risk assessment

Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Pediatrics and Adults A WikiGuidelines Group Consensus Statement

Nathan Hinkle — Wed, 17 Jun 2026 01:19:59 +0000

Date Added:

June 16, 2026

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Network Open

Publisher:

The American Medical Association

Publication Date:

November 4, 2024

Pages:

1-29

URL:

Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Pediatrics and Adults A Wiki Guidelines Group Consensus Statement

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

DOI (1):

doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.44495

Keywords

urinary tract infections

pediatrics

Treatment guidelines

MeSH

urinary tract infections

risk assessment

RPR Commentary: Suggested guidelines from the WikiGuidelines Group for diagnosis and management of children and adults with urinary tract infections. James W. Molds, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance Traditional approaches to practice guidelines frequently result in dissociation between strength of recommendation and quality of evidence.

Objective To create a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of urinary tract infections that addresses the gap between the evidence and recommendation strength.

Evidence Review This consensus statement and systematic review applied an approach previously established by the WikiGuidelines Group to construct collaborative clinical guidelines. In May 2023, new and existing members were solicited for questions on urinary tract infection prevention, diagnosis, and management. For each topic, literature searches were conducted up until early 2024 in any language. Evidence was reported according to the WikiGuidelines charter: clear recommendations were established only when reproducible, prospective, controlled studies provided hypothesis-confirming evidence. In the absence of such data, clinical reviews were developed discussing the available literature and associated risks and benefits of various approaches.

Findings A total of 54 members representing 12 countries reviewed 914 articles and submitted information relevant to 5 sections: prophylaxis and prevention (7 questions), diagnosis and diagnostic stewardship (7 questions), empirical treatment (3 questions), definitive treatment and antimicrobial stewardship (10 questions), and special populations and genitourinary syndromes (10 questions). Of 37 unique questions, a clear recommendation could be provided for 6 questions. In 3 of the remaining questions, a clear recommendation could only be provided for certain aspects of the question. Clinical reviews were generated for the remaining questions and aspects of questions not meeting criteria for a clear recommendation.

Conclusions and Relevance In this consensus statement that applied the WikiGuidelines method for clinical guideline development, the majority of topics relating to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of urinary tract infections lack high-quality prospective data and clear recommendations could not be made. Randomized clinical trials are underway to address some of these gaps; however further research is of utmost importance to inform true evidence-based, rather than eminence-based practice.

Author/s:

Zachary Nelson, Abdullah Tarik Aslan, Nathan P. Beahm

Where Can I Find Reliable Information About Vaccines?

Megan George — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 23:19:45 +0000

Date Added:

April 9, 2026

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Internal Medicine

Publication Date:

January 30, 2026

URL:

Where Can I Find Reliable Information About Vaccines?

Type:

Patient Education Materials

Format:

Poster

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2026.0129

Keywords

PMID (1):

41615685

MeSH

Information for patients regarding where to find reliable information about vaccines. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

Vaccination has prevented serious illness and death in children and adults for more than 200 years. However, conflicting statements and misleading information about the benefits and risks of vaccines are becoming more common. This is especially true on the internet and social media. Many of these conflicting statements appear to come from experts, which can lead to confusion about which information to trust. Finding accurate information about vaccines is important for people trying to make healthy decisions for themselves and their families.

Author/s:

Michael A. Incze, Jerard Z. Kneifati-Hayek

Screening for Breast Cancer

Alex Haga — Tue, 07 May 2024 21:10:39 +0000

Date Added:

May 7, 2024

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Patient Page

Publisher:

JAMA

Publication Date:

April 30, 2024

URL:

Screening for Breast Cancer

Type:

Patient Education Materials

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2024.5535

Keywords

Early Detection of Cancer

PMID (1):

38687488

MeSH

breast neoplasms

mammography

early detection of cancer

risk assessment

Information for patients about the new screening recommendations from the USPSTF. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

We all want better ways to find breast cancer early and save lives from this disease. Breast cancer screening can detect cancer early, when it’s most treatable. This guide is meant to help you and your health care professional understand the benefits and risks of breast cancer screening, including what age to start screening and how often people should be screened. This guide is not for women who have a BRCA gene variant, a history of chest radiation, or a personal history of breast cancer. These women should talk to their health care professional about how best to stay healthy.

