positive predictive value for malignancy on surgical excision of breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential b3 diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum assisted needle core biopsy vancb a large multi institutional study in italy

Abstract Percutaneous core biopsy (CB) has been introduced to increase the ability of accurately diagnosing breast malignancies without the need of resorting to surgery. Compared to conventional automated 14 gauge needle core biopsy (NCB), vacuum-assisted needle core biopsy (VANCB) allows obtaining larger specimens and has recognized advantages particularly when the radiological pattern is represented by microcalcifications. Regardless of technical improvements, a small percentage of percutaneous CBs performed to detect breast lesions are still classified, according to European and UK guidelines, in the borderline B3 category, including a group of heterogeneous lesions with uncertain malignant potential. We aimed to assess the prevalence and positive predictive values (PPV) on surgical excision (SE) of B3 category (overall and by sub-categories) in a large series of non-palpable breast lesions assessed through VANCB, also comparison with published data on CB. Overall, 26,165 consecutive stereotactic VANCB were identified in 22 Italian centres: 3107 (11.9%) were classified as B3, of which 1644 (54.2%) proceeded to SE to establish a definitive histological diagnosis of breast pathology. Due to a high proportion of microcalcifications as main radiological pattern, the overall PPV was 21.2% (range 10.6%–27.3% for different B3 subtypes), somewhat lower than the average value (24.5%) from published studies (range 9.9%–35.1%). Our study, to date the largest series of B3 with definitive histological assessment on SE, suggests that B3 lesions should be referred for SE even if VANCB is more accurate than NCB in the diagnostic process of non-palpable, sonographically invisible breast lesions

Clinical Phenotypes and Comorbidity in European Sleep Apnoea Patients

Background Clinical presentation phenotypes of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and their association with comorbidity as well as impact on adherence to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment have not been established. Methods A prospective follow-up cohort of adult patients with OSA (apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) of 655/h) from 17 European countries and Israel (n = 6,555) was divided into four clinical presentation phenotypes based on daytime symptoms labelled as excessive daytime sleepiness ("EDS") and nocturnal sleep problems other than OSA (labelled as "insomnia"): 1) EDS (daytime+/nighttime-), 2) EDS/insomnia (daytime+/nighttime+), 3) non-EDS/noninsomnia (daytime-/nighttime-), 4) and insomnia (daytime-/nighttime+) phenotype. Results The EDS phenotype comprised 20.7%, the non-EDS/non-insomnia type 25.8%, the EDS/ insomnia type 23.7%, and the insomnia phenotype 29.8% of the entire cohort. Thus, clinical presentation phenotypes with insomnia symptoms were dominant with 53.5%, but only 5.6% had physician diagnosed insomnia. Cardiovascular comorbidity was less prevalent in the EDS and most common in the insomnia phenotype (48.9% vs. 56.8%, p<0.001) despite more severe OSA in the EDS group (AHI 35.0\ub125.5/h vs. 27.9\ub122.5/h, p<0.001, respectively). Psychiatric comorbidity was associated with insomnia like OSA phenotypes independent of age, gender and body mass index (HR 1.5 (1.188-1.905), p<0.001). The EDS phenotype tended to associate with higher CPAP usage (22.7 min/d, p = 0.069) when controlled for age, gender, BMI and sleep apnoea severity. Conclusions Phenotypes with insomnia symptoms comprised more than half of OSA patients and were more frequently linked with comorbidity than those with EDS, despite less severe OSA. CPAP usage was slightly higher in phenotypes with EDS

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation &lt;92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). Findings: Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p&lt;0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p&lt;0·0001). Interpretation: In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

The Analogical Symptom Assessment: validation in a sample of new parents during the prenatal period

Background: The Analogical Symptom Assessment test (ASA) (Baldoni, 2013) is a symptomatologic self-report questionnaire that assesses the general state of health as perceived by the subject. It consists of seven questions evaluated on an analogical basis (a ten-centimeter line). The aim of this study is to measure the psychometric characteristics of ASA in a sample of parents during the prenatal period. Methods: A sample of new fathers and mothers (200 couples, 400 parents) at the VII-VIII months prenatal was involved in the study. All participants completed the following questionnaires: ASA, PAPA, CES-D, SCL-90-R, PSS and DAS. Results: Statistical analysis reported acceptable values of Cronbach\u2019s alpha both in mothers (\u3b1 = 0,76) and fathers (\u3b1 = 0,67). Spearman\u2019s correlation coefficient between subscales and general scales of the different tests was analyzed to assess the criterion-related validity of ASA. Findings revealed significant (p &lt; 0,05) and strong (r &gt; 0,5) association between indicators of anxiety, depression, anger, stress and somatic symptoms both in mothers and fathers. Results showed higher scores (p &lt; 0,05) in depression, anxiety, anger and somatic symptoms in mothers. Fathers reported higher scores (p &lt; 0,05) only for addictions and risky behaviors. Conclusions: ASA revealed good concurrent validity and internal reliability in mothers and fathers. It also appears capable of capturing some gender differences in the manifestation of suffering. Due to its simplicity, cost effectiveness and administration speed, ASA turns out to be a useful screening tool in clinical and in research contexts

The Perinatal Assessment of Paternal Affectivity (PAPA): Italian validation of a new tool for the screening of perinatal depression and affective disorders in fathers

Background: Questionnaires for the screening of paternal perinatal psychological distress are based on clinical manifestations expressed by women, showing limitations in capturing the wide array of signs and symptoms exhibited by men. The current study aimed to validate the Perinatal Assessment of Paternal Affectivity, a new self-report tool for the screening of paternal depressive and affective disorder.Method: This study used a cross-sectional design with a 3-month test-retest, involving respectively 385 (T1) and a sub-sample of 111(T2) fathers. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test structural validity and concurrent validity was assessed by Spearman correlations. We assessed reliability using McDonald's omega and ordinal alpha. Group differences in PAPA scores based on sociodemographic were also tested.Results: The CFA reported a one factor structure as the optimal solution. The PAPA also showed adequate reliability and internal consistency as well as acceptable test-retest indices. Concurrent validity was confirmed by significant correlations between PAPA total score and standardized test scores. Non-Italian fathers and fathers who experienced recent stressful life events reported higher PAPA scores.Limitations: Our sample was not homogeneous in terms of nationality and most of the participants, were from Northern Italy. Some risk factors associated with paternal parental psychological distress (e.g., unplanned pregnancy) have not been considered.Conclusion: This study provides initial evidence of validity and reliability of the PAPA as a brief and sensitive screening tool to detect signs and symptoms of paternal affective disorder during both prenatal and postnatal period

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease