Intra-Abdominal Candidiasis

Intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) is the second most common form of invasive candidiasis after candidaemia. IAC is a broad term and can be classified on the basis of anatomical site (Candida peritonitis, pancreatic candidiasis, biliary tract candidiasis, gastrointestinal candidiasis, and hepatosplenic candidiasis) as well as clinical setting (community acquired versus nosocomial). The risk factors linked with IAC are candida colonisation, anastomotic leak, multiple instrumentation, long-term broad spectrum antibiotic use, total parenteral nutrition, and immunocompromised state. Clinically, IAC is not different from intraabdominal bacterial infection. Patients generally present with signs and symptoms of intra-abdominal sepsis after not responding to antibiotic therapy and with a background history of multiple surgical interventions or history of delayed source control. Radiological investigations, like ultrasonography and computed tomography scan, not only aid in diagnosis but also assist in differentiating medical from surgical cases. Microbiological diagnosis requires isolation of candida from an intra-abdominal specimen. Differentiation between colonisation and infection is difficult. Generally, progressive and persistent colonisation is associated with high risk of infection. Blood cultures have poor sensitivity for IAC. Non-culture based techniques used for diagnosis are mannan/anti-mannan assay, beta-D glucan assay, and validated polymerase chain reaction. Four types of antifungal strategies described in the literature are prophylaxis (risk factor driven), pre-emptive (colonisation or biomarker driven), empirical (fever driven), and targeted therapy (microbiology driven). Over recent years, global epidemiology has shown a shift from Candida albicans to non-albicans. Local epidemiology plays an important role in selection of the appropriate empirical therapy. The purpose of this review is to discuss different types of IAC based on their classification, risk factors, and management

Technology-Assisted Teachers' Training to Promote Socioemotional Well-Being of Children in Public Schools in Rural Pakistan.

BACKGROUND:The World Health Organization's (WHO) Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) developed a school mental health program (SMHP) to help reduce the burden of youth mental health problems. Designed in collaboration with international consultants, the SMHP draws on evidence-based interventions to train personnel to identify students in need, respond therapeutically, and engage families in seeking care. METHODS:Teams from Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Jordan collaborated with the WHO EMRO and British and U.S. universities to form the School Health Implementation Network: Eastern Mediterranean Region (SHINE), a National Institute of Mental Health-funded global mental health hub. SHINE partners used a "theory of change" process to adapt the SMHP to be more readily adopted by school personnel and replicated with fidelity. The adapted SMHP more directly addresses teachers' priorities and uses technology to facilitate training. RESULTS:A cluster-randomized implementation effectiveness trial enrolling 960 children ages 8-13 in 80 Pakistani schools will test the adapted SMHP against the original. Children who screen positive on first the teacher and subsequently the parent Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaires (SDQs) will be enrolled and tracked for 9 months. The primary trial outcome is reduction in parent-rated SDQ total difficulties scores. Secondary outcomes include children's well-being, academic performance, absenteeism, and perceived stigma; parent-teacher interaction; teachers' self-efficacy and subjective well-being; and school environment. Implementation outcomes include change in teachers' behavior and sense of program acceptability, cultural appropriateness, feasibility, penetration, and sustainability. NEXT STEPS:The trial began in October 2019, and the expected completion date is March 2021. Outcomes will inform dissemination of the SMHP in Pakistan and elsewhere

Validation of Alternative Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML)-Specific Prognostic Scoring (CPSS) System in UT MD Anderson Cancer Center Cohort