Author/s:

US Preventive Services Task Force

Suicide Prevention in Primary Care: A Toolkit for Primary Care Clinicians and Leaders

Aubrey Delammermore — Sat, 19 Nov 2022 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

November 19, 2022

Journal/Publication:

Association of Clinicians for the Underserved

Publisher:

Centene Corporation

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

Keywords

evidence-based medicine

MeSH

primary health care

Suicide

Vulnerable Populations

risk assessment

communication

A suicide prevention toolkit developed for primary care practices recommended by the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

Suicide prevention has been named a national priority and much work has been done to review existing evidence and identify gaps in how our nation’s mental health and health care systems address this public health challenge. A national task force that was part of the effort to update the national suicide prevention strategy reviewed research and best practices from the field and
concluded that suicide prevention could be improved in health care. The task force found three common characteristics among successful suicide prevention programs in health care settings. Health care staff in these organizations:
Believed that suicide can be prevented in the population they serve through improvements in service access and quality, and through systems of continuous improvement;
Created a culture that finds suicide unacceptable and sets and monitors ambitious goals to prevent suicide; and
Employed evidence-based clinical care practice, including standardized risk stratification, evidence-based interventions, and patient engagement approaches1.

The task force’s recommendations formed the foundation of the Zero Suicide Approach for health care organizations. The recommendations contained in this guide are based on those offered in the comprehensive Zero Suicide in Health and Behavioral Health Care Toolkit [http://zerosuicide.sprc.org/toolkit]. Here they have been adapted specifically for primary care organizations and clinicians who care for underserved populations.
The guide focuses on two core components:
1. Screening and assessment
2. Care management and referral processes
The final section contains some additional information on administrative and legal issues providers and leaders may find helpful to support integration of safer suicide care in practice. Many providers and clinical leaders erroneously assume if they discuss suicide with a patient they open up themselves to liability. Utilizing a patient safety approach, primary care organizations can
establish safer suicide care practices that deliver high quality care to patients and reduce risk to the organization.
In each section of this guide you will find:
Information summarized for providers, including some helpful provider communication tips.
A list of recommended trainings and resources to learn more.
Leadership actions organizations may wish to undertake to help providers reduce suicide in their organization’s
patient population, and
Relevant tools, templates and case studies.
This toolkit begins with a brief background on the impact of suicide and offers a case study illustrating how one federally qualified health center adopted a safer suicide care model.

Author/s:

Institute of Family Health, Little, V.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on Infection Prevention for Healthcare Personnel Caring for Patients with Suspected or Known COVID-19

Bethie Seay — Tue, 30 Nov 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

November 30, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Publication Date:

November 15, 2021

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

DOI (1):

10.1093/cid/ciab953

PMID (1):

34791102

Recommendations from the Infectious Disease Society of America regarding prevention of COVID-19 infection in health care professionals.

View

Background: Since its emergence in late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions like coughing and care activities like aerosol-generating procedures likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators.

Objective: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19.

Methods: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.

Results: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations, including two updated recommendations and one new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included.

Conclusions: Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

Author/s:

Lynch, J. B., Davitkov, P., Anderson, D. J., Bhimraj, A., Cheng, V. C. C., Guzman-Cottrill, J., Dhindsa, J., Duggal, A., Jain, M. K., Lee, G. M., Liang, S. Y., McGeer, A., Varghese, J., Lavergne, V., Murad, M. H., Mustafa, R. A., Sultan, S., Falck-Ytter, Y., Morgan, R. L.

Prevalence of Allergic Reactions After Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults With High Allergy Risk

Bethie Seay — Fri, 03 Sep 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

September 3, 2021

Type:

Clinical Research Results

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.22255

MeSH

referral and consultation

Surveys and Questionnaires

Algorithms

SARS-CoV-2

Highly allergic individuals can safely receive the COVID vaccine if certain precautions are taken. Anaphylaxis is very unlikely (0.7%).

View

Importance
Allergic reactions among some individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine discourage patients with allergic conditions from receiving this vaccine and physicians from recommending the vaccine.

Objective
To describe the assessment and immunization of highly allergic individuals with the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants
In a prospective cohort study from December 27, 2020, to February 22, 2021, 8102 patients with allergies who applied to the COVID 19 vaccine referral center at the Sheba Medical Center underwent risk assessment using an algorithm that included a detailed questionnaire. High-risk patients (n = 429) were considered “highly allergic” and were immunized under medical supervision.

Exposures
Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine.

Main Outcomes and Measures
Allergic and anaphylactic reactions after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 vaccine among highly allergic patients.

