breast screening axillary lymph node status of interval cancers by interval year

Abstract The aim of this study was to determine whether the excess risk of axillary lymph node metastases (N+) differs between interval breast cancers arising shortly after a negative mammography and those presenting later. In a registry-based series of pT1a–pT3 breast carcinoma patients aged 50–74years from the Italian screening programmes, the odds ratio (OR) for interval cancers ( n =791) versus the screen-detected (SD) cancers ( n =1211) having N+ was modelled using forward stepwise logistic regression analysis. The interscreening interval was divided into 1–12, 13–18, and 19–24months. The prevalence of N+ was 28% among SD cancers. With a prevalence of 38%, 42%, and 44%, the adjusted (demographics and N staging technique) OR of N+ for cancers diagnosed between 1–12, 13–18, and 19–24months of interval was 1.41 (95% confidence interval 1.06–1.87), 1.74 (1.31–2.31), and 1.91 (1.43–2.54), respectively. Histologic type, tumour grade, and tumour size were entered in turn into the model. Histologic type had modest effects. With adjustment for tumour grade, the ORs decreased to 1.23 (0.92–1.65), 1.58 (1.18–2.12), and 1.73 (1.29–2.32). Adjusting for tumour size decreased the ORs to 0.95 (0.70–1.29), 1.34 (0.99–1.81), and 1.37 (1.01–1.85). The strength of confounding by tumour size suggested that the excess risk of N+ for first-year interval cancers reflected only their higher chronological age, whereas the increased aggressiveness of second-year interval cancers was partly accounted for by intrinsic biological attributes

Solid Organ Transplantation During COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Web-based Survey on Resources’ Allocation

Background. Solid organ transplants (SOTs) are life-saving interventions, recently challenged by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SOTs require a multistep process, which can be affected by COVID-19 at several phases. Methods. SOT-specialists, COVID-19-specialists, and medical ethicists designed an international survey according to CHERRIES guidelines. Personal opinions about continuing SOTs, safe managing of donors and recipients, as well as equity of resources' allocation were investigated. The survey was sent by e-mail. Multiple approaches were used (corresponding authors from Scopus, websites of scientific societies, COVID-19 webinars). After the descriptive analysis, univariate and multivariate ordinal regression analysis was performed. Results. There were 1819 complete answers from 71 countries. The response rate was 49%. Data were stratified according to region, macrospecialty, and organ of interest. Answers were analyzed using univariate- multivariate ordinal regression analysis and thematic analysis. Overall, 20% of the responders thought SOTs should not stop (continue transplant without restriction); over 70% suggested SOTs should selectively stop, and almost 10% indicated they should completely stop. Furthermore, 82% agreed to shift resources from transplant to COVID-19 temporarily. Briefly, main reason for not stopping was that if the transplant will not proceed, the organ will be wasted. Focusing on SOT from living donors, 61% stated that activity should be restricted only to "urgent"cases. At the multivariate analysis, factors identified in favor of continuing transplant were Italy, ethicist, partially disagreeing on the equity question, a high number of COVID-19- related deaths on the day of the answer, a high IHDI country. Factors predicting to stop SOTs were Europe except-Italy, public university hospital, and strongly agreeing on the equity question. Conclusions. In conclusion, the majority of responders suggested that transplant activity should be continued through the implementation of isolation measures and the adoption of the COVID-19-free pathways. Differences between professional categories are less strong than supposed

Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study

BACKGROUND: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Societa Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18 -member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when >70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. RESULTS: Two -hundred -forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first -round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available

Burnout among surgeons before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: an international survey

Background: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had many significant impacts within the surgical realm, and surgeons have been obligated to reconsider almost every aspect of daily clinical practice. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study reported in compliance with the CHERRIES guidelines and conducted through an online platform from June 14th to July 15th, 2020. The primary outcome was the burden of burnout during the pandemic indicated by the validated Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure. Results: Nine hundred fifty-four surgeons completed the survey. The median length of practice was 10 years; 78.2% included were male with a median age of 37 years old, 39.5% were consultants, 68.9% were general surgeons, and 55.7% were affiliated with an academic institution. Overall, there was a significant increase in the mean burnout score during the pandemic; longer years of practice and older age were significantly associated with less burnout. There were significant reductions in the median number of outpatient visits, operated cases, on-call hours, emergency visits, and research work, so, 48.2% of respondents felt that the training resources were insufficient. The majority (81.3%) of respondents reported that their hospitals were included in the management of COVID-19, 66.5% felt their roles had been minimized; 41% were asked to assist in non-surgical medical practices, and 37.6% of respondents were included in COVID-19 management. Conclusions: There was a significant burnout among trainees. Almost all aspects of clinical and research activities were affected with a significant reduction in the volume of research, outpatient clinic visits, surgical procedures, on-call hours, and emergency cases hindering the training. Trial registration: The study was registered on clicaltrials.gov "NCT04433286" on 16/06/2020

