Lung cancer diagnosis and mortality beyond 15 years since quit in individuals with a 20+ pack-year history: A systematic review.

Current US lung cancer screening recommendations limit eligibility to adults with a pack-year (PY) history of ≥20 years and the first 15 years since quit (YSQ). The authors conducted a systematic review to better understand lung cancer incidence, risk and mortality among otherwise eligible individuals in this population beyond 15 YSQ. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched through February 14, 2023, and relevant articles were searched by hand. Included studies examined the relationship between adults with both a ≥20-PY history and ≥15 YSQ and lung cancer diagnosis, mortality, and screening ineligibility. One investigator abstracted data and a second confirmed. Two investigators independently assessed study quality and certainty of evidence (COE) and resolved discordance through consensus. From 2636 titles, 22 studies in 26 articles were included. Three studies provided low COE of elevated lung cancer incidence beyond 15 YSQ, as compared with people who never smoked, and six studies provided moderate COE that the risk of a lung cancer diagnosis after 15 YSQ declines gradually, but with no clinically significant difference just before and after 15 YSQ. Studies examining lung cancer-related disparities suggest that outcomes after 15 YSQ were similar between African American/Black and White participants; increasing YSQ would expand eligibility for African American/Black individuals, but for a significantly larger proportion of White individuals. The authors observed that the risk of lung cancer not only persists beyond 15 YSQ but that, compared with individuals who never smoked, the risk may remain significantly elevated for 2 or 3 decades. Future research of nationally representative samples with consistent reporting across studies is needed, as are better data from which to examine the effects on health disparities across different populations.

Updates to Advanced Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline (2023).

PURPOSE: In 2022 the American Urological Association (AUA) requested an Update Literature Review (ULR) to incorporate new evidence generated since the 2020 publication of this guideline. The resulting 2023 Guideline Amendment addresses updated recommendations for patients with advanced prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ULR addressed 23 of the original 38 guideline statements and included an abstract-level review of eligible studies published since the 2020 systematic review. Sixteen studies were selected for full text review. The current summary presents the updates made to the Guideline as a result of that new literature. RESULTS: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Panel amended evidence- and consensus-based statements based on an updated review to aid clinicians in the management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. These statements are detailed herein. CONCLUSION: This Guideline Amendment provides a framework designed to improve a clinician's ability to treat patients diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer with the most current evidence-based information. Further research and publication of high-quality clinical trials will be essential to continue to improve the quality of care for these patients.

Telehealth-guided provider-to-provider communication to improve rural health: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth may address healthcare disparities for rural populations. This systematic review assesses the use, effectiveness, and implementation of telehealth-supported provider-to-provider collaboration to improve rural healthcare. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1 January 2010 to 12 October 2021 for trials and observational studies of rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Abstracts and full text were dual-reviewed. We assessed the risk of bias for individual studies and strength of evidence for studies with similar outcomes. RESULTS: Seven studies of rural uptake of provider-to-provider telehealth documented increases over time but variability across geographic regions. In 97 effectiveness studies, outcomes were similar with rural provider-to-provider telehealth versus without for inpatient consultations, neonatal care, outpatient depression and diabetes, and emergency care. Better or similar results were reported for changes in rural clinician behavior, knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy. Evidence was insufficient for other clinical uses and outcomes. Sixty-seven (67) evaluation and qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators to implementing rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Success was linked to well-functioning technology, sufficient resources, and adequate payment. Barriers included lack of understanding of rural context and resources. Methodologic weaknesses of studies included less rigorous study designs and small samples. DISCUSSION: Rural provider-to-provider telehealth produces similar or better results versus care without telehealth. Barriers to rural provider-to-provider telehealth implementation are common to practice change but include some specific to rural adaptation and adoption. Evidence gaps are partially due to studies that do not address differences in the groups compared or do not include sufficient sample sizes.

