No abstract

Often clinicians are interested in determining whether a subject's measurement falls within a normal range, defined as a range of values of a continuous outcome which contains some proportion (eg, 95%) of measurements from a healthy population. Several studies in the biomedical field have estimated reference ranges based on a meta‐analysis of multiple studies with healthy individuals. However, the literature currently gives no guidance about how to estimate the reference range of a new subject in such settings. Instead, meta‐analyses of such normative range studies typically report the pooled mean as a reference value, which does not incorporate natural variation across healthy individuals in different studies. We present three approaches to calculating the normal reference range of a subject from a meta‐analysis of normally or lognormally distributed outcomes: a frequentist random effects model, a Bayesian random effects model, and an empirical approach. We present the results of a simulation study demonstrating that the methods perform well under a variety of scenarios, though users should be cautious when the number of studies is small and between‐study heterogeneity is large. Finally, we apply these methods to two examples: pediatric time spent awake after sleep onset and frontal subjective postural vertical measurements.

Mucosal melanomas are rare, and less is known about the biomarkers of this subtype in comparison to cutaneous or uveal melanomas. Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) has been studied as a tool for prognostication of uveal melanomas, and immunotherapy against PRAME-expressing tumor cells has already shown promise. Our goal was to retrospectively analyze 29 cases of mucosal melanomas at our institution to determine if any molecular and histopathologic prognosticators could be identified, as well as to study PRAME expression and its association with prognosis. We found that the majority of mucosal melanomas expressed PRAME and a high PRAME expression score predicted a poor prognosis. There was no association between prognosis and the histomorphologic features analyzed, such as presence of spindle cell or epithelioid predominance. BRAF mutations were absent in 16 of 16 cases tested. Pathogenic NRAS mutations were detected in 3 of 11 cases tested and were associated with shorter overall survival compared to those without NRAS alterations, but the presence of NRAS mutations did not correlate with PRAME expression. In conclusion, an increase in PRAME expression and the presence of a pathogenic NRAS were both associated with a worse prognosis in mucosal melanomas.Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use:

No abstract

Background Long Covid is an emerging chronic illness potentially affecting millions, sometimes preventing the ability to work or participate in normal daily activities. COVID-OUT was an investigator-initiated, multi-site, phase 3, randomized, quadruple-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT04510194). The design simultaneously assessed three oral medications (metformin, ivermectin, fluvoxamine) using two by three parallel treatment factorial assignment to efficiently share placebo controls and assessed Long Covid outcomes for 10 months to understand whether early outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 with metformin, ivermectin, or fluvoxamine prevents Long Covid. Methods: This was a decentralized, remotely delivered trial in the US of 1,125 adults age 30 to 85 with overweight or obesity, fewer than 7 days of symptoms, and enrolled within three days of a documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immediate release metformin titrated over 6 days to 1,500mg per day 14 days total; ivermectin 430mcg/kg/day for 3 days; fluvoxamine, 50mg on day one then 50mg twice daily through 14 days. Medical-provider diagnosis of Long Covid, reported by participant by day 300 after randomization was a pre-specified secondary outcome; the primary outcome of the trial was severe Covid by day 14. Result: The median age was 45 years (IQR 37 to 54), 56% female of whom 7% were pregnant. Two percent identified as Native American; 3.7% as Asian; 7.4% as Black/African American; 82.8% as white; and 12.7% as Hispanic/Latino. The median BMI was 29.8 kg/m2 (IQR 27 to 34); 51% had a BMI >30kg/m2. Overall, 8.4% reported having received a diagnosis of Long Covid from a medical provider: 6.3% in the metformin group and 10.6% in the metformin control; 8.0% in the ivermectin group and 8.1% in the ivermectin control; and 10.1% in the fluvoxamine group and 7.5% in the fluvoxamine control. The Hazard Ratio (HR) for Long Covid in the metformin group versus control was 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.88); 0.99 (95% CI 0.592 to 1.643) in the ivermectin group; and 1.36 in the fluvoxamine group (95% CI 0.785 to 2.385). Conclusions: There was a 42% relative decrease in the incidence of Long Covid in the metformin group compared to its blinded control in a secondary outcome of this randomized phase 3 trial. Trial registration:NCT04510194; IND 152439