Omecamtiv mecarbil in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, GALACTIC‐HF: baseline characteristics and comparison with contemporary clinical trials

Aims: The safety and efficacy of the novel selective cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil, in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is tested in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC‐HF) trial. Here we describe the baseline characteristics of participants in GALACTIC‐HF and how these compare with other contemporary trials. Methods and Results: Adults with established HFrEF, New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) ≥ II, EF ≤35%, elevated natriuretic peptides and either current hospitalization for HF or history of hospitalization/ emergency department visit for HF within a year were randomized to either placebo or omecamtiv mecarbil (pharmacokinetic‐guided dosing: 25, 37.5 or 50 mg bid). 8256 patients [male (79%), non‐white (22%), mean age 65 years] were enrolled with a mean EF 27%, ischemic etiology in 54%, NYHA II 53% and III/IV 47%, and median NT‐proBNP 1971 pg/mL. HF therapies at baseline were among the most effectively employed in contemporary HF trials. GALACTIC‐HF randomized patients representative of recent HF registries and trials with substantial numbers of patients also having characteristics understudied in previous trials including more from North America (n = 1386), enrolled as inpatients (n = 2084), systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg (n = 1127), estimated glomerular filtration rate < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (n = 528), and treated with sacubitril‐valsartan at baseline (n = 1594). Conclusions: GALACTIC‐HF enrolled a well‐treated, high‐risk population from both inpatient and outpatient settings, which will provide a definitive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this novel therapy, as well as informing its potential future implementation

Composite Peptide-Agarose Hydrogels for Robust and High-Sensitivity 3D Immunoassays

Canonical immunoassays rely on highly sensitive and specific capturing of circulating biomarkers by interacting biomolecular baits. In this frame, bioprobe immobilization in spatially discrete three-dimensional (3D) spots onto analytical surfaces by hydrogel encapsulation was shown to provide relevant advantages over conventional two-dimensional (2D) platforms. Yet, the broad application of 3D systems is still hampered by hurdles in matching their straightforward fabrication with optimal functional properties. Herein, we report on a composite hydrogel obtained by combining a self-assembling peptide (namely, Q3 peptide) with low-temperature gelling agarose that is proved to have simple and robust application in the fabrication of microdroplet arrays, overcoming hurdles and limitations commonly associated with 3D hydrogel assays. We demonstrate the real-case scenario feasibility of our 3D system in the profiling of Covid-19 patients' serum IgG immunoreactivity, which showed remarkably improved signal-to-noise ratio over canonical assays in the 2D format and exquisite specificity. Overall, the new two-component hydrogel widens the perspectives of hydrogel-based arrays and represents a step forward towards their routine use in analytical practices

Pulmonary nodules: volume repeatability at multidetector CT lung cancer screening.

To assess in vivo volumetric repeatability of an automated software algorithm in pulmonary nodules detected during a lung cancer screening trial.This study was approved by an institutional review board. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Data were collected from the Multicentric Italian Lung Detection project, a randomized controlled lung cancer screening trial. The first 1236 consecutive baseline computed tomographic (CT) studies performed at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan were evaluated. Among the enrolled participants, those who underwent repeat low-dose CT after 3 months and had at least one indeterminate nodule with a volume of more than 60 mm(3) (diameter of 4.8 mm or greater) were considered. Nonsolid, part-solid, and pleural-based nodules were excluded from this study. A descriptive analysis was performed by calculating means and standard deviations of nodule volumes at three assessment times (at baseline and 3 and 12 months later). The volume measurement repeatability was determined by using the approach described by Bland and Altman.One hundred one subjects (70 men, 31 women; mean age, 58 years) with 233 eligible nodules (mean volume, 98.3 mm(3); range, 5-869 mm(3)) were identified. The 95\% confidence interval for difference in measured volumes was in the range of +/-27\%. About 70\% of measurements had a relative difference in nodule volume of less than 10\%. No malignant lesions were registered during the follow-up of these subjects.Semiautomatic volumetry is sufficiently accurate and repeatable and may be useful in assisting with lung nodule management in a lung cancer screening program