Screening for Chlamydial and Gonococcal Infections: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement supported the effectiveness of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in asymptomatic, sexually active women 24 years or younger and in older women at increased risk for infection, although evidence for screening in men was insufficient. Objective: To update the 2014 USPSTF review on screening for chlamydial and gonococcal infection in adults and adolescents, including those who are pregnant. Data Sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid MEDLINE (January 1, 2014, through May 28, 2020) with surveillance through May 21, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and observational studies of screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk stratification and alternative screening methods, accuracy of tests, and screening harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Complications of infection; infection transmission or acquisition; diagnostic accuracy of anatomical site-specific testing and collection methods; screening harms. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included (N = 179 515). Chlamydia screening compared with no screening was significantly associated with reduced risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in 2 of 4 trials and with reduced hospital-diagnosed PID (0.24% vs 0.38%); relative risk, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-1.0]), but not clinic-diagnosed PID or epididymitis, in the largest trial. In studies of risk prediction instruments in asymptomatic women, age younger than 22 years demonstrated comparable accuracy to extensive criteria. Sensitivity of chlamydial testing was similar at endocervical (89%-100%) and self- and clinician-collected vaginal (90%-100%) sites for women and at meatal (100%), urethral (99%), and rectal (92%) sites for men but lower at pharyngeal sites (69.2%) for men who have sex with men. Sensitivity of gonococcal testing was 89% or greater for all anatomical samples. False-positive and false-negative testing rates were low across anatomical sites and collection methods. Conclusions and Relevance: Screening for chlamydial infection was significantly associated with a lower risk of PID in young women. Risk prediction criteria demonstrated limited accuracy beyond age. Testing for asymptomatic chlamydial and gonococcal infections was highly accurate at most anatomical sites, including urine and self-collected specimens. Effectiveness of screening in men and during pregnancy, optimal screening intervals, and adverse effects of screening require further evaluation.

Management of Suspected Opioid Overdose With Naloxone in Out-of-Hospital Settings: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone is effective for reversing opioid overdose, but optimal strategies for out-of-hospital use are uncertain. PURPOSE: To synthesize evidence on 1) the effects of naloxone route of administration and dosing for suspected opioid overdose in out-of-hospital settings on mortality, reversal of overdose, and harms, and 2) the need for transport to a health care facility after reversal of overdose with naloxone. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (1946 through September 2017), PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) materials, and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: English-language cohort studies and randomized trials that compared different doses of naloxone, administration routes, or transport versus nontransport after reversal of overdose with naloxone. Main outcomes were mortality, reversal of overdose, recurrence of overdose, and harms. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies; consensus assessment of overall strength of evidence (SOE). DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 13 eligible studies, 3 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohort studies compared different administration routes. At the same dose (2 mg), 1 trial found similar efficacy between higher-concentration intranasal naloxone (2 mg/mL) and intramuscular naloxone, and 1 trial found that lower-concentration intranasal naloxone (2 mg/5 mL) was less effective than intramuscular naloxone but was associated with decreased risk for agitation (low SOE). Evidence was insufficient to evaluate other comparisons of route of administration. Six uncontrolled studies reported low rates of death and serious adverse events (0% to 1.25%) in nontransported patients after successful naloxone treatment. LIMITATION: There were few studies, all had methodological limitations, and none evaluated FDA-approved autoinjectors or highly concentrated intranasal formulations. CONCLUSION: Higher-concentration intranasal naloxone (2 mg/mL) seems to have efficacy similar to that of intramuscular naloxone for reversal of opioid overdose, with no difference in adverse events. Nontransport after reversal of overdose with naloxone seems to be associated with a low rate of serious harms, but no study evaluated risks of transport versus nontransport. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42016053891).

Comparative Effectiveness of Fluorescent Versus White Light Cystoscopy for Initial Diagnosis or Surveillance of Bladder Cancer on Clinical Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: We systematically reviewed the comparative effectiveness of fluorescent vs white light cystoscopy on bladder cancer clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE® (January 1990 through September 2015), Cochrane databases and reference lists were performed. A total of 14 randomized trials of fluorescent cystoscopy using 5-aminolevulinic acid or hexaminolevulinic acid vs white light cystoscopy for the diagnosis of initial or recurrent bladder cancer that reported bladder cancer recurrence, progression, mortality and harms were selected for review. RESULTS: Fluorescent cystoscopy was associated with a decreased risk of bladder cancer recurrence vs white light cystoscopy at short-term (less than 3 months, 10 trials, RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.88, I2=69%), intermediate-term (3 months to less than 1 year, 6 trials, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.88, I2=19%) and long-term followup (1 year or more, 12 trials, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.93, I2=49%). However, the findings were inconsistent, and potentially susceptible to performance and publication bias (strength of evidence low). There were no differences between cystoscopic methods in risk of mortality (3 trials, RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.95, I2=41%) (strength of evidence low) or progression (9 trials, RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03, I2=0%) (strength of evidence moderate). Estimates for short-term recurrence (6 trials, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.00), long-term recurrence (7 trials, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.92) and progression (4 trials, RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.96) were statistically significant in the subgroup of trials that used hexaminolevulinic acid, but there were no statistically significant interactions based on the photosensitizer used. Fluorescent cystoscopy was not associated with a decreased risk of long-term recurrence in 3 trials that used methods to reduce performance bias with initial cystoscopy (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.18, I2=36%). Data on harms were sparse. CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescent cystoscopy was associated with a reduced risk of bladder cancer recurrence vs white light cystoscopy. However, additional trials that adequately guard against performance bias are needed to confirm these findings. Fluorescent cystoscopy with hexaminolevulinic acid may be associated with a decreased risk of progression, but more studies with long-term followup are needed to better understand the effects of the photosensitizer used on progression.

