In 2011, ipilimumab was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for metastatic melanoma. Since its approval, numerous targeted therapies have been approved by the FDA. Population-based studies assessing the survival benefit from these agents are lacking. We therefore carried out this study to compare the 1-year, 2-year, and median overall survival (OS) among metastatic melanoma patients in pretargeted and post-targeted eras. This is a retrospective study that utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER-18) database, version 8.3.4 (22 March 2017). The patient groups were defined as the pretargeted era (2004-2010) and the post-targeted era (2011-2014) as ipilimumab was approved by the FDA in 2011. The database comprised of 5471 patients (3314 in the pretargeted era and 2157 in the post-targeted era). OS in the post-targeted era was found to be significantly better compared with the pretargeted era by Kaplan-Meier curve (1-year OS: 38.9 vs. 36.8%, 2-year OS: 28.3 vs. 23.5%, and median survival: 8 vs. 7 months, P=0.001 by the log-rank test). The survival was significantly better in the post-targeted era compared with the pretargeted era on multivariate analysis using a Cox proportional hazard model after adjusting for age, sex, race, and metasectomy status (adjusted hazard ratio of 0.889, 95% CI: of 0.832-0.951, P=0.001). There is significant survival benefit in metastatic melanoma patients since the introduction of immune checkpoint-blocking agents.

No abstract

Endotracheal intubation (EI) is a potentially lifesaving but high-risk procedure in critically ill patients. While the ACGME mandates that trainees in pulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM) achieve competence in this procedure, there is wide variation in EI training across the USA. One study suggests that 40% of the US PCCM trainees feel they would not be proficient in EI upon graduation. This article presents a review of the EI training literature; the recommendations of a national group of PCCM, anesthesiology, emergency medicine, and pediatric experts; and a call for further research, collaboration, and consensus guidelines.

Timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 has attracted substantial attention. Initial guidelines recommended delaying or avoiding tracheostomy due to the potential for particle aerosolization and theoretical risk to providers. However, early tracheostomy could improve patient outcomes and alleviate resource shortages. This study compares outcomes in a diverse population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy either "early" (within 14 d of intubation) or "late" (more than 14 d after intubation).DESIGN: International multi-institute retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Thirteen hospitals in Bolivia, Brazil, Spain, and the United States.

No abstract