ImportanceGender-affirming care is a key clinical area that can benefit from implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Identifying barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation is needed to develop an evidence-based implementation strategy.ObjectiveTo identify (1) PROMs previously implemented for gender-affirming care and constructs measured, (2) how patients completed PROMs and how results were reported and used, and (3) barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation.Evidence ReviewIn this systematic review, PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to October 25, 2021, and updated on December 16, 2022. Gray literature was searched through gray literature database, online search engine, and targeted website searching. Inclusion criteria were (1) original articles of (2) a formally developed PROM or ad hoc instrument administered for gender-affirming care to (3) patients accessing gender-affirming care. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool was used to evaluate quality of included studies. This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021233080).FindingsIn total, 286 studies were included, representing 85 395 transgender and nonbinary patients from more than 30 countries. A total of 205 different PROMs were used in gender-affirming care. No studies described using an implementation science theory, model, or framework to support PROM deployment. Key barriers to PROM implementation included issues with evidence strength and quality of the PROM, engaging participants, and PROM complexity. Key enablers of PROM implementation included using PROMs validated for gender-affirming care, implementing PROMs able to be deployed online or in person, implementing PROMs that are shorter and reduce patient burden, engaging key stakeholders and participants as part of developing an implementation plan, and organizational climate.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this systematic review of barriers to and enablers of PROM implementation in gender-affirming care, PROM implementation was inconsistent and did not follow evidence-based approaches in implementation science. There was also a lack of patient input in creating implementation strategies, suggesting a need for patient-centered approaches to PROM implementation. Frameworks created from these results can be used to develop evidence-based PROM implementation initiatives for gender-affirming care and have potential generalizability for other clinical areas interested in implementing PROMs.

Highlights d AMPK signaling to the autophagy pathway precedes bacterial invasion d Bacterial-derived outer membrane vesicles trigger AMPK activation d Pathogen-induced changes to AMPK and mTORC1 signaling does not induce bulk autophagy d AMPK is a key regulator of xenophagy through control of mTORC1, ULK1, and VPS34 kinases

Histone deacetylase 6 (HDAC6) has been targeted in clinical studies for anticancer effects due to its role in oncogenic transformation and metastasis. Through a second-generation structure–activity relationship (SAR) study, the design, and biological evaluation of the selective HDAC6 inhibitor NN-390 is reported. With nanomolar HDAC6 potency, >200–550-fold selectivity for HDAC6 in analogous HDAC isoform functional assays, potent intracellular target engagement, and robust cellular efficacy in cancer cell lines, NN-390 is the first HDAC6-selective inhibitor to show therapeutic potential in metastatic Group 3 medulloblastoma (MB), an aggressive pediatric brain tumor often associated with leptomeningeal metastases and therapy resistance. MB stem cells contribute to these patients’ poor clinical outcomes. NN-390 selectively targets this cell population with a 44.3-fold therapeutic margin between patient-derived Group 3 MB cells in comparison to healthy neural stem cells. NN-390 demonstrated a 45-fold increased potency over HDAC6-selective clinical candidate citarinostat. In summary, HDAC6-selective molecules demonstrated in vitro therapeutic potential against Group 3 MB.

ObjectiveTo inform a clinical practice guideline (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) considering sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes, we summarised the available evidence regarding the performance of validated risk models on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in these patients.MethodsWe systematically searched bibliographic databases in January 2020 to identify observational studies evaluating risk models for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalisations, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), myocardial infarction (MI) and ischaemic stroke in ambulatory adults with type 2 diabetes. Using a random effects model, we pooled discrimination measures for each model and outcome, separately, and descriptively summarised calibration plots, when available. We used the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool to assess risk of bias of each included study and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to evaluate our certainty in the evidence.ResultsOf 22 589 publications identified, 15 observational studies reporting on seven risk models proved eligible. Among the seven models with >1 validation cohort, the Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes (RECODe) had the best calibration in primary studies and the highest pooled discrimination measures for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality (C-statistics 0.75, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.80; high certainty), cardiovascular mortality (0.79, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.84; low certainty), ESKD (0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94; low certainty), MI (0.72, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.74; moderate certainty) and stroke (0.71, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.74; moderate certainty). This model does not, however, predict risk of HF hospitalisations.ConclusionOf available risk models, RECODe proved to have satisfactory calibration in primary validation studies and acceptable discrimination superior to other models, though with high risk of bias in most primary studies.Trial registration numberCRD42020168351.