Intravesical Therapy for the Treatment of Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: We systematically review the benefits and harms of intravesical therapies for nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic literature searches were performed of Ovid MEDLINE (January 1990 through February 2016), the Cochrane databases and reference lists. Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guérin, mitomycin C, gemcitabine, thiotepa, valrubicin, doxorubicin, epirubicin and interferon vs transurethral bladder tumor resection alone, and head-to-head trials of intravesical therapies were selected. Data were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: Overall 39 trials evaluated adjuvant intravesical therapy vs transurethral bladder tumor resection alone. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin was associated with a decreased risk of bladder cancer recurrence (3 trials, RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.43-0.71) and progression (4 trials, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.64) (strength of evidence low). Mitomycin C, doxorubicin, epirubicin and thiotepa were also associated with a decreased risk of recurrence, with no difference in risk of progression (strength of evidence low). There were 55 trials that compared one intravesical therapy agent against another. There were no differences between bacillus Calmette-Guérin vs mitomycin C in recurrence risk (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81-1.11), but bacillus Calmette-Guérin was associated with a decreased risk of recurrence in the subgroup of trials of maintenance regimens (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.87, strength of evidence low). Bacillus Calmette-Guérin was associated with a lower recurrence risk vs doxorubicin, epirubicin, interferon alpha-2a, bacillus Calmette-Guérin plus interferon alpha-2b, and thiotepa (strength of evidence low to moderate). Bacillus Calmette-Guérin was associated with higher rates of local and systemic adverse events than other intravesical agents (strength of evidence low). Head-to-head trials showed no clear differences between standard and lower doses of bacillus Calmette-Guérin in recurrence, progression or mortality risk (strength of evidence low). Limited evidence suggested that bacillus Calmette-Guérin maintenance regimens are associated with reduced recurrence risk vs no further intravesical therapy in responders to induction therapy (strength of evidence low). CONCLUSIONS: For nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer several intravesical therapies are associated with a decreased risk of recurrence vs transurethral bladder tumor resection alone. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin is the only agent associated with a decreased progression risk vs transurethral bladder tumor resection alone, but may be associated with a higher risk of adverse events than other intravesical therapies, indicating trade-offs between potential benefits and harms.

Treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review.

There is uncertainty regarding the use of bladder-sparing alternatives to standard radical cystectomy, optimal lymph node dissection techniques, and optimal chemotherapeutic regimens. This study was conducted to systematically review the benefits and harms of bladder-sparing therapies, lymph node dissection, and systemic chemotherapy for patients with clinically localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE (from 1990 through October 2014), the Cochrane databases, reference lists, and the ClinicalTrials.gov Web site were performed. A total of 41 articles were selected for review. Bladder-sparing therapies were found to be associated with worse survival compared with radical cystectomy, although the studies had serious methodological shortcomings, findings were inconsistent, and only a few studies evaluated currently recommended techniques. More extensive lymph node dissection might be more effective than less extensive dissection at improving survival and decreasing local disease recurrence, but there were methodological shortcomings and some inconsistency. Six randomized trials found cisplatin-based combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy to be associated with a decreased mortality risk versus cystectomy alone. Four randomized trials found adjuvant chemotherapy to be associated with decreased mortality versus cystectomy alone, but none of these trials reported a statistically significant effect. There was insufficient evidence to determine optimal chemotherapeutic regimens.

Urinary Biomarkers for Diagnosis of Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Urinary biomarkers may be a useful alternative or adjunct to cystoscopy for diagnosis of bladder cancer. PURPOSE: To systematically review the evidence on the accuracy of urinary biomarkers for diagnosis of bladder cancer in adults who have signs or symptoms of the disease or are undergoing surveillance for recurrent disease. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (January 1990 through June 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: 57 studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative or qualitative nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22), qualitative or quantitative bladder tumor antigen (BTA), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), fluorescent immunohistochemistry (ImmunoCyt [Scimedx]), and Cxbladder (Pacific Edge Diagnostics USA) using cystoscopy and histopathology as the reference standard met inclusion criteria. Case-control studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies. Overall strength of evidence (SOE) was also assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Across biomarkers, sensitivities ranged from 0.57 to 0.82 and specificities ranged from 0.74 to 0.88. Positive likelihood ratios ranged from 2.52 to 5.53, and negative likelihood ratios ranged from 0.21 to 0.48 (moderate SOE for quantitative NMP22, qualitative BTA, FISH, and ImmunoCyt; low SOE for others). For some biomarkers, sensitivity was higher for initial diagnosis of bladder cancer than for diagnosis of recurrence. Sensitivity increased with higher tumor stage or grade. Studies that directly compared the accuracy of quantitative NMP22 and qualitative BTA found no differences in diagnostic accuracy (moderate SOE); head-to-head studies of other biomarkers were limited. Urinary biomarkers plus cytologic evaluation were more sensitive than biomarkers alone but missed about 10% of bladder cancer cases. LIMITATION: Restricted to English-language studies; no search for studies published only as abstracts; statistical heterogeneity present in most analyses; few studies for qualitative NMP22, quantitative BTA, and Cxbladder; and methodological shortcomings in almost all studies. CONCLUSION: Urinary biomarkers miss a substantial proportion of patients with bladder cancer and are subject to false-positive results in others. Accuracy is poor for low-stage and low-grade tumors. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014013284).

