OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between stroke care infrastructure and stroke quality-of-care outcomes at 29 spoke hospitals participating in the <name concealed for blinding purposes> hub-and-spoke telestroke network. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Encounter-level data from <name concealed for blinding purposes> telestroke patient registry were filtered to include encounters during 2015-2022 for patients aged 18 and above with a clinical diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke, and who received intravenous tissue plasminogen activator. Unadjusted and adjusted generalized estimating equations assessed associations between time-related stroke quality-of-care metrics captured during the encounter and the existence of the two components of stroke care infrastructure-stroke coordinators and stroke center certifications-across all hospitals and within hospital subgroups defined by size and rurality. RESULTS: Telestroke encounters at spoke hospitals with stroke coordinators and stroke center certifications were associated with shorter door-to-needle (DTN) times (60.9 min for hospitals with both components and 57.3 min for hospitals with one, vs. 81.2 min for hospitals with neither component, p <.001). Similar patterns were observed for the percentage of encounters with DTN time of ≤60 min (63.8% and 68.9% vs. 32.0%, p <.001) and ≤45 min (34.0% and 38.4% vs. 8.42%, p <.001). Associations were similar for other metrics (e.g., door-to-registration time), and were stronger for smaller (vs. larger) hospitals and rural (vs. urban) hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke coordinators or stroke center certifications may be important for stroke quality of care, especially at spoke hospitals with limited resources or in rural areas.

Identifying persons who have newly acquired HIV infections is critical for characterizing the HIV epidemic direction. We analyzed pooled data from nationally representative Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment surveys conducted across 14 countries in Africa for recent infection risk factors. We included adults 15-49 years of age who had sex during the previous year and used a recent infection testing algorithm to distinguish recent from long-term infections. We collected risk factor information via participant interviews and assessed correlates of recent infection using multinomial logistic regression, incorporating each survey's complex sampling design. Compared with HIV-negative persons, persons with higher odds of recent HIV infection were women, were divorced/separated/widowed, had multiple recent sex partners, had a recent HIV-positive sex partner or one with unknown status, and lived in communities with higher HIV viremia prevalence. Prevention programs focusing on persons at higher risk for HIV and their sexual partners will contribute to reducing HIV incidence.

Objectives: Examine publicly accessible HBCU COVID-19 policies and associations with community COVID-19 infection and vaccination rates, and utilization of a dashboard. Participants: Excluding unaccredited or closed programs (n = 5) and those without COVID-19 information on website (n= 18), 76 HBCUs were included. Methods: Data on vaccine requirements, masking, and other policies were collected. Student enrollment and demographics and community infection and vaccination rates were obtained from websites. Results: Between August 15 and September 6, 2021, 36% of HBCU websites indicated vaccination requirements for students, with differences by private (57%) and public (17%). Masking requirements were more prevalent in HBCUs in areas with >50% community vaccination coverage vs those with <25%. Private institutions were more likely than public to require faculty/staff testing (34% vs 19%). HBCUs in areas with low/moderate COVID-19 rates were twice as likely to require vaccinations than HBCUs with higher rates. Conclusions: Easily accessible COVID-19 policies may help guide community prevention measures.

