The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged front-line clinical decision-making, leading to numerous published prognostic tools. However, few models have been prospectively validated and none report implementation in practice. Here, we use 3345 retrospective and 474 prospective hospitalizations to develop and validate a parsimonious model to identify patients with favorable outcomes within 96 h of a prediction, based on real-time lab values, vital signs, and oxygen support variables. In retrospective and prospective validation, the model achieves high average precision (88.6% 95% CI: [88.4–88.7] and 90.8% [90.8–90.8]) and discrimination (95.1% [95.1–95.2] and 86.8% [86.8–86.9]) respectively. We implemented and integrated the model into the EHR, achieving a positive predictive value of 93.3% with 41% sensitivity. Preliminary results suggest clinicians are adopting these scores into their clinical workflows.
Background
There is little data regarding the risk of new or recurrent cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and a prior history of cancer who are exposed to ustekinumab or vedolizumab. We assessed the risk of subsequent cancer in patients exposed to these agents.
Methods
We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with IBD and a history of cancer at an academic medical center between January 2013 and December 2020. We collected data on demographics, IBD and cancer disease characteristics, and drug exposures. The primary exposure was immunosuppressive therapy after diagnosis of cancer. The primary outcome was interval development of new or recurrent cancer.
Results
Of 390 patients with IBD and a previous history of cancer, 37 were exposed to vedolizumab, 14 ustekinumab, 41 antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF), and 31 immunomodulator; and 267 were not exposed to immunosuppression following cancer diagnosis. During a total median follow-up time of 52 months, 81 (20%) patients developed subsequent cancer: 6 (16%) were exposed to vedolizumab, 2 (14%) to ustekinumab, 3 (10%) to immunomodulators, 12 (29%) to anti-TNF, and 56 (21%) with no immunosuppression (P = .41). In a multivariable Cox model adjusting for age, IBD subtype, smoking, cancer recurrence risk, and cancer stage, there was no increase in subsequent cancer with vedolizumab (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.27-7.01) or ustekinumab (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.17-5.41). Patients with more than 1 biologic exposure also did not have an increased risk of subsequent cancer.
Conclusions
Exposure to ustekinumab or vedolizumab in patients with IBD and a prior history of cancer does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of subsequent new or recurrent cancer.
ObjectivesEsophageal food bolus impaction is a medical emergency and 10-20% of impacted food boluses will require endoscopic removal. Emergent and prolonged procedures are associated with increased adverse events. We are interested in the relationship between the pre-endoscopic duration of esophageal food impaction and the duration of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) performed to remove the impacted food bolus.MethodsBetween 2010 and 2021, we examined EGD procedures performed for esophageal food impaction. Subjects were classified according to pre-endoscopic duration of food impaction.ResultsWe found a positive correlation between pre-endoscopic duration of food impaction and procedure length (r=0.18). Esophageal impactions with mixed foods resulted in the longest procedure duration (p<0.05). Increasing age, male gender, and duration of impaction greater than 42 hours were significantly associated with increased procedure duration (p<0.05). Esophageal perforations, prolonged intubations, admissions following EGD, and readmissions were associated with EGD duration greater than 25.5 minutes. No adverse events occurred in patients who underwent EGD within 6 hours of symptom onset.ConclusionsIn the case of an esophageal food impaction, the time between symptom onset and endoscopy is positively correlated with procedure length and risk of adverse outcomes. We suggest that food impaction should remain an indication for emergent endoscopy. Prospective studies evaluating the safety and outcomes of prolonged time to endoscopy will further clarify the management of esophageal food impactions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.