Results
Of the 429 individuals who applied to the COVID-19 referral center and were defined as highly allergic, 304 (70.9%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 52 (16) years. This highly allergic group was referred to receive immunization under medical supervision. After the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 420 patients (97.9%) had no immediate allergic event, 6 (1.4%) developed minor allergic responses, and 3 (0.7%) had anaphylactic reactions. During the study period, 218 highly allergic patients (50.8%) received the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose, of which 214 (98.2%) had no allergic reactions and 4 patients (1.8%) had minor allergic reactions. Other immediate and late reactions were comparable with those seen in the general population, except for delayed itch and skin eruption, which were more common among allergic patients.

Conclusions and Relevance
The rate of allergic reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine, is higher among patients with allergies, particularly among a subgroup with a history of high-risk allergies. This study suggests that most patients with a history of allergic diseases and, particularly, highly allergic patients can be safely immunized by using an algorithm that can be implemented in different medical facilities and includes a referral center, a risk assessment questionnaire, and a setting for immunization under medical supervision of highly allergic patients. Further studies are required to define more specific risk factors for allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Author/s:

Shavit, R., Maoz-Segal, R., Iancovici-Kidon, M.

Management of Blood Pressure in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Not Receiving Dialysis: Synopsis of the 2021 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline

Saige Blanchard — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

June 23, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Annals of Internal Medicine

Publisher:

American College of Physicians

Publication Date:

June 22, 2021

URL:

Management of Blood Pressure in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Not Receiving Dialysis: Synopsis of the 2021 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.7326/M21-0834

Keywords

PMID (1):

34152826

MeSH

blood pressure

renal dialysis

Renal Replacement Therapy

referral and consultation

risk assessment

renal insufficiency, chronic

Eleven guideline recommendations for management of elevated BP in patients with CKD from the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Description: The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of blood pressure (BP) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving dialysis is an update of the KDIGO 2012 guideline on the same topic and reflects new evidence on the risks and benefits of BP-lowering therapy among patients with CKD. It is intended to support shared decision making by health care professionals working with patients with CKD worldwide. This article is a synopsis of the full guideline.

Methods: The KDIGO leadership commissioned 2 co-chairs to convene an international Work Group of researchers and clinicians. After a Controversies Conference in September 2017, the Work Group defined the scope of the evidence review, which was undertaken by an evidence review team between October 2017 and April 2020. Evidence reviews were done according to the Cochrane Handbook. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to guide the development of the recommendations and rate the strength and quality of the evidence. Practice points were included to provide guidance when evidence was insufficient to make a graded recommendation. The guideline was revised after public consultation between January and March 2020.

Recommendations: The updated guideline comprises 11 recommendations and 20 practice points. This synopsis summarizes key recommendations pertinent to the diagnosis and management of high BP in adults with CKD, excluding those receiving kidney replacement therapy. In particular, the synopsis focuses on recommendations for standardized BP measurement and a target systolic BP of less than 120 mm Hg, because these recommendations differ from some other guidelines.

Author/s:

Tomson, C. R. V., Cheung, A. K., Mann, J. F. E., Chang, T. I., Cushman, W. C., Furth, S. L., Hou, F. F., Knoll, G. A., Muntner, P., Pecoits-Filho, R., Tobe, S. W., Lytvyn, L, Craig, J. C., Tunnicliffe, D. J., Howell, M., Tonelli, M., Cheung, M., Earley, A., Ix, J. H., Sarnak, M. J.

Preoperative Cardiac Risk Assessment

John Bayhi — Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:22:21 +0000

Date Added:

February 27, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publisher:

Elsevier B.V. / Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

Publication Date:

February 24, 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.08.013

Keywords

cardiac

preoperative assessment

MeSH

acute coronary syndrome

Cost-Benefit Analysis

This is a review of the latest recommendations regarding the cardiac assessment of patients needing surgery. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Major adverse cardiac events are common causes of perioperative mortality and major morbidity. Preventing these complications requires thorough preoperative risk assessment and postoperative monitoring of at-risk patients. Major guidelines recommend assessment based on a validated risk calculator that incorporates patient- and procedure-specific factors. American and European guidelines define when stress testing is needed on the basis of functional capacity assessment. Favoring cost-effectiveness, Canadian guidelines instead recommend obtaining brain natriuretic peptide or N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide levels to guide postoperative screening for myocardial injury or infarction. When conditions such as acute coronary syndrome, severe pulmonary hypertension, and decompensated heart failure are identified, nonemergent surgery should be postponed until the condition is appropriately managed. There is an evolving role of biomarkers and myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery to enhance risk stratification, but the effect of interventions guided by these strategies is unclear.