Use of medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

BACKGROUND: Medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer are recommended for women at increased risk; however, use is low. PURPOSE: To update evidence about the effectiveness and adverse effects of medications to reduce breast cancer risk, patient use of such medications, and methods for identifying women at increased risk for breast cancer. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (through 5 December 2012), Scopus, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: English-language randomized trials of medication effectiveness and adverse effects, observational studies of adverse effects and patient use, and diagnostic accuracy studies of risk assessment. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators independently extracted data on participants, study design, analysis, follow-up, and results, and a second investigator confirmed key data. Investigators independently dual-rated study quality and applicability using established criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven good- and fair-quality trials indicated that tamoxifen and raloxifene reduced incidence of invasive breast cancer by 7 to 9 cases in 1000 women over 5 years compared with placebo. New results from STAR (Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene) showed that tamoxifen reduced breast cancer incidence more than raloxifene by 5 cases in 1000 women. Neither reduced breast cancer-specific or all-cause mortality rates. Both reduced the incidence of fractures, but tamoxifen increased the incidence of thromboembolic events more than raloxifene by 4 cases in 1000 women. Tamoxifen increased the incidence of endometrial cancer and cataracts compared with placebo and raloxifene. Trials provided limited and heterogeneous data on medication adherence and persistence. Many women do not take tamoxifen because of associated harms. Thirteen risk-stratification models were modest predictors of breast cancer. LIMITATION: Data on mortality and adherence measures and for women who are nonwhite, are premenopausal, or have comorbid conditions were lacking. CONCLUSION: Medications reduced the incidence of invasive breast cancer and fractures and increased the incidence of thromboembolic events. Tamoxifen was more effective than raloxifene but also increased the incidence of endometrial cancer and cataracts. Use is limited by adverse effects and inaccurate methods to identify candidates. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trials demonstrate the efficacy of medications to reduce the risk for invasive breast cancer. PURPOSE: To summarize benefits and harms of tamoxifen citrate, raloxifene, and tibolone to reduce the risk for primary breast cancer. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases from inception to January 2009, Web of Science, trial registries, and manufacturer information. STUDY SELECTION: Predefined eligibility criteria were used to select articles. English-language reports of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) for benefits and RCTs and observational studies for harms were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers assessed study data, quality, and applicability. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven placebo-controlled RCTs and 1 head-to-head trial provide results for main outcomes. Tamoxifen (risk ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82]; 4 trials), raloxifene (risk ratio, 0.44 [CI, 0.27 to 0.71]; 2 trials), and tibolone (risk ratio, 0.32 [CI, 0.13 to 0.80]; 1 trial) reduce risk for invasive breast cancer compared with placebo by 7 to 10 per 1000 women per year. Tamoxifen and raloxifene reduce estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer but not estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, noninvasive breast cancer, or mortality. All medications reduce fractures. Tamoxifen (risk ratio, 1.93 [CI, 1.41 to 2.64]; 4 trials) and raloxifene (risk ratio, 1.60 [CI, 1.15 to 2.23]; 2 trials) increase thromboembolic events by 4 to 7 per 1000 women per year; raloxifene causes fewer events than tamoxifen. Tamoxifen increases risk for endometrial cancer (risk ratio, 2.13 [CI, 1.36 to 3.32]; 3 trials) compared with placebo by 4 per 1000 women per year and causes cataracts compared with raloxifene. Tibolone causes strokes in older women. LIMITATIONS: Bias, trial heterogeneity, and a dearth of head-to-head trials limit this review. Data are lacking on doses, duration, and timing of the medications; long-term effects; and nonwhite and premenopausal women. CONCLUSION: Three medications reduce risk for primary breast cancer but increase risk for thromboembolic events (tamoxifen, raloxifene), endometrial cancer (tamoxifen), or stroke (tibolone).