A case series evaluating patient perceptions after switching from nusinersen to risdiplam for spinal muscular atrophy.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: In 2016, nusinersen became the first disease-modifying medication approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). With the later availability of risdiplam in 2020, individuals now have the option of switching from nusinersen to risdiplam. Limited published data exist to inform this decision. This study aims to evaluate the perceptions and experiences of adult participants and parents of minor participants who previously received nusinersen and switched to risdiplam for the treatment of SMA. METHODS: Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained from the Wake Forest IRB prior to the initiation of this study. A cross-sectional, observational study, with qualitative and quantitative data gathered via questionnaire and medical record review, was performed. Inclusion criteria included (1) prior diagnosis of SMA, (2) previous treatment with nusinersen, and (3) change to treatment with risdiplam. No participants were excluded based on age. RESULTS: Fourteen participants-eight adults and six children-were enrolled in the study. Respondents noted improvements in physical function with each medication. Overall, respondents reported worse satisfaction with the method of delivery of the intrathecally delivered nusinersen compared to the orally-delivered risdiplam, but no respondent reported negative overall satisfaction with either medication. A majority (78.6%) of respondents reported that switching from nusinersen to risdiplam was the correct decision. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that most patients are satisfied when switching from nusinersen to risdiplam, with the method of delivery being a primary factor.

ENDOGENOUS ENDOPHTHALMITIS ASSOCIATED WITH INJECTION DRUG USE COMPARED WITH OTHER ETIOLOGIES.

PURPOSE: To compare features of endogenous endophthalmitis associated with injection drug use (IDU) to endogenous endophthalmitis from other etiologies. METHODS: The authors retrospectively collected data on patients with endogenous endophthalmitis due to IDU or other causes from three academic tertiary care centers over a six-year period. Differences in presenting characteristics, culture results, treatment, and visual acuity were compared between groups. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (34%) had IDU-associated endogenous endophthalmitis while 75 patients (67%) had endogenous endophthalmitis from other causes. Compared with patients in the non-IDU group, IDU patients were significantly younger, more frequently male, had longer duration of symptoms at diagnosis, and were less likely to have bilateral disease ( P < 0.05 for all). Injection drug use patients were less likely to have a systemic infection source identified (29% vs. 71%, P < 0.001) or have positive cultures (47% vs. 80%, P < 0.001). The IDU group was less likely to be admitted to the hospital (71% vs. 92%, P = 0.005) and less likely to receive treatment with intravenous antimicrobials (55% vs. 83%, P = 0.003). Visual acuity did not significantly differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Endophthalmitis related to IDU presents in younger patients with less comorbidities and frequently without positive cultures or an identifiable systemic source; therefore, a high index of suspicion is needed to identify this disease.

Lessons on Resilient Research: Adapting the Tribal Turning Point Study to COVID-19.

Tribal Turning Point (TTP) is a community-based randomized controlled trial of a lifestyle intervention to reduce risk factors for type 2 diabetes in Native youth. TTP began in 2018 and was interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. In this paper we aimed to understand 1) how the pandemic impacted TTP's operations, and how the TTP team successfully adapted to these impacts; 2) how the effects of COVID-19 and our adaptations to them were similar or different across TTP's research sites; and 3) lessons learned from this experience that may help other Native health research teams be resilient in this and future crises. Using a collaborative mixed methods approach, this report explored five a priori domains of adaptation: intervention delivery, participant engagement, data collection, analytic strategies, and team operations. We derived three lessons learned: 1) ensure that support offered is flexible to differing needs and responsive to changes over time; 2) adapt collaboratively and iteratively while remaining rooted in community; and 3) recognize that relationships are the foundation of successful research.