Author/s:

Raslau, D, Bierle, DM, Stephenson, CR, Mikhail, MA, Kebede, EB, Mauck, KF

Immunization Strategies to Span the Spectrum of Immunocompromised Adults

John Bayhi — Sat, 15 Feb 2020 20:43:08 +0000

Date Added:

February 15, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publisher:

Elsevier, Inc.

Publication Date:

February 14, 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.09.002

Keywords

MeSH

Immunogenicity, Vaccine

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.

risk assessment

This is a concise review of the principles involved in the immunization of patients who are immunocompromised. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides annual recommendations for routine adult immunizations. Many recommendations consider patient factors such as age, medical conditions, and medications that increase an individual’s risk for infection with a vaccine-preventable disease. These factors, particularly those that lead to immunocompromise, may also alter the risk-benefit ratio for live vaccines, and/or lead to decreased vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness. The provider may need to consider alternative vaccination strategies, including higher antigen dose vaccines, adjuvanted vaccines, avoidance of live vaccines, and careful timing of vaccination to optimize safety and effectiveness in immunocompromised populations. This thematic review discusses general principles regarding immunization of adults across the spectrum of immunocompromise, examines current guidelines and studies that support them, and outlines future research needs.

Author/s:

Whitaker, JA

Safety and efficacy of testosterone for women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trial data

Brian Desmarais — Thu, 23 Jan 2020 02:08:35 +0000

Date Added:

January 22, 2020

Journal/Publication:

The Lancet: Diabetes Endocrinology

Publication Date:

October 7, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

754-766

URL:

Safety and efficacy of testosterone for women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trial data

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30189-5

MeSH

risk assessment

Testosterone Congeners

Testosterone

female

This meta-analysis found that topical testosterone improves sexual desire, performance, and satisfaction in women with presumed testosterone deficiency. Adverse effects included some weight gain, acne, and hair growth. However, proper evaluation, dosing, and long term effects are still uncertain. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

BACKGROUND:

The benefits and risks of testosterone treatment for women with diminished sexual wellbeing remain controversial. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess potential benefits and risks of testosterone for women.

METHODS:

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for blinded, randomised controlled trials of testosterone treatment of at least 12 weeks' duration completed between Jan 1, 1990, and Dec 10, 2018. We also searched drug registration applications to the European Medicine Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration to identify any unpublished data. Primary outcomes were the effects of testosterone on sexual function, cardiometabolic variables, cognitive measures, and musculoskeletal health. This study is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), number CRD42018104073.

FINDINGS:

Our search strategy retrieved 46 reports of 36 randomised controlled trials comprising 8480 participants. Our meta-analysis showed that, compared with placebo or a comparator (eg, oestrogen, with or without progestogen), testosterone significantly increased sexual function, including satisfactory sexual event frequency (mean difference 0·85, 95% CI 0·52 to 1·18), sexual desire (standardised mean difference 0·36, 95% CI 0·22 to 0·50), pleasure (mean difference 6·86, 95% CI 5·19 to 8·52), arousal (standardised mean difference 0·28, 95% CI 0·21 to 0·35), orgasm (standardised mean difference 0·25, 95% CI 0·18 to 0·32), responsiveness (standardised mean difference 0·28, 95% CI 0·21 to 0·35), and self-image (mean difference 5·64, 95% CI 4·03 to 7·26), and reduced sexual concerns (mean difference 8·99, 95% CI 6·90 to 11·08) and distress (standardised mean difference -0·27, 95% CI -0·36 to -0·17) in postmenopausal women. A significant rise in the amount of LDL-cholesterol, and reductions in the amounts of total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, and triglycerides, were seen with testosterone administered orally, but not when administered non-orally (eg, by transdermal patch or cream). An overall increase in weight was recorded with testosterone treatment. No effects of testosterone were reported for body composition, musculoskeletal variables, or cognitive measures, although the number of women who contributed data for these outcomes was small. Testosterone was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of reporting acne and hair growth, but no serious adverse events were recorded.

INTERPRETATION:

Testosterone is effective for postmenopausal women with low sexual desire causing distress, with administration via non-oral routes (eg, transdermal application) preferred because of a neutral lipid profile. The effects of testosterone on individual wellbeing and musculoskeletal and cognitive health, as well as long-term safety, warrant further investigation.

