Search

Background: Research suggests a bidirectional relationship between food insecurity and stress, but few studies have examined associations of food insecurity with stress and other indicators of cardiometabolic health, including depression, diet quality, and body weight, among lower-income women in the U.S. Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed data from lower-income women caregivers living in North Carolina (n = 100): 42% Black/African American, 25% Hispanic/Latina, and 33% White women. Multivariable linear regression models were used to determine associations of food insecurity status with perceived stress, depressive symptoms, diet quality, and body mass index (BMI). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine associations of food insecurity with clinical depression and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2. Associations were examined with and without adjustment for perceived stress. Results: Forty-two percent of the sample were experiencing food insecurity. Compared to food secure caregivers, food-insecure caregivers had significantly higher perceived stress (β: +7.51; 95%CI: 4.19, 10.84) and depressive symptoms (β: +3.55; 95%CI: 0.54, 6.56) and lower diet quality (β: −9.10; 95%CI: −15.81, −2.40). Associations with BMI outcomes were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Findings support removing stigma in nutrition assistance programs and clinical interactions, motivate future longitudinal studies, and inform the development of destigmatizing interventions for health promotion or disease prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Superficial CD34 fibroblastic tumors (SCD34FT) and PRDM10‐rearranged tumors (PRTs) are mesenchymal tumors that have recently received increased scientific attention due to their irrefutable similarities yet debatable relationship. A 74‐year‐old male presented to the dermatology clinic with a violaceous, well‐defined nodule on the left medial knee of 2‐year duration. Shave biopsy demonstrated spindle cells arranged in a vaguely storiform pattern forming fascicles. Immunohistochemical stains were positive for vimentin, CD68, CD10, and CD34 diffusely. ERG, S‐100, HMB45, and SOX‐10 were negative. Molecular studies identified a mediator complex subunit 12 (MED12)‐PR/SET Domain 10 (PRDM10) gene fusion thus favoring confirming the diagnosis of a PRT. Our patient underwent wide local excision with negative margins and had no complications. This case aims to provide context for considering SCD34FT and PRT as intersecting entities and to discuss a diagnostic approach when encountering these tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T‐cell therapy has demonstrated remarkable success in treating various B‐cell malignancies, redirecting T‐cell cytotoxicity toward cancer cells. Despite its efficacy, CAR‐T therapy is associated with potential risks, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and cytopenia. We present a case of a 69‐year‐old man with diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with axicabtagene‐ciloleucel CAR‐T therapy, who developed a rare and severe cutaneous toxicity resembling toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). The patient exhibited persistent fevers, CRS, and subsequent development of a widespread erythematous macular eruption, progressing to vesiculation with bullae. Notably, allopurinol‐induced TEN was considered with the patient's recent exposure to allopurinol, although the onset and minimal mucosal involvement did not align with typical presentations of allopurinol‐induced cases. The cutaneous reaction, distinct from typical SJS/TEN, showed minimal mucosal involvement and coincided with the cytokine release storm, differing from allopurinol‐induced TEN. Despite the absence of guidelines, the patient was managed with systemic steroids, achieving significant improvement. This case expands the spectrum of CAR‐T therapy‐related cutaneous toxicities, highlighting the need for early recognition of histopathology and tailored management by dermatologists. Further understanding of these reactions is crucial for optimizing the safety profile of this groundbreaking immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Assessing variant-specific COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and severity can inform public health risk assessments and decisions about vaccine composition. BA.2.86 and its descendants, including JN.1 (referred to collectively as "JN lineages"), emerged in late 2023 and exhibited substantial divergence from co-circulating XBB lineages., Methods: We analyzed patients hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness at 26 hospitals in 20 U.S. states admitted October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024. Using a test-negative, case-control design, we estimated effectiveness of an updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccine dose against sequence-confirmed XBB and JN lineage hospitalization using logistic regression. Odds of severe outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, were compared for JN versus XBB lineage hospitalizations using logistic regression., Results: 585 case-patients with XBB lineages, 397 case-patients with JN lineages, and 4,580 control-patients were included. VE in the first 7-89 days after receipt of an updated dose was 54.2% (95% CI = 36.1%-67.1%) against XBB lineage hospitalization and 32.7% (95% CI = 1.9%-53.8%) against JN lineage hospitalization. Odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI = 0.46-1.38) and IMV or death (aOR 0.69; 95% CI = 0.34-1.40) were not significantly different among JN compared to XBB lineage hospitalizations., Conclusions: Updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against both XBB and JN lineage hospitalization, but protection against the latter may be attenuated by immune escape. Clinical severity of JN lineage hospitalizations was not higher relative to XBB., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Objective: ICU delirium commonly complicates critical illness associated with factors such as cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and the requirement of mechanical ventilation (MV). Recent reports associate hyperoxia with poorer outcomes in critically ill children. This study sought to determine whether hyperoxia on CPB in pediatric patients was associated with a higher prevalence of postoperative delirium., Design: Secondary analysis of data obtained from a prospective cohort study., Setting: Twenty-two-bed pediatric cardiac ICU in a tertiary children's hospital., Patients: All patients (18 yr old or older) admitted post-CPB, with documented delirium assessment scores using the Preschool/Pediatric Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and who were enrolled in the Precision Medicine in Pediatric Cardiology Cohort from February 2021 to November 2021., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Of 148 patients, who underwent cardiac surgery, 35 had delirium within the first 72 hours (24%). There was no association between hyperoxia on CPB and postoperative delirium for all definitions of hyperoxia, including hyperoxic area under the curve above 5 predetermined Pao2 levels: 150 mm Hg (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.176 [0.605-2.286], p = 0.633); 175 mm Hg (OR 1.177 [95% CI, 0.668-2.075], p = 0.572); 200 mm Hg (OR 1.235 [95% CI, 0.752-2.026], p = 0.405); 250 mm Hg (OR 1.204 [95% CI, 0.859-1.688], p = 0.281), 300 mm Hg (OR 1.178 [95% CI, 0.918-1.511], p = 0.199). In an additional exploratory analysis, comparing patients with delirium within 72 hours versus those without, only the z score for weight differed (mean [sd]: 0.09 [1.41] vs. -0.48 [1.82], p < 0.05). When comparing patients who developed delirium at any point during their ICU stay (n = 45, 30%), MV days, severity of illness (Pediatric Index of Mortality 3 Score) score, CPB time, and z score for weight were associated with delirium (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Postoperative delirium (72 hr from CPB) occurred in 24% of pediatric patients. Hyperoxia, defined in multiple ways, was not associated with delirium. On exploratory analysis, nutritional status (z score for weight) may be a significant factor in delirium risk. Further delineation of risk factors for postoperative delirium versus ICU delirium warrants additional study., Competing Interests: The authors have not disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

