Background

In 2007, we reported a summary of data comparing diabetic foot complications to cancer. The purpose of this brief report was to refresh this with the best available data as they currently exist. Since that time, more reports have emerged both on cancer mortality and mortality associated with diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), Charcot arthropathy, and diabetes-associated lower extremity amputation.

Methods

We collected data reporting 5-year mortality from studies published following 2007 and calculated a pooled mean. We evaluated data from DFU, Charcot arthropathy and lower extremity amputation. We dichotomized high and low amputation as proximal and distal to the ankle, respectively. This was compared with cancer mortality as reported by the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute.

Results

Five year mortality for Charcot, DFU, minor and major amputations were 29.0, 30.5, 46.2 and 56.6%, respectively. This is compared to 9.0% for breast cancer and 80.0% for lung cancer. 5 year pooled mortality for all reported cancer was 31.0%. Direct costs of care for diabetes in general was $237 billion in 2017. This is compared to $80 billion for cancer in 2015. As up to one-third of the direct costs of care for diabetes may be attributed to the lower extremity, these are also readily comparable.

Conclusion

Diabetic lower extremity complications remain enormously burdensome. Most notably, DFU and LEA appear to be more than just a marker of poor health. They are independent risk factors associated with premature death. While advances continue to improve outcomes of care for people with DFU and amputation, efforts should be directed at primary prevention as well as those for patients in diabetic foot ulcer remission to maximize ulcer-free, hospital-free and activity-rich days.

Despite the known higher risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes, the pathophysiology and optimal management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), a leading complication associated with diabetes, is complex and continues to evolve. Complications of type 2 diabetes, such as DFUs, are a major cause of morbidity and mortality and the leading cause of major lower extremity amputation in the United States. There has recently been a strong focus on the prevention and early treatment of DFUs, leading to the development of multidisciplinary diabetic wound and amputation prevention clinics across the country. Mounting evidence has shown that, despite these efforts, amputations associated with DFUs continue to increase. Furthermore, due to increasing patient complexity of management secondary to comorbid conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, the management of peripheral artery disease associated with DFUs has become increasingly difficult, and care delivery is often episodic and fragmented. Although structured, process-specific approaches exist at individual institutions for the management of DFUs in the cardiovascular patient population, there is insufficient awareness of these principles in the general medicine communities. Furthermore, there is growing interest in better understanding the mechanistic underpinnings of DFUs to better define personalized medicine to improve outcomes. The goals of this scientific statement are to provide salient background information on the complex pathogenesis and current management of DFUs in cardiovascular patients, to guide therapeutic and preventive strategies and future research directions, and to inform public policy makers on health disparities and other barriers to improving and advancing care in this expanding patient population.

Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) causes significant morbidity with profound negative effects on health-related quality of life. As the prevalence of peripheral artery disease and diabetes continue to rise in our aging population, the public health impact of CLTI has escalated. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become common and important measures for clinical evaluation in both clinical care and research. PROMs are important for the measurement of clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness and for shared decision-making on treatment options. However, the PROMs used to describe the experience of patients with CLTI are heterogeneous, incomplete, and lack specific applicability to the underlying disease processes and diverse populations. For example, certain PROMs exist for patients with extremity wounds, and other PROMs exist for patients with pain, and still others exist for patients with vascular disease. Despite this multiplicity of tools, no single PROM encompasses all of the components necessary to describe the experiences of patients with CLTI. This significant unmet need is evident from both published reports and contemporary large-scale clinical trials in the field. In this systematic review, we review the current use of PROMs for patients with CLTI in clinical practice and in research trials and highlight the gaps that need to be addressed to develop a unifying PROM instrument for CLTI.

Ever-harsher service conditions in the future will call for materials with increasing ability to undergo deformation without sustaining damage while retaining high strength. Prime candidates for these conditions are certain high-entropy alloys (HEAs), which have extraordinary work-hardening ability and toughness. By subjecting the equiatomic CrMnFeCoNi HEA to severe plastic deformation through swaging followed by either quasi-static compression or dynamic deformation in shear, we observe a dense structure comprising stacking faults, twins, transformation from the face-centered cubic to the hexagonal close-packed structure, and, of particular note, amorphization. The coordinated propagation of stacking faults and twins along {111} planes generates high-deformation regions, which can reorganize into hexagonal packets; when the defect density in these regions reaches a critical level, they generate islands of amorphous material. These regions can have outstanding mechanical properties, which provide additional strengthening and/or toughening mechanisms to enhance the capability of these alloys to withstand extreme loading conditions.

