Search

Background It is unknown whether persons with symptomatic cryptococcal meningitis detected during routine blood cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening have better survival than persons presenting with overt meningitis. Methods We prospectively enrolled Ugandans with HIV and cryptocococcal meningitis from December 2018 to December 2021. Participants were treated with amphotericin-based combination therapy. We compared outcomes between persons who were CrAg screened then referred to hospital with those presenting directly to the hospital with symptomatic meningitis. Results Among 489 participants with cryptococcal meningitis, 40% (194/489) received blood CrAg screening and were referred to hospital (median time to referral 2 days; interquartile range [IQR], 1–6). CrAg-screened persons referred to hospital had lower 14-day mortality than non–CrAg-screened persons who presented directly to hospital with symptomatic meningitis (12% vs 21%; hazard ratio,.51; 95% confidence interval,.32–.83; P =.006). Fewer CrAg-screened participants had altered mental status versus non–CrAg-screened participants (29% vs 41%; P =.03). CrAg-screened persons had lower quantitative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture burden (median [IQR], 4570 [11–100 000] vs 26 900 [182–324 000] CFU/mL; P =.01) and lower CSF opening pressures (median [IQR], 190 [120–270] vs 225 [140–340] mmH2O; P =.004) compared with non–CrAg-screened persons. Conclusions Survival from cryptococcal meningitis was higher in persons with prior CrAg screening than those without CrAg screening. Altered mental status was the most potent predictor for mortality in a multivariate model. We suggest that CrAg screening detects cryptococcal meningitis at an earlier stage, as evidenced by a favorable baseline risk profile and notably fewer persons with altered mental status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate neonatal morbidity and maternal complication rates with delivery body mass index (BMI) 60 or greater.Methods: This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included singleton pregnancies between 23 and 42 weeks of gestation from January 2005 to April 2016. Women with BMI 60 or greater were compared with a random sample of women with BMI 30-59. The primary outcome, composite neonatal morbidity, was defined as 5-minute Apgar score less than 7, hypoglycemia, respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, hospital stay greater than 5 days, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or neonatal death. Secondary outcomes included maternal labor and delivery characteristics and complication rates. Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ or Fisher exact tests were used to compare BMI categories. Multivariable logistic regression was used for adjusted analysis.Results: The study included 338 women, with 39 in the BMI 60 or greater group. An association between obesity and neonatal morbidity was found. Increasing BMI correlated with increasing neonatal morbidity, with the highest rates among those with BMI 60 or greater (BMI 30-39 [17%], 40-49 [19%], 50-59 [22%], 60 or greater [56%]; P<.001). After adjustment for confounders, obese women with BMI less than 60 had at least a 75% reduction in odds of neonatal morbidity compared with women with BMI 60 or greater (BMI 30-39 adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.22 [0.1-0.5], 40-49 adjusted OR 0.23 [0.1-0.6], 50-59 adjusted OR 0.25 [0.1-0.6]). Maternal complication rates including labor induction, cesarean delivery, wound complication, postpartum hemorrhage, and hospital stay greater than 5 days were also significantly increased with BMI 60 or greater.Conclusion: A BMI 60 or greater at the time of delivery is significantly associated with increased neonatal morbidity and increased maternal complication rates. In addition, neonatal morbidity and maternal complication rates with BMI 60 or greater were significantly higher when compared with women in any lesser obese BMI cohort between 30 and 59. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Objective: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients.Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04308668).Setting: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces).Participants: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset.Intervention: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo.Measurements: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days.Results: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, -0.27 point [95% CI, -0.61 to 0.07 point]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non-COVID-19-related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29).Limitation: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages.Conclusion: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19.Primary Funding Source: Private donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: WHO recommends Xpert MTB/RIF as initial diagnostic testing for tuberculous meningitis. However, diagnosis remains difficult, with Xpert sensitivity of about 50-70% and culture sensitivity of about 60%. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the new Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra (Xpert Ultra) for tuberculous meningitis.Methods: We prospectively obtained diagnostic cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimens during screening for a trial on the treatment of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis in Mbarara, Uganda. HIV-infected adults with suspected meningitis (eg, headache, nuchal rigidity, altered mental status) were screened consecutively at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital. We centrifuged CSF, resuspended the pellet in 2 mL of CSF, and tested 0·5 mL with mycobacteria growth indicator tube culture, 1 mL with Xpert, and cryopreserved 0·5 mL, later tested with Xpert Ultra. We assessed diagnostic performance against uniform clinical case definition or a composite reference standard of any positive CSF tuberculous test.Findings: From Feb 27, 2015, to Nov 7, 2016, we prospectively evaluated 129 HIV-infected adults with suspected meningitis for tuberculosis. 