Search

Objective To examine the association between obesity and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a primary care-based cohort of people with PMR. Methods The PMR Cohort Study recruited people with incident PMR from 382 general practices. Self-completed questionnaires (0, 12, 24 months) captured a range of PROMs for pain, stiffness, anxiety, depression, fatigue, function and quality of life, alongside data on BMI. People were categorized as underweight/normal weight (BMI < 25kg/m2), overweight (25–29.99 kg/m2) or obese (≥30 kg/m2). Piecewise, multilevel, linear mixed-effects regression models examined relationships between BMI categories and PROMs over time, adjusting for confounding variables. Chi-squared tests examined the relationship between obesity and glucocorticoid persistence. Results 644 people with PMR were included. At baseline, 33.9% were normal/underweight, 40.6% overweight and 25.5% obese. Compared with normal/underweight people, those with obesity had significantly worse scores for the following: pain and stiffness at 12 months; fatigue at 12 and 24 months; depression at baseline; physical function at all time points; and quality of life at baseline and 12 months. They also had significantly smaller improvements in stiffness (1.13 units on an 11-point numeric rating scale; P  =   0.001) and physical function (0.14 units measured using the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire; P  =   0.025) between 0 and 12 months. BMI categories did not relate to persistent glucocorticoid use at 12 months (P  =   0.110) or 24 months (P  =   0.166). Conclusion Obesity associates with poorer outcomes for a range of PROMs in people with PMR. Consideration should be given to providing weight management support to people with PMR and obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dear Editor, We read the recent article with great interest by Wang and Jonas [1], who assessed the likelihood of severe COVID‐19 outcomes among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV) with [...]

Oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (OMD NSCLC) has been proposed to bridge the spectrum between non-metastatic and widely metastatic states and is perceived as an opportunity for potential cure if removed. Twelve clinical trials on local treatment have been reported, yet none are conclusive. These trials informed the development of a joint clinical practice guideline by the American & European Societies for Radiation Oncology, which endorses local treatment for OMD NSCLC. However, the heterogeneity between prognostic factors within these trials likely influenced outcomes and can only support guidance at this time. Caution against an uncritical acceptance of the guideline is discussed, as strong recommendations are offered based on expert opinion and inconclusive evidence. The guideline is also examined by a patient's caregiver, who emphasizes that uncertain evidence impedes shared decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A peripheral, bronchoscopically invisible pulmonary lesion is a diagnostic challenge. Transthoracic needle aspiration has long been the investigation of choice but runs the risk of pneumothorax (up to 44%). Newer technologies like radial endobronchial ultrasound (R-EBUS) offer a safer approach. We present our results of R-EBUS in the diagnosis of bronchoscopically invisible lesions. This is the first large case series from India. Aims: (1) To determine the yield of R-EBUS for the diagnosis of bronchoscopically invisible lesions. (2) To compare the yields of forceps versus cryobiopsies in the diagnosis of these lesions. Setting: Tertiary care cancer center. Design: Prospective study. Methods: Consecutive patients presenting between January and October 2015 with bronchoscopically invisible peripheral pulmonary lesions were included. R-EBUS was used to localize and sample the lesion and the yields were analyzed. Yields of cryo and forceps biopsy were compared where both methods had been used. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22. Results: A definite diagnosis obtained in 67.3% (37/55) patients with no major complications. No significant difference was found in yield between: (1) small (3 cm) lesions: (46.2% versus 78.6%, P = 0.38). (2) central and adjacent lesions: 61.5% versus 70%. (3) forceps and cryobiopsy (n = 28, 75% versus 67.9% P = 0.562). Conclusions: R-EBUS is a safe procedure in our setting and its yield is comparable to that reported in literature. The yield of central and adjacent lesions and forceps or cryobiopsy appears similar. Further refinements in the technique could improve yield.