The Wound Healing Foundation (WHF) recognised a need for an unbiased consensus on the best treatment of chronic wounds. A panel of 13 experts were invited to a virtual meeting which took place on 27 March 2021. The proceedings were organised in the sub-sections diagnosis, debridement, infection control, dressings, grafting, pain management, oxygen treatment, outcomes and future needs. Eighty percent or better concurrence among the panellists was considered a consensus. A large number of critical questions were discussed and agreed upon. Important takeaways included that wound care needs to be simplified to a point that it can be delivered by the patient or the patient's family. Another one was that telemonitoring, which has proved very useful during the COVID-19 pandemic, can help reduce the frequency of interventions by a visiting nurse or a wound care center. Defining patient expectations is critical to designing a successful treatment. Patient outcomes might include wound specific outcomes such as time to heal, wound size reduction, as well as improvement in quality of life. For those patients with expectations of healing, an aggressive approach to achieve that goal is recommended. When healing is not an expectation, such as in patients receiving palliative wound care, outcomes might include pain reduction, exudate management, odour management and/or other quality of life benefits to wound care.

Introduction

Endogenous granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), identified by its ability to support differentiation of hematopoietic cells into several types of myeloid cells, is now known to support maturation and maintain the metabolic capacity of mononuclear phagocytes including monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. These cells sense and attack potential pathogens, present antigens to adaptive immune cells, and recruit other immune cells. Recombinant human (rhu) GM-CSF (e.g., sargramostim [glycosylated, yeast-derived rhu GM-CSF]) has immune modulating properties and can restore the normal function of mononuclear phagocytes rendered dysfunctional by deficient or insufficient endogenous GM-CSF.

Methods

We reviewed the emerging biologic and cellular effects of GM-CSF. Experts in clinical disease areas caused by deficient or insufficient endogenous GM-CSF examined the role of GM-CSF in mononuclear phagocyte disorders including autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (aPAP), diverse infections (including COVID-19), wound healing, and anti-cancer immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Results

We discuss emerging data for GM-CSF biology including the positive effects on mitochondrial function and cell metabolism, augmentation of phagocytosis and efferocytosis, and immune cell modulation. We further address how giving exogenous rhu GM-CSF may control or treat mononuclear phagocyte dysfunction disorders caused or exacerbated by GM-CSF deficiency or insufficiency. We discuss how rhu GM-CSF may augment the anti-cancer effects of immune checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy as well as ameliorate immune-related adverse events.

Discussion

We identify research gaps, opportunities, and the concept that rhu GM-CSF, by supporting and restoring the metabolic capacity and function of mononuclear phagocytes, can have significant therapeutic effects. rhu GM-CSF (e.g., sargramostim) might ameliorate multiple diseases of GM-CSF deficiency or insufficiency and address a high unmet medical need.

Guideline summary

Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is associated with mortality, amputation, and impaired quality of life. These Global Vascular Guidelines (GVG) are focused on definition, evaluation, and management of CLTI with the goals of improving evidence-based care and highlighting critical research needs. The term CLTI is preferred over critical limb ischemia, as the latter implies threshold values of impaired perfusion rather than a continuum. CLTI is a clinical syndrome defined by the presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in combination with rest pain, gangrene, or a lower limb ulceration >2 weeks duration. Venous, traumatic, embolic, and nonatherosclerotic etiologies are excluded. All patients with suspected CLTI should be referred urgently to a vascular specialist. Accurately staging the severity of limb threat is fundamental, and the Society for Vascular Surgery Threatened Limb Classification system, based on grading of Wounds, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) is endorsed. Objective hemodynamic testing, including toe pressures as the preferred measure, is required to assess CLTI. Evidence-based revascularization (EBR) hinges on three independent axes: Patient risk, Limb severity, and ANatomic complexity (PLAN). Average-risk and high-risk patients are defined by estimated procedural and 2-year all-cause mortality. The GVG proposes a new Global Anatomic Staging System (GLASS), which involves defining a preferred target artery path (TAP) and then estimating limb-based patency (LBP), resulting in three stages of complexity for intervention. The optimal revascularization strategy is also influenced by the availability of autogenous vein for open bypass surgery. Recommendations for EBR are based on best available data, pending level 1 evidence from ongoing trials. Vein bypass may be preferred for average-risk patients with advanced limb threat and high complexity disease, while those with less complex anatomy, intermediate severity limb threat, or high patient risk may be favored for endovascular intervention. All patients with CLTI should be afforded best medical therapy including the use of antithrombotic, lipid-lowering, antihypertensive, and glycemic control agents, as well as counseling on smoking cessation, diet, exercise, and preventive foot care. Following EBR, long-term limb surveillance is advised. The effectiveness of nonrevascularization therapies (eg, spinal stimulation, pneumatic compression, prostanoids, and hyperbaric oxygen) has not been established. Regenerative medicine approaches (eg, cell, gene therapies) for CLTI should be restricted to rigorously conducted randomizsed clinical trials. The GVG promotes standardization of study designs and end points for clinical trials in CLTI. The importance of multidisciplinary teams and centers of excellence for amputation prevention is stressed as a key health system initiative.