23 participants were classified as probable or definite tuberculous meningitis by uniform case definition, excluding Xpert Ultra results. Xpert Ultra sensitivity was 70% (95% CI 47-87; 16 of 23 cases) for probable or definite tuberculous meningitis compared with 43% (23-66; 10/23) for Xpert and 43% (23-66; 10/23) for culture. With composite standard, we detected tuberculous meningitis in 22 (17%) of 129 participants. Xpert Ultra had 95% sensitivity (95% CI 77-99; 21 of 22 cases) for tuberculous meningitis, which was higher than either Xpert (45% [24-68]; 10/22; p=0·0010) or culture (45% [24-68]; 10/22; p=0·0034). Of 21 participants positive by Xpert Ultra, 13 were positive by culture, Xpert, or both, and eight were only positive by Xpert Ultra. Of those eight, three were categorised as probable tuberculous meningitis, three as possible tuberculous meningitis, and two as not tuberculous meningitis. Testing 6 mL or more of CSF was associated with more frequent detection of tuberculosis than with less than 6 mL (26% vs 7%; p=0·014).Interpretation: Xpert Ultra detected significantly more tuberculous meningitis than did either Xpert or culture. WHO now recommends the use of Xpert Ultra as the initial diagnostic test for suspected tuberculous meningitis.Funding: National Institute of Neurologic Diseases and Stroke, Fogarty International Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, UK Medical Research Council/DfID/Wellcome Trust Global Health Trials, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To update the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) for a markedly heterogeneous patient population, patients with melanoma and brain metastases, using a larger, more current cohort, including molecular markers.Methods: The original Melanoma-GPA is based on data from 483 patients whose conditions were diagnosed between 1985 and 2005. This is a multi-institutional retrospective database analysis of 823 melanoma patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015. Multivariable analyses identified significant prognostic factors, which were weighted and included in the updated index (Melanoma-molGPA). Multiple Cox regression was used to select and weight prognostic factors in proportion to their hazard ratios to design the updated Melanoma-molGPA in which scores of 4.0 and 0.0 are associated with the best and worst prognoses, as with all of the diagnosis-specific GPA indices. Log-rank tests were used to compare adjacent classes.Results: There were 5 significant prognostic factors for survival (age, Karnofsky performance status [KPS], extracranial metastases [ECM], number of brain metastases, and BRAF status), whereas only KPS and the number of brain metastases were significant in the original Melanoma-GPA. Median survival improved from 6.7 to 9.8 months between the 2 treatment eras, and the median survival times for patients with Melanoma-molGPA of 0 to 1.0, 1.5 to 2.0, 2.5 to 3.0, and 3.5 to 4.0 were 4.9, 8.3, 15.8, and 34.1 months (P<.0001 between each adjacent group).Conclusions: Survival and our ability to estimate survival in melanoma patients with brain metastases has improved significantly. The updated Melanoma-molGPA, a user-friendly tool to estimate survival, will facilitate clinical decision making regarding whether and which treatment is appropriate and will also be useful for stratification of future clinical trials. To further simplify use, a free online/smart phone app is available at brainmetgpa.com. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act authorized the FDA to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes. Research is needed to guide proposed regulations, including evaluation of consequences to public health. This study evaluated how a reduced nicotine product standard might be moderated by and impact cannabis use.Methods: Secondary analysis of a controlled clinical trial examining the effects of nicotine content in cigarettes in adult daily smokers. Linear regression assessed whether baseline cannabis use moderated behavioral, subjective, or physiological effects of smoking very low nicotine content (VLNC) versus normal nicotine content (NNC) cigarettes. Repeated measures analysis of associations between nicotine condition and prevalence and frequency of cannabis use was completed using generalized estimating equations (GEE).Results: Cannabis use did not moderate most of the following effects of VLNC cigarettes: Among cannabis users and non-users, smokers randomized to VLNC cigarettes reported lower nicotine dependence, cigarettes per day, biomarkers of nicotine exposure, and craving compared to smokers randomized to NNC cigarettes. Non-cannabis using smokers randomized to VLNC cigarettes also reported lower smoking dependence motives and had lower tobacco-specific nitrosamine exposure and total puff volume versus smokers randomized to NNC cigarettes. For cannabis users, smokers randomized to VLNC cigarettes reported decreased positive affect. VLNC cigarette use did not impact the prevalence or frequency of cannabis use.Discussion: Findings provide evidence that nicotine reduction in cigarettes could have beneficial effects on cigarette smoking regardless of cannabis use. Results suggest that transitioning to VLNC cigarettes is unlikely to alter current rates of cannabis use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]