Context Solid organ transplant recipients have elevated cancer risk due to immunosuppression and oncogenic viral infections. Since most prior research has concerned kidney recipients, large studies that include recipients of differing organs can inform cancer etiology. Objective Describe the overall pattern of cancer among solid organ transplant recipients. Design Cohort study using linked data from the U.S. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (1987–2008) and 13 state/regional cancer registries. Participants and Setting Solid organ transplant recipients in the U.S. Main Outcome Measure Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and excess absolute risks (EARs) assessing relative and absolute cancer risk in transplant recipients compared to the general population. Results Registry linkages yielded data on 175,732 solid organ transplants (58.4% kidney, 21.6% liver, 10.0% heart, 4.0% lung). Overall cancer risk was elevated (N=10,656 cases, incidence 1374.7 per 100,000 person-years; SIR 2.10, 95%CI 2.06–2.14; EAR 719.3, 95%CI 693.3–745.6, per 100,000 person-years). Risk was increased (p<0.001) for 32 different malignancies, some related to known infections (e.g., anal cancer, Kaposi sarcoma) and others unrelated (e.g., melanoma, thyroid and lip cancers). The most common malignancies with elevated risk were non-Hodgkin lymphoma (N=1504, incidence 194.0; SIR 7.54, 95%CI 7.17–7.93; EAR 168.3, 95%CI 158.6–178.4) and cancers of the lung (N=1344, incidence 173.4; SIR 1.97, 95%CI 1.86–2.08; EAR 85.3, 95%CI 76.2–94.8), liver (N=930, incidence 120.0; SIR 11.56, 95%CI 10.83–12.33; EAR 109.6, 95%CI 102.0–117.6), and kidney (N=752, incidence 97.0; SIR 4.65, 95%CI 4.32–4.99; EAR 76.1, 95%CI 69.3–83.3). Lung cancer risk was most elevated in lung recipients (SIR 6.13, 95%CI 5.18–7.21) but also increased among other recipients (SIR 1.46, 95%CI 1.34–1.59 for kidney; 1.95, 1.74–2.19 for liver; 2.67, 2.40–2.95 for heart). Liver cancer was elevated only among liver recipients (SIR 43.83, 95%CI 40.90–46.91), who manifested exceptional risk in the first 6 months (SIR 508.97, 95%CI 474.16–545.66) and continuing two-fold excess for 10–15 years (SIR 2.22, 95%CI 1.57–3.04). Among kidney recipients, kidney cancer was elevated (SIR 6.66, 95%CI 6.12–7.23) and bimodal in onset. Kidney cancer was also increased in liver and heart recipients (SIR 1.80, 95%CI 1.40–2.29, and 2.90, 2.32–3.59, respectively). Conclusions Recipients of a kidney, liver, heart, or lung transplant have an increased risk for diverse infection-related and unrelated cancers, compared with the general population.

The gtsummary package provides an elegant and flexible way to create publication-ready summary tables in R. A critical part of the work of statisticians, data scientists, and analysts is summarizing data sets and regression models in R and publishing or sharing polished summary tables. The gtsummary package was created to streamline these everyday analysis tasks by allowing users to easily create reproducible summaries of data sets, regression models, survey data, and survival data with a simple interface and very little code. The package follows a tidy framework, making it easy to integrate with standard data workflows, and offers many table customization features through function arguments, helper functions, and custom themes.

The number of pancreas transplants performed in the United States increased by 7.0% in 2016 over the previous year, the first such increase in more than a decade, largely attributable to an increase in simultaneous kidney pancreas transplants. Transplant rates increased in 2016, and mortality on the waiting list decreased. The declining enthusiasm for pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplants persisted. The uniform definition of graft failure was approved by the OPTN Board of Directors in 2015 and will be implemented in early 2018. Meanwhile, SRTR continues to refrain from reporting pancreas graft failure data. The OPTN/UNOS Pancreas Transplantation Committee is seeking to broaden allocation of pancreata across compatible ABO blood types in a proposal out for public comment July 31 to October 2, 2017. A new initiative to provide guidance on the benefits of PAK transplants is also out for public comment.