Background & aims

It is not clear whether symptoms alone can be used to estimate the biologic activity of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to evaluate whether symptoms can be used to identify patients with endoscopic and histologic features of remission.

Methods

Between April 2011 and June 2014, we performed a prospective, observational study and recruited 269 consecutive adults with EoE (67% male; median age, 39 years old) in Switzerland and the United States. Patients first completed the validated symptom-based EoE activity index patient-reported outcome instrument and then underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy collection. Endoscopic and histologic findings were evaluated with a validated grading system and standardized instrument, respectively. Clinical remission was defined as symptom score <20 (range, 0-100); histologic remission was defined as a peak count of <20 eosinophils/mm(2) in a high-power field (corresponds to approximately <5 eosinophils/median high-power field); and endoscopic remission as absence of white exudates, moderate or severe rings, strictures, or combination of furrows and edema. We used receiver operating characteristic analysis to determine the best symptom score cutoff values for detection of remission.

Results

Of the study subjects, 111 were in clinical remission (41.3%), 79 were in endoscopic remission (29.7%), and 75 were in histologic remission (27.9%). When the symptom score was used as a continuous variable, patients in endoscopic, histologic, and combined (endoscopic and histologic remission) remission were detected with area under the curve values of 0.67, 0.60, and 0.67, respectively. A symptom score of 20 identified patients in endoscopic remission with 65.1% accuracy and histologic remission with 62.1% accuracy; a symptom score of 15 identified patients with both types of remission with 67.7% accuracy.

Conclusions

In patients with EoE, endoscopic or histologic remission can be identified with only modest accuracy based on symptoms alone. At any given time, physicians cannot rely on lack of symptoms to make assumptions about lack of biologic disease activity in adults with EoE. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00939263.

Background & aims

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is assessed endoscopically (endoscopic activity), based on grades of edema, rings, exudates, furrows, and strictures (EREFS). We examined variations in endoscopic assessments of severity, developed and validated 3 EREFS-based scoring systems, and assessed responsiveness of these systems using data from a randomized placebo-controlled trial of patients with EoE.

Methods

For the development set, 5 gastroenterologists reviewed EREFS findings from 266 adults with EoE and provided endoscopist global assessment scores (EndoGA, scale of 0 to 10); variation (ΔEndoGA) was assessed using linear regression. We evaluated simple scores (features given arbitrary values from 0 to 3) and developed 2 scoring systems (adjusted score range, 0-100). We then fitted our linear regression model with mean EndoGA to data from 146 adults recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between April 2011 and December 2012. For the validation set, we collected data from 120 separate adults (recruited in centers in Switzerland and the United States between May 2013 and July 2014), assessing regression coefficient-based scores using Bland-Altman method. We assessed the responsiveness of our scoring systems using data from a randomized trial of patients with EoE given fluticasone (n=16) or placebo (n=8).

Results

The distribution of EndoGA values differed among endoscopists (mean ΔEndoGA, 2.6±1.8; range 0-6.6). We developed 2 regression-based scoring systems to assess overall and proximal and distal esophageal findings; variation in endoscopic features accounted for more than 90% of the mean EndoGA variation. In the validation group, differences between mean EndoGA and regression-based scores were small (ranging from -4.70 to 2.03), indicating good agreement. In analyses of data from the randomized trial, the baseline to end of study change in patients given fluticasone was a reduction of 24.3 in simple score (reduction of 4.6 in patients given placebo, P=.052); a reduction of 23.5 in regression-based overall score (reduction of 6.56 in patients given placebo, P=.12), and a reduction of 23.8 (reduction of 8.44 in patients given placebo, P=.11).

Conclusion

Assessments of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE vary among endoscopists. In an analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial, we found that newly developed scoring systems are no better than simple scoring system in detecting changes in endoscopic activity. These results support the use of a simple scoring system in evaluation of endoscopic activity in patients with EoE. clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT00939263 and NCT01386112.