Evaluation of appendectomy as a potential risk factor for immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated enterocolitis.

Aims: The relationship between appendectomy and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) enterocolitis was explored. Methods: Patients who began ICIs between July 2010 and September 2020 (n = 10,907) were included. The exposure group included patients with evidence of appendectomy prior to ICIs in operative notes (n = 380). The control group included patients with evidence of normal appendix in radiologic reports (n = 3602). ICI enterocolitis was defined as histopathologic evidence of colitis or enteritis attributed to ICIs. The association between appendectomy and ICI enterocolitis was characterized by multivariate logistic regression. Results: 248 patients (6.2%) developed ICI enterocolitis. The odds of ICI enterocolitis were similar among those with prior appendectomy and those without appendectomy (adjusted odds ratio: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.49-1.36; p = 0.449). Conclusion: No association was found between prior appendectomy and ICI enterocolitis.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a form of cancer treatment that 'unleash the brakes' on the body's immune system. One common and sometimes serious side effect of this type of drug is gut inflammation. Studies have shown that appendectomy, or surgical removal of the appendix, lowers the risk of inflammatory bowel disease, which is another cause of gut inflammation. This research assessed whether appendectomy reduces the risk of gut inflammation caused by ICIs. Patients on ICIs for cancer with and without prior appendectomy were identified. The rates of gut inflammation caused by ICIs between these two groups were compared and the rates of this side effect were similar. This suggests that appendectomy does not reduce the risk of gut inflammation caused by ICIs.

CoVA: An Acuity Score for Outpatient Screening that Predicts Coronavirus Disease 2019 Prognosis.

BACKGROUND: We sought to develop an automatable score to predict hospitalization, critical illness, or death for patients at risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting for urgent care. METHODS: We developed the COVID-19 Acuity Score (CoVA) based on a single-center study of adult outpatients seen in respiratory illness clinics or the emergency department. Data were extracted from the Partners Enterprise Data Warehouse, and split into development (n = 9381, 7 March-2 May) and prospective (n = 2205, 3-14 May) cohorts. Outcomes were hospitalization, critical illness (intensive care unit or ventilation), or death within 7 days. Calibration was assessed using the expected-to-observed event ratio (E/O). Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). RESULTS: In the prospective cohort, 26.1%, 6.3%, and 0.5% of patients experienced hospitalization, critical illness, or death, respectively. CoVA showed excellent performance in prospective validation for hospitalization (expected-to-observed ratio [E/O]: 1.01; AUC: 0.76), for critical illness (E/O: 1.03; AUC: 0.79), and for death (E/O: 1.63; AUC: 0.93). Among 30 predictors, the top 5 were age, diastolic blood pressure, blood oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing status, and respiratory rate. CONCLUSIONS: CoVA is a prospectively validated automatable score for the outpatient setting to predict adverse events related to COVID-19 infection.

COVID-19 Outpatient Screening: a Prediction Score for Adverse Events.

BACKGROUND: We sought to develop an automatable score to predict hospitalization, critical illness, or death in patients at risk for COVID-19 presenting for urgent care during the Massachusetts outbreak. METHODS: Single-center study of adult outpatients seen in respiratory illness clinics (RICs) or the emergency department (ED), including development (n = 9381, March 7-May 2) and prospective (n = 2205, May 3-14) cohorts. Data was queried from Partners Enterprise Data Warehouse. Outcomes were hospitalization, critical illness or death within 7 days. We developed the COVID-19 Acuity Score (CoVA) using automatically extracted data from the electronic medical record and learning-to-rank ordinal logistic regression modeling. Calibration was assessed using predicted-to-observed event ratio (E/O). Discrimination was assessed by C-statistics (AUC). RESULTS: In the development cohort, 27.3%, 7.2%, and 1.1% of patients experienced hospitalization, critical illness, or death, respectively; and in the prospective cohort, 26.1%, 6.3%, and 0.5%. CoVA showed excellent performance in the development cohort (concurrent validation) for hospitalization (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.80); for critical illness (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.82); and for death (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.87). Performance in the prospective cohort (prospective validation) was similar for hospitalization (E/O: 1.01, AUC: 0.76); for critical illness (E/O 1.03, AUC: 0.79); and for death (E/O: 1.63, AUC=0.93). Among 30 predictors, the top five were age, diastolic blood pressure, blood oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing status, and respiratory rate. CONCLUSIONS: CoVA is a prospectively validated automatable score to assessing risk for adverse outcomes related to COVID-19 infection in the outpatient setting.

Who will manage American patients with diabetes? Residents' career preferences and perceptions of diabetes care.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors that encourage or discourage internal medicine and pediatric residents regarding specializing in endocrinology with a focus on diabetes. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey of internal medicine and pediatric residents using a $10 participation incentive. A total of 653 residents responded to the survey (estimated response rate of 9.2%)-626 from residency programs that were contacted for our survey and 27 from referrals. RESULTS: Among internal medicine and pediatric residents surveyed, 39 respondents (6.0%) planned to specialize in endocrinology, and 27 of these (4.1% of total respondents) planned to focus on diabetes. "Intellectual satisfaction," "emotional satisfaction," and "work-life balance" were identified by respondents as the most important factors in their choice of a specialty, with ratings of 5.5, 5.4, and 5.3 on a 6-point Likert scale. Among these factors identified as most important to a medical career, endocrinology with a focus on diabetes scored poorly with regard to intellectual and emotional satisfaction but received high ranking with regard to lifestyle. With regard to other factors, endocrinology was rated negatively on "compensation," "number of procedures," and "patient adherence to prescribed treatment." Exposure to diabetes during training had no major influence on the decision to enter endocrinology. CONCLUSION: Endocrinology with a focus on diabetes care is not an attractive specialty for most internal medicine and pediatric residents. Therefore, new strategies to attract residents to the field of diabetes care are needed.

Rapid cleavage of cyclic tertiary amides of Kemp's triacid: effects of ring structure.

The piperidyl and prolyl amides of Kemp's triacid (7 and 8, respectively) have been prepared and their rates of intramolecular acylolysis measured as a function of pD. The piperidyl derivative 7 reacts approximately four-times faster (e.g., t(1/2)=3 min at 20 degrees C and pD7.7) than the previously reported pyrrolidyl and methylphenethyl amide derivatives, while the prolyl derivative 8 reacts two-times more slowly (e.g., e.g., t(1/2)=30 min at 20 degrees C and pD7.8). Molecular-mechanics calculations indicate that the nonbonded interactions in the piperidyl derivative 7 are distinct from those in the prolyl, pyrrolidyl, and methylphenethyl amide derivatives, a result that supports the suggestion that ground-state pseudoallylic strain contributes to the enormous reactivity of Kemp's triacid tertiary amides. In sum, the results reported indicate that the Kemp's triacid scaffolding provides a general means of activating tertiary amide derivatives.