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a myeloid neoplasm that belongs to the category of myelodysplastic syndrome / myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS / MPN). The International Prognostic Scoring System for Myelodysplastic Syndromes (IPSS) classification and its revised version (IPSS-R) addressed patients with newly diagnosed, untreated MDS and excluded CMML. While numerous investigators have attempted to devise a prognostic risk scoring system for CMML, no system has been generally accepted for this entity. A CMML-specific prognostic scoring (CPSS) system proposed by Such, et al [Blood. 2013; 11;121(15):3005-15] defines 4 different prognostic risk categories for estimating both overall survival (OS) and risk for AML transformation; the alternative version replaces RBC transfusion dependency with hemoglobin levels. AIM: The aim of the study is to validate the alternative CPSS scoring system on the CMML patient cohort at UT MD Anderson Cancer Center (UTMDACC). METHODS: The databases of the Department of Hematopathology at UTMDACC were searched for patients diagnosed with CMML presenting from 2005 to 2012. Cases were classified by WHO 2008 criteria. Inclusion criteria were: confirmed diagnosis of CMML, age &gt; 18 years, persistent absolute monocyte count &gt;1 × 109/L, marrow blasts &lt; 20%, peripheral blood blasts &lt; 20%. The alternative CPSS score was calculated as a function of WHO subtype, FAB subtype, CMML-specific cytogenetic risk classification, and hemoglobin score. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model overall survival and time to AML progression from date of diagnosis. For time to AML progression, patients who did not experience AML progression were censored at their date of death or last follow-up. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival and the log-rank test was used to test for significant differences by CPSS score. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.3 for Windows. RESULTS: Two hundred and three patients with newly diagnosed, untreated CMML were identified in the clinical databases. These included 132 males and 71 females; median age was 70 (range 55-80) years. 149 had CMML-1 and 54 had CMML-2. A total of 107 deaths and 38 progressions were observed. The median (range) follow-up time for all patients was 1.9 (2 days-10.8) years. The variables that compose the alternative CPSS (WHO subtype, FAB subtype, CMML-specific cytogenetic risk classification, hemoglobin) as well as a description of how the score is calculated are given in Tables 1-2. In univariate Cox models, the alternative CPSS score was a significant predictor of both OS and time to AML progression (Type III p-values &lt;.0001 and 0.0037, respectively). Median survival times for OS were 4.07, 3.32, 2.14, and 1.23 years in the low, intermediate-1, intermediate-2, and high risk groups, respectively. Since less than half the patients progressed, the median time to AML progression could not be estimated for all groups but was 6.40 and 1.60 in the intermediate-2 and high risk groups, respectively. Overall, the alternative CPSS score was highly predictive of both OS and progression free survival (PFS) and clearly delineated the patient risk groups in this sample. CONCLUSIONS: These data reinforce the validity of the alternative CPSS and serve as an additional validation cohort. Table 1. Alternative CMML-specific prognostic scoring system (CPSS) score criteria Variable Each level assigned the following value(sum to get the composite CPSS score): 0 1 2 WHO subtype CMML-1 blasts (including promonocytes) &lt;5% in the PB and &lt;10% in the BM CMML-2 blasts (including promonocytes) from 5% to 19% in the PB and from 10% to 19% in the BM, or when Auer rods are present irrespective of blast count — FAB subtype CMML-MD (WBC &lt;13 × 109/L) CMML-MP (WBC ≥13 × 109/L) — CMML-specific cytogenetic risk classification* Low Intermediate High Hemoglobin ≥10 g/dL &lt;10/dL WBC: white blood cell * CMML-specific cytogenetic risk classification; low: normal and isolated –Y; intermediate: other abnormalities; and high: trisomy 8, complex karyotype (≥3 abnormalities), chromosome 7 abnormalities Table 2. Alternative CPSS: scores used for predicting likelihood of survival and leukemic evolution in individual patient with CMML Risk group Overall CPSS score Low 0 Intermediate-1 1 Intermediate-2 2-3 High 4-5 Figure 1 Overall Survival by alternative CPSS Score Figure 1. Overall Survival by alternative CPSS Score Figure 2 Time to AML Progression by alternative CPSS Score Figure 2. Time to AML Progression by alternative CPSS Score Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare. </jats:sec

Associations between chromosome 7 aneusomy and EGFR copy number with survival and response to gefitinib in NSCLC

7171 Background: EGFR, the presumed target of gefitinib and erlotinib, has been studied (expression, gene copy number, &amp; mutations) for predicting response to these tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). ’High polysomy’ and ’amplification’ of the EGFR gene, as defined by Cappuzzo et al. JNCI 97:643, using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), showed significant association with objective response (Resp) and survival. We also measured EGFR and chromosome 7 (C7) copy numbers by FISH in 81 gefitinib-treated NSCLC patients (12 Resp). Using Cappuzzo’s FISH± parameter alone we saw similar trends but no statistical significance in the 81 patient group. Therefore we sought to optimize FISH parameters for these patients. Methods: FISH was performed (paraffin sections) using a 2-color probe set (Vysis LSI EGFR/CEP 7), median 80 cells per specimen. &gt;50 parameters were derived from the data (e.g. mean EGFR/cell, C7/cell etc) and compared, using different threshold values, to Resp and survival. Results: The best single parameter associated with survival was the average C7/cell. Applying upper and lower thresholds of 3.6 and 2.0 C7/cell to delineate moderate from extreme ratios yielded median survival of 177 and 465 d, respectively (Kaplan-Meier, p &lt; .002). A single threshold of 3.6, separating low from high, yielded survival of 201 and 522 d, respectively (p &lt; .01). For these thresholds C7/cell was not associated with Resp, however, thresholds could be found for which both survival and Resp were significant. The best single parameter associated with Resp was average EGFR/cell. Of the 70 patients with EGFR/cell≤6.0, 63 (90%) did not respond while 5 of 11 patients (45%) with EGFR/cell &gt;6.0 responded (p &lt; .01). No EGFR/cell threshold could be found for which both survival and Resp were significant. Many 2-parameter combinations provided significant associations with both survival and Resp. Conclusions: Several FISH-derived parameters were significantly associated with either survival or Resp to gefitinib and a subset were associated with both. These parameters must be tested on independent data sets to determine their value in directing TKI therapy. [Table: see text] </jats:p