ObjectiveTo examine the relationship between depressive disorders and unprotected anal intercourse with casual partners, among homosexually active men attending for primary care. MethodsThe first 460 homosexually active men enrolling in an Australian integrated primary care programme were screened for current depressive disorders using the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) and completed questionnaires on their sexual behaviour in the prior 6 months. One hundred and sixty-two (35%) were HIV positive, 283 (62%) were HIV negative and 15 (3%) were untested. ResultsThe prevalence of major depressive episode (MDE), as measured by the PRIME-MD, on enrolment was 28% (129/460), while the prevalence of dysthymic disorder (DD) was 26% (121/460). These include 84 men (18%) who met the criteria for both disorders ('double depression'). Men with DD alone, however, were significantly more likely than men with neither disorder to report having had unprotected anal intercourse with a casual partner (11/38 [29%] vs. 43/292 [15%]; OR: 2.36 [95%CI: 1.09-5.10]; P 5 0.035). ConclusionsDepressive disorders were highly prevalent in this cohort and independent of HIV status. MDE was associated with reduced sexual activity. Among men without MDE, the presence of DD was independently associated with an increased likelihood of reporting unsafe anal sex with a casual partner in the prior 6 months.Keywords: homosexual men, neuropsychological, prevention of sexual transmission, psychiatry, psychosocial, risk factors, sexual behaviour Received: 30 September 2002, accepted 20 February 2003 Introduction Depressive disorders are highly prevalent in people with HIV infection [1][2][3][4][5]. Clinical wisdom is that this high prevalence results from the psychosocial stress of HIV diagnosis and disease together, perhaps, with direct neurochemical effects of the virus. A number of studies, however, identify levels of depressive disorder among uninfected members of the communities particularly affected by HIV that are similarly high [6][7][8][9][10]. Ciesla and Roberts, in a recent metaanalysis of 10 studies, concluded that HIV infection did appear to be an independent risk factor for major depression, but not for dysthymic disorder (DD) [11].The relationship between depression and HIV risk behaviour among gay men has been addressed in many studies, but the results have been conflicting. Ross [12] [20]. Dolezal in a recent study of homosexually active Latino men found a positive association between measures of selfworth and sexual risk taking [21], and Robins [22,23] found that gay men who reported unprotected anal intercourse had lower levels of psychological distress than their peers. Similarly, Rubb's group found that homosexually active men whose responses indicated depressed ideation were less likely to report having engaged in receptive or insertive unprotected anal intercourse [24].While these results appear conflicting, it seems that no previous study has differentiated between the two common patterns of depression seen c...

The number of pancreas transplants performed in the United States stabilized over the last 3 years after nearly a decade of steady decline. Numbers of new additions to the list also stabilized during the same period. Notably, the persistent decline in pancreas after kidney transplants also seems to have abated, at least for now. The first full year of data after implementation of the new pancreas allocation system revealed no change in the distribution of organs between simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplant and pancreas transplant alone. The percentage of kidneys used in SPK transplants was also unchanged. While a uniform definition of pancreas graft failure was approved in June 2015, it is awaiting implementation. Meanwhile, SRTR will refrain from publishing pancreas graft failure data in the program-specific reports. Therefore, it is difficult to track trends in outcomes after pancreas transplant over the past 2 years. New initiatives by the OPTN/UNOS Pancreas Transplantation Committee include facilitated pancreas allocation and broadened allocation of pancreata across compatible ABO blood types to increase organ utilization.

Patient survival after pancreas after kidney transplant (PAK) has been reported to be inferior to patient survival after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant (SPK). The authors examine national data to further explore allograft (kidney and pancreas) and patient survival after PAK. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyze Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from 1995 to 2010. The analysis compared PAK and SPK candidates and recipients. Kaplan-Meier analysis results showed that PAK after either a living or a deceased donor kidney transplant is associated with increased kidney graft survival compared with recipients with type 1 diabetes who received only a kidney. The best kidney allograft survival was for patients who received a living donor kidney followed by PAK. Receiving a living donor kidney was associated with increased pancreas allograft survival compared with receiving a deceased donor kidney. PAK transplant recipients who receive both organs have a survival advantage compared with uremic candidates who receive neither (SPK waitlist). Compared with uremic diabetic waitlist patients, SPK and PAK recipients showed similar overall patient survival. Successful PAK offers a survival advantage compared with receiving neither a kidney nor a pancreas transplant. These data also suggest that receiving a pancreas (after kidney) transplant may have a protective effect on the kidney allograft.

IntroductionMental health disparities based on minority racial status are well characterized, including inequities in access, symptom severity, diagnosis, and treatment. For African Americans, racism may affect mental health through factors such as poverty and segregation, which have operated since slavery. While the need to address racism in medical training has been recognized, there are few examples of formal didactic curricula in the psychiatric literature. Antiracism didactics during psychiatry residency provide a unique opportunity to equip physicians to address bias and racism in mental health care.MethodsWith advocacy by residents in the Massachusetts General Hospital/McLean Psychiatry residency program, the Division of Public and Community Psychiatry developed a curriculum addressing racial inequities in mental health, particularly those experienced by African Americans. Four 50-minute interactive didactic lectures were integrated into the required didactic curriculum (one lecture per postgraduate training class) during the 2015–2016 academic year.ResultsOf residents who attended lectures and provided anonymous feedback, 97% agreed that discussing racism in formal didactics was at least “somewhat” positive, and 92% agreed that it should “probably” or “definitely” remain in the curriculum. Qualitative feedback centered on a need for more time to discuss racism as well as a desire to learn more about minority mental health advocacy in general.DiscussionTeaching about racism as part of required training conveys the explicit message that this is core curricular material and critical knowledge for all physicians. These lectures can serve as a springboard for dissemination and provide scaffolding for similar curriculum development in medical residency programs.

Key Points Question What are the real-world outcomes for Medicare patients with metastatic cancer receiving recently approved oncology drugs and how do they compare with pivotal clinical trial outcomes? Findings In this retrospective cohort study, outcomes were compared between clinical trial participants and treated Medicare patients across 22 cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for 29 indications. Median duration of therapy and overall survival among treated Medicare patients were generally shorter than among trial participants, and dose reductions were common among Medicare patients. Meaning Pivotal clinical trials may provide inadequate data for the purpose of clinical decision-making among Medicare beneficiaries with advanced cancer.