Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a heterogenous group of malignancies originating from neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal tract, the incidence of which has been increasing for several decades. While there has been significant progress in the development of therapeutic options for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, these remain limited both in quantity and durability of benefit. This review examines the latest research elucidating the mechanisms of both up-front resistance and the eventual development of resistance to the primary systemic therapeutic options including somatostatin analogues, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with lutetium Lu 177 dotatate, everolimus, sunitinib, and temozolomide-based chemotherapy. Further, potential strategies for overcoming these mechanisms of resistance are reviewed in addition to a comprehensive review of ongoing and planned clinical trials addressing this important challenge.
Background Individuals with intravenous drug use (IDU) have higher risk for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) and increased management complexity. The goal of this study was to compare differences in SAB characteristics, adherence to standard of care metrics, and clinical outcomes in those with and without IDU. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on cases of SAB between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2017 at a 500-bed teaching hospital. Inclusion criteria was age > 18 years and ≥ one blood culture positive for S. aureus. Patients were excluded if they transferred hospitals, had care withdrawn or died within 48 hours of diagnosis or had a ventricular assist device infection. Records were reviewed for substance use, SAB characteristics, standards of care, and outcomes. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Results In 248 patients with SAB, 28.2% had documented IDU. Median age was 37 (IDU) and 57 (non-IDU). In the IDU group, 75.7% had the formal diagnosis of opioid use disorder and 78.9% of stimulant use disorder. IDU was associated with hepatitis C and houselessness while non-IDU was associated with diabetes, hemodialysis, and cancer. Those with IDU had higher rates of MRSA, endocarditis, and spinal infections, but did not have higher rates of polymicrobial infections or venous thrombosis. There was no difference in appropriate repeat blood cultures, antibiotic management, and ID consultation. Length of stay and against medical advice (AMA) discharges were higher in those with IDU. There was no difference in 90-day recurrence or readmission, but 90-day mortality was higher in the non-IDU group. Conclusion There was no difference in adherence to SAB quality of care metrics between groups with and without IDU. Despite the IDU group being younger with fewer comorbidities, 90-day readmissions were not different between groups. This bears further analysis but may represent the influence of therapy completion, AMA discharges, and unmeasured social determinants of health. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures
Introduction: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Oregon Health and Science University Blood & Host Defense medical school pre-clinical block was reformatted to a completely online curriculum. In previous years, the curriculum consisted of traditional 1-hour lectures from Monday to Wednesday, with small group review sessions on Thursday prior to weekly assessments on Friday. Changes for the virtual curriculum included shortened, pre-recorded lectures divided into modules by topic, with follow-up questions to test comprehension in real-time. These were followed by live, 1-hour Q&A sessions each day. Weekly, 2-3-hour case-based review sessions were also held virtually in real-time. We aimed to study student performance in this new curriculum, and to learn about the satisfaction of both students and instructors with these changes. Methods: To measure performance, class testing averages across graded components were compared to previous years. To measure satisfaction, first-year medical students and course instructors were polled via anonymous, voluntary Qualtrics® surveys after course completion. Answers were given on a 5-point Likert scale. Students were also asked to answer four free-response questions. Results: Class testing averages were similar to previous years across all graded components of the curriculum. Following remediation, the pass rate for the course was 100%. Fifty eight out of 150 students completed the satisfaction survey, a response rate of 39%. Most students found pre-recorded lectures and weekly live review sessions "useful" or "very useful," but responses were more varied for daily Q&A sessions. Most students either "somewhat preferred" or "greatly preferred" the module-based format over hour-long lectures and indicated they would like a similar format in future virtual blocks. Themes from qualitative questions included a preference for virtual curriculum for its increased flexibility. A small subset of students described a preference for in-person lecture due to increased engagement. Thirteen out of 31 instructors completed the survey, for a response rate of 42%. Six of the respondents indicated that they would prefer the traditional version of the curriculum for the following year, while 5 selected the new virtual-only format. Twelve instructors completed Likert-scale questions comparing the two curriculums. There was no statistically significant difference in satisfaction with lecture format, time and effort to prepare lectures, amount of interaction with students, and overall teaching experience. However, there was a significant increase in dissatisfaction with the quality of student interaction and student engagement with the new virtual curriculum. Conclusions: Students successfully learned in the new, virtual curriculum as demonstrated by summative assessments. Trends that emerged from student feedback included a preference for module-based format over hour-long lectures, and pre-recorded lectures over live sessions. Most respondents enjoyed the weekly live review sessions, but were mixed regarding daily live Q&A sessions. We suspect this mixed feedback for the daily reviews was due to constraints on the schedule and the necessity of viewing all modules each morning prior to the session. From the perspective of instructors, there was perhaps unsurprisingly decreased satisfaction with student engagement in the virtual setting. However, overall, there was no meaningful difference in preference regarding lecture format. When combining this with the diverse needs and preferences of medical students, future versions of the course should consider incorporating more virtual elements. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.