FUNDING:

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Author/s:

Islam, R.M., Bell, R.J., Page, M.J., Davis, S.R., Green, S.

Preoperative Evaluation Before Noncardiac Surgery

John Bayhi — Wed, 20 Nov 2019 21:00:21 +0000

Date Added:

November 20, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publisher:

Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research / Elsevier, Inc.

Publication Date:

November 18, 2019

URL:

Preoperative Evaluation Before Noncardiac Surgery

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.04.029

Keywords

surgery

preoperative evaluation

MeSH

This is a fairly comprehensive review of the preoperative considerations and evaluation components for a patient undergoing non-cardiac surgeries. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

The medical complexity of surgical patients is increasing and medical specialties are frequently asked to assist with perioperative management surgical patients. Effective pre-anesthetic medical evaluations are a valuable tool in providing high-value, patient-centered surgical care and should systematically address risk assessment and identify areas for risk modification. This review outlines a structured approach to the pre-anesthetic medical evaluation, focusing on the asymptomatic patient. It discusses the evidence supporting the use of perioperative risk calculation tools and focused preoperative testing. We also introduce important key topics that will be explored in greater detail in upcoming reviews in this series.

Author/s:

Bierle, DM, Raslau, D, Regan, DW, Sundsted, KK, Mauck, K.F.

Final Update Summary: Breast Cancer: Medication Use to Reduce Risk

John Bayhi — Wed, 04 Sep 2019 17:50:29 +0000

Date Added:

September 4, 2019

Journal/Publication:

US Preventative Services Task Force / JAMA

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

September 3, 2019

Issue:

322

Volume:

Pages:

857-867

URL:

Final Update Summary: Breast Cancer: Medication Use to Reduce Risk

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2019.11885

Keywords

PMID (1):

31479144

MeSH

breast neoplasms

risk reduction behavior

biopsy

risk assessment

tamoxifen

Raloxifene Hydrochloride

aromatase inhibitors

It looks like all women need to be assessed for risk of breast cancer so that high-risk women can be offered medications to reduce risk. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

IMPORTANCE:

Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer among women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death. The median age at diagnosis is 62 years, and an estimated 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer at some point in their lifetime. African American women are more likely to die of breast cancer compared with women of other races.

OBJECTIVE:

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on medications for risk reduction of primary breast cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW:

The USPSTF reviewed evidence on the accuracy of risk assessment methods to identify women who could benefit from risk-reducing medications for breast cancer, as well as evidence on the effectiveness, adverse effects, and subgroup variations of these medications. The USPSTF reviewed evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, and diagnostic accuracy studies of risk stratification models in women without preexisting breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.

FINDINGS:

The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk assessment tools can predict the number of cases of breast cancer expected to develop in a population. However, these risk assessment tools perform modestly at best in discriminating between individual women who will or will not develop breast cancer. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk-reducing medications (tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors) provide at least a moderate benefit in reducing risk for invasive estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. The USPSTF found that the benefits of taking tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors to reduce risk for breast cancer are no greater than small in women not at increased risk for the disease. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that tamoxifen and raloxifene and adequate evidence that aromatase inhibitors are associated with small to moderate harms. Overall, the USPSTF determined that the net benefit of taking medications to reduce risk of breast cancer is larger in women who have a greater risk for developing breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION:

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer to prescribe risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, to women who are at increased risk for breast cancer and at low risk for adverse medication effects. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the routine use of risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, in women who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. (D recommendation) This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women 35 years and older, including women with previous benign breast lesions on biopsy (such as atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ). This recommendation does not apply to women who have a current or previous diagnosis of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.

Author/s:

US Preventive Services Task Force, Owens, Douglas K., Davidson, Karina W., Krist, Alex H., Barry, Michael J., Cabana, M, Caughey, AB, Doubeni, Chyke A., Epling, John W. Jr., Kubik, M, Landefeld, CS, Mangione, Carol M., Pbert, L, Silverstein, Michael, Tseng, Chien-Wen, Wong, JB

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Brian Desmarais — Wed, 21 Aug 2019 19:42:45 +0000

Date Added:

August 21, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association

Publication Date:

August 20, 2019

URL:

Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2019.10987

Keywords

MeSH

early detection of cancer

Genetic Counseling

I suspect you are already doing this, but since it is making a splash on the TV news programs, I thought you ought to see it. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

IMPORTANCE:

Potentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased riskfor breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases.

OBJECTIVE:

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW:

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery.