Fathers are potential leaders of healthy behavior changes in their families. Culturally tailored programs are needed to support behavior changes within families, including Latino families; however, there have been few father-focused nutrition programs for Latino families. This study evaluated the immediate effects of &iexcl;Haz Espacio Para Papi! (Make Room for Daddy!; HEPP), a six-week, father-focused, family-centered program focused on nutrition and physical activity near the Texas-Mexico border. A modified stepped-wedge study design included a treatment group for the HEPP pilot and a wait-listed control group. Pre/post-tests included instant skin carotenoid scores, the self-reported dietary intake of fruits and vegetables (FV), and healthy dietary behavior scores (HDBSs). A 2 × 2 mixed analysis of variance evaluated changes in outcomes across time and between groups for 42 fathers with pre/post-test measures. There were no statistically significant changes in fathers' VM scores and FV intake across time or between groups. Fathers' HDBSs increased across time ( p ≤ 0.01, 95% CI [0.23, 1.38]). Age, educational attainment, and the number of children living in the household did not have a significant effect on the program outcomes ( p > 0.05). The HEPP program may guide the design of future father-focused nutrition interventions aimed at dietary behavior changes.

Background: Influenza circulation during the 2022-2023 season in the United States largely returned to pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-pandemic patterns and levels. Influenza A(H3N2) viruses were detected most frequently this season, predominately clade 3C.2a1b.2a, a close antigenic match to the vaccine strain., Methods: To understand effectiveness of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failure, and death, a multicenter sentinel surveillance network in the United States prospectively enrolled adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness between 1 October 2022, and 28 February 2023. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates against influenza-associated hospitalization, organ failures, and death were measured by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients., Results: A total of 3707 patients, including 714 influenza cases (33% vaccinated) and 2993 influenza- and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-negative controls (49% vaccinated) were analyzed. VE against influenza-associated hospitalization was 37% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27%-46%) and varied by age (18-64 years: 47% [30%-60%]; ≥65 years: 28% [10%-43%]), and virus (A[H3N2]: 29% [6%-46%], A[H1N1]: 47% [23%-64%]). VE against more severe influenza-associated outcomes included: 41% (29%-50%) against influenza with hypoxemia treated with supplemental oxygen; 65% (56%-72%) against influenza with respiratory, cardiovascular, or renal failure treated with organ support; and 66% (40%-81%) against influenza with respiratory failure treated with invasive mechanical ventilation., Conclusions: During an early 2022-2023 influenza season with a well-matched influenza vaccine, vaccination was associated with reduced risk of influenza-associated hospitalization and organ failure., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. S. B. reports participating as the DSMB chair for Hamilton Ventilators, outside the submitted work. J. C. reports receiving funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DoD), and a travel grant from Fisher-Paykel, outside the submitted work. S. C. reports consulting for PureTech Health in 2021–2022 and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals in 2022, outside the submitted work. A. D. reports participating on an advisory board for ALung Technologies and being a principal investigator (PI) for the PETAL Network, outside the submitted work. C. G. G. reports consulting fees from Merck and received research support from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, CDC, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and AHRQ, outside the submitted work. M. N. G. reports receiving grant funding from NIH and AHRQ for research, honorarium for giving Medicine grand rounds at Yale and Washington Healthcare, fees for DSMB for Palm trial and Regeneron trials on monoclonal antibodies, and fees for serving on scientific advisory board for Philips Healthcare on monitoring, outside the submitted work. R. G. reports consulting for Gilead Sciences, Eli Lily, GSK, Janssen, and AbbVie, being on an advisory board for Gilead Sciences, Eli Lily, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and AstraZeneca, speaker bureau for Pfizer and AbbVie, and gift-in-kind to institution from Gilead Sciences, outside the submitted work. N. H. reports prior grant support from Sanofi and Quidel, and current funding from Merck, outside the submitted work. A. L. reports being a consultant for Roche on a clinical trial of baloxavir, outside the submitted work. Christopher Mallow reports medical legal consulting, outside the submitted work. I. P. reports receiving grants from NHLBI, NIGMS, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)

