria from Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Cardionomic, InnaMed, LivaNova, Natera, Novartis, Procyrion, Story Health, Vifor, and Zoll; and has received nonfinancial support from Abbott for educational and research activities. Dr Vaduganathan is supported by the KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training award from Harvard Catalyst (National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Award UL 1TR002541); and has served on advisory boards or has received research grant support from American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxter Healthcare, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Relypsa. Dr Lam has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, and Roche Diagnostics; has served as a consultant or on advisory boards/steering committees/executive committees for Actelion, Alleviant Medical, Allysta, Amgen, ANaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Darma, EchoNous, Impulse Dynamics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research and Development, Medscape, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Radcliffe Group, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Us2.ai and WebMD Global; and has served as cofounder and non-executive director of Us2.ai. Dr Zannad has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; has received personal fees from Janssen, Novartis, Boston Scientific, Amgen, CVRx, AstraZeneca, Vifor Fresenius, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Applied Therapeutics, Merck, Bayer, and Cellprothera outside of the submitted work; and has received other support from cardiovascular clinical trialists and Cardiorenal outside of the submitted work. Dr Verma holds a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery; has received research grants and honoraria from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, and Pfizer; has received honoraria from Sanofi, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and the Toronto Knowledge Translation Working Group; is a member of the scientific excellence committee of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction); has served as a national lead investigator of the DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-Reduced trials; and is the president of the Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, a federally incorporated not-for-profit physician organization. Dr Butler has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, CVRx, Foundry, G3 Pharma, Imbria, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, Sanofi, Sequana Medical, V-Wave Ltd, and Vifor. Dr Pandey has received grant funding outside the present study from Applied Therapeutics; has received honoraria outside of the present study as an advisor/consultant for Tricog Health Inc, Lilly, USA, Rivus, and Roche Diagnostics; has received nonfinancial support from Pfizer and Merck; is supported by the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, and the National Institute of Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01); and has received grant support from Applied Therapeutics. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We aimed to examine exercise intensity among older adults participating from home in remotely delivered EnhanceFitness (Tele-EF). Exercise intensity was assessed through Fitbit-measured heart rate and the Borg 10-point rating of perceived exertion over 1 week of a 16-week exercise program. Outcomes included mean minutes spent at or above the heart rate reserve calculated threshold for moderate intensity and mean rating of perceived exertion. Pearson and Spearman rank correlations were used to examine associations between baseline characteristics with exercise intensity. During the 60-min classes, the 55 participants achieved moderate intensity for a mean of 21.0 min (SD = 13.5) and had a mean rating of perceived exertion of 4.9 (SD = 1.2). There were no significant associations between baseline characteristics and exercise intensity. Older adults can achieve sustained moderate-intensity exercise during Tele-EF supervised classes. Baseline physical function, physical activity, and other health characteristics did not limit ability to exercise at a moderate intensity, though further investigation is warranted.