FINDINGS:

For women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION:

The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).

Author/s:

US Preventive Services Task Force

Periprocedural Bridging in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review

Brian Desmarais — Wed, 19 Jun 2019 20:00:05 +0000

Date Added:

June 19, 2019

Journal/Publication:

The American Journal of Medicine

Publication Date:

June 16, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

132

Pages:

722-732.e7

URL:

Periprocedural Bridging in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review.

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.amjmed.2019.01.004

Keywords

MeSH

Venous Thromboembolism

This systematic review of 28 cohort studies suggests that anticoagulation bridging in patients on warfarin for procedures is probably both unwise (increased bleeding) and unnecessary (no reduction in thromboembolic risk) .

James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) are the most widely used anticoagulants, and bridging is commonly administered during periprocedural VKA interruption. Given the unclear benefits and risks of periprocedural bridging in patients with previous venousthromboembolism, we aimed to assess recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding outcomes with and without bridging in this population.

METHODS:

We performed a systematic review searching the PubMed and Embase databases from inception to December 7, 2017 for randomized and nonrandomized studies that included adults with previous venous thromboembolism requiring VKA interruption to undergo an elective procedure, and that reported venous thromboembolism or bleeding outcomes. Quality of evidence was graded by consensus.

RESULTS:

We included 28 cohort studies (20 being single-arm cohorts) with, overall, 6915 procedures for analysis. In 27 studies reporting perioperative venous thromboembolism outcomes, the pooled incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism with bridging was 0.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4%-1.2%) and 0.5% (95% CI, 0.3%-0.8%) without bridging. Eighteen studies reported major or nonmajor bleeding outcomes. The pooled incidence of any bleeding was 3.9% (95% CI, 2.0%-7.4%) with bridging and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.1%-1.7%) without bridging. In bridged patients at high thromboembolic risk, the pooled incidence for venous thromboembolism was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3%-2.5%) and 7.5% (95% CI, 3.1%-17.4%) for any bleeding. Quality of available evidence was very low, primarily due to a high risk of bias of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS:

Periprocedural bridging increases the risk of bleeding compared with VKA interruption without bridging, without a significant difference in periprocedural venous thromboembolism rates.

KEYWORDS:

Anticoagulants; Bleeding; Bridging; PROSPERO; Periprocedural; Venous thromboembolism; registration number CRD42017074710

Author/s:

Baumgartner, C., de Kouchkovsky, I., Whitaker, E., Fang, M.C.

Preexposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of HIV Infection: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Brian Desmarais — Wed, 12 Jun 2019 19:42:06 +0000

Date Added:

June 12, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association

Publication Date:

June 11, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

321

URL:

Preexposure Prophylaxis for the Prevention of HIV Infection: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2019.6390

Keywords

MeSH

acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis

risk factors

risk assessment

primary health care

The USPSTF recommends offering antiretroviral prophylaxis to patients at high risk for HIV infection. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Abstract

IMPORTANCE:

An estimated 1.1 million individuals in the United States are currently living with HIV, and more than 700 000 persons have died of AIDS since the first cases were reported in 1981. In 2017, there were 38 281 new diagnoses of HIV infection reported in the United States; 81% of these new diagnoses were among males and 19% were among females. Although treatable, HIV infection has no cure and has significant health consequences.

OBJECTIVE:

To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the prevention of HIV infection.

EVIDENCE REVIEW:

The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits of PrEP for the prevention of HIV infection with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy or combined tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine and whether the benefits vary by risk group, population subgroup, or regimen or dosing strategy; the diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment tools to identify persons at high risk of HIVacquisition; the rates of adherence to PrEP in primary care settings; the association between adherence and effectiveness of PrEP; and the harms of PrEP when used for HIV prevention.

FINDINGS:

The USPSTF found convincing evidence that PrEP is of substantial benefit in decreasing the risk of HIV infection in persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. The USPSTF also found convincing evidence that adherence to PrEP is highly associated with its efficacy in preventing the acquisition of HIV infection; thus, adherence to PrEP is central to realizing its benefit. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that PrEP is associated with small harms, including kidney and gastrointestinal adverse effects. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the magnitude of benefit of PrEP with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based therapy to reduce the risk of acquisition of HIV infection in persons at high risk is substantial.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION:

The USPSTF recommends offering PrEP with effective antiretroviral therapy to persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. (A recommendation).

Author/s:

US Preventive Services Task Force