Importance: On June 21, 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended the first respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines for adults aged 60 years and older using shared clinical decision-making. Understanding the severity of RSV disease in adults can help guide this clinical decision-making., Objective: To describe disease severity among adults hospitalized with RSV and compare it with the severity of COVID-19 and influenza disease by vaccination status., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, adults aged 18 years and older admitted to the hospital with acute respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection were prospectively enrolled from 25 hospitals in 20 US states from February 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023. Clinical data during each patient's hospitalization were collected using standardized forms. Data were analyzed from August to October 2023., Exposures: RSV, SARS-CoV-2, or influenza infection., Main Outcomes and Measures: Using multivariable logistic regression, severity of RSV disease was compared with COVID-19 and influenza severity, by COVID-19 and influenza vaccination status, for a range of clinical outcomes, including the composite of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death., Results: Of 7998 adults (median [IQR] age, 67 [54-78] years; 4047 [50.6%] female) included, 484 (6.1%) were hospitalized with RSV, 6422 (80.3%) were hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1092 (13.7%) were hospitalized with influenza. Among patients with RSV, 58 (12.0%) experienced IMV or death, compared with 201 of 1422 unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 (14.1%) and 458 of 5000 vaccinated patients with COVID-19 (9.2%), as well as 72 of 699 unvaccinated patients with influenza (10.3%) and 20 of 393 vaccinated patients with influenza (5.1%). In adjusted analyses, the odds of IMV or in-hospital death were not significantly different among patients hospitalized with RSV and unvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.13; P = .22) or influenza (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.82-1.76; P = .35); however, the odds of IMV or death were significantly higher among patients hospitalized with RSV compared with vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (aOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.02-1.86; P = .03) or influenza disease (aOR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.62-4.86; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults hospitalized in this US cohort during the 16 months before the first RSV vaccine recommendations, RSV disease was less common but similar in severity compared with COVID-19 or influenza disease among unvaccinated patients and more severe than COVID-19 or influenza disease among vaccinated patients for the most serious outcomes of IMV or death.

In September 2023, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended updated 2023-2024 (monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months to prevent COVID-19, including severe disease. However, few estimates of updated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically attended illness are available. This analysis evaluated VE of an updated COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-associated emergency department (ED) or urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during September 2023-January 2024 using a test-negative, case-control design with data from two CDC VE networks. VE against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 51% (95% CI = 47%-54%) during the first 7-59 days after an updated dose and 39% (95% CI = 33%-45%) during the 60-119 days after an updated dose. VE estimates against COVID-19-associated hospitalization from two CDC VE networks were 52% (95% CI = 47%-57%) and 43% (95% CI = 27%-56%), with a median interval from updated dose of 42 and 47 days, respectively. Updated COVID-19 vaccine provided increased protection against COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalization among immunocompetent adults. These results support CDC recommendations for updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination. All persons aged ≥6 months should receive updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccine., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting fees from PureTech Health and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, and participation on the data safety monitoring board for an unrelated, local study at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports serving as the Texas Pediatric Society, Texas Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics co-chair of the ID and Immunization Committee, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports support from Biomeme and Seastar, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports other funding from Merck, contracts from Syneos Health and the Food and Drug Administration, and grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grant funding from 4DMedical, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, Ely Lilly, and Roche Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports research support from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Flu Lab, and consulting fees from Roche, outside the submitted work. Christopher Mallow reports medical legal consulting, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports research funding from Merck, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grant support from NIH, Intermountain Research and Medical Foundation, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and funding to his institution from Bluejay Diagnostics and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Karthik Natarajan reports institutional support from NIH, Office of the Director, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Brian E. Dixon reports Institutional support from NIH, National Library of Medicine in the form of a T15 training grant in biomedical informatics, salary support from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, royalties from Elsevier, Inc. for a book on health information technology and from Springer Nature for a book on health information technology. Nicola P. Klein reports support from GSK, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur, and Seqirus for work unrelated to this report. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.