Long-term symptoms often associated with COVID-19 (post-COVID conditions or long COVID) are an emerging public health concern that is not well understood. Prevalence of post-COVID conditions has been reported among persons who have had COVID-19 (range = 5%-80%), with differences possibly related to different study populations, case definitions, and data sources (1). Few studies of post-COVID conditions have comparisons with the general population of adults with negative test results for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, limiting ability to assess background symptom prevalence (1). CDC used a nonprobability-based Internet panel established by Porter Novelli Public Services* to administer a survey to a nationwide sample of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years to compare the prevalence of long-term symptoms (those lasting >4 weeks since onset) among persons who self-reported ever receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result with the prevalence of similar symptoms among persons who reported always receiving a negative test result. The weighted prevalence of ever testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 22.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 20.6%-23.8%). Approximately two thirds of respondents who had received a positive test result experienced long-term symptoms often associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Compared with respondents who received a negative test result, those who received a positive test result reported a significantly higher prevalence of any long-term symptom (65.9% versus 42.9%), fatigue (22.5% versus 12.0%), change in sense of smell or taste (17.3% versus 1.7%), shortness of breath (15.5% versus 5.2%), cough (14.5% versus 4.9%), headache (13.8% versus 9.9%), and persistence (>4 weeks) of at least one initially occurring symptom (76.2% versus 69.6%). Compared with respondents who received a negative test result, a larger proportion of those who received a positive test result reported believing that receiving a COVID-19 vaccine made their long-term symptoms better (28.7% versus 15.7%). Efforts to address post-COVID conditions should include helping health care professionals recognize the most common post-COVID conditions and optimize care for patients with persisting symptoms, including messaging on potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: The increase in cell phone ownership in low- and middle- income countries (LMIC) has created an opportunity for low-cost, rapid turnaround data collection by calling participants on their cell phones. Cell phones can be mobilized for myriad data collection purposes, including surveillance. In LMIC, cell phone-based surveillance has been used to track Ebola, measles, acute flaccid paralysis, and diarrheal disease, as well as non-communicable diseases. Phone-based surveillance in LMIC is a particularly pertinent, burgeoning approach in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participatory surveillance via cell phone could allow governments to assess burden of disease and complements existing surveillance systems. OBJECTIVE: We describe the protocol for the LeCellPHIA project, a cell phone surveillance system that collects weekly population-based data on influenza-like illness (ILI) in Lesotho by calling a representative sample of a recent face-to-face survey. METHODS: We established a phone-based surveillance system to collect ILI symptoms from approximately 1700 participants who had participated in a recent face-to-face survey in Lesotho, the Population-based HIV Impact Assessment (PHIA) Survey. Of the 15,267 PHIA participants who were over 18, 11,975 (78.44%) consented to future research and provided a valid phone number. We followed the PHIA sample design and included 342 primary sampling units from 10 districts. We randomly selected 5 households from each primary sampling unit that had an eligible participant and sampled one person per household. We oversampled the elderly, as they are more likely to be affected by COVID-19. A three-day Zoom training was conducted in June 2020 to train LeCellPHIA interviewers. RESULTS: The surveillance system launched July 1, 2020, beginning with a two-week enrollment period followed by weekly calls that will continue until September 30, 2021. Of the 11,975 phone numbers that were in the sample frame, 3,020 were sampled and 1,778 were enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: The surveillance system will track COVID-19 in a resource-limited setting. The novel approach of a weekly cell phone-based surveillance system can be used to track other health outcomes and this protocol provides information about how to implement such a system.

As of June 30, 2021, 33.5 million persons in the United States had received a diagnosis of COVID-19 (1). Although most patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, recover within a few weeks, some experience post-COVID-19 conditions. These range from new or returning to ongoing health problems that can continue beyond 4 weeks. Persons who were asymptomatic at the time of infection can also experience post-COVID-19 conditions. Data on post-COVID-19 conditions are emerging and information on rehabilitation needs among persons recovering from COVID-19 is limited. Using data acquired during January 2020-March 2021 from Select Medical* outpatient rehabilitation clinics, CDC compared patient-reported measures of health, physical endurance, and health care use between patients who had recovered from COVID-19 (post-COVID-19 patients) and patients needing rehabilitation because of a current or previous diagnosis of a neoplasm (cancer) who had not experienced COVID-19 (control patients). All patients had been referred to outpatient rehabilitation. Compared with control patients, post-COVID-19 patients had higher age- and sex-adjusted odds of reporting worse physical health (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.8), pain (aOR = 2.3), and difficulty with physical activities (aOR = 1.6). Post-COVID-19 patients also had worse physical endurance, measured by the 6-minute walk test(†) (6MWT) (p<0.001) compared with control patients. Among patients referred to outpatient rehabilitation, those recovering from COVID-19 had poorer physical health and functional status than those who had cancer, or were recovering from cancer but not COVID-19. Patients recovering from COVID-19 might need additional clinical support, including tailored physical and mental health rehabilitation services.

As of April 19, 2021, 21.6 million COVID-19 cases had been reported among U.S. adults, most of whom had mild or moderate disease that did not require hospitalization (1). Health care needs in the months after COVID-19 diagnosis among nonhospitalized adults have not been well studied. To better understand longer-term health care utilization and clinical characteristics of nonhospitalized adults after COVID-19 diagnosis, CDC and Kaiser Permanente Georgia (KPGA) analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from health care visits in the 28-180 days after a diagnosis of COVID-19 at an integrated health care system. Among 3,171 nonhospitalized adults who had COVID-19, 69% had one or more outpatient visits during the follow-up period of 28-180-days. Compared with patients without an outpatient visit, a higher percentage of those who did have an outpatient visit were aged ≥50 years, were women, were non-Hispanic Black, and had underlying health conditions. Among adults with outpatient visits, 68% had a visit for a new primary diagnosis, and 38% had a new specialist visit. Active COVID-19 diagnoses* (10%) and symptoms potentially related to COVID-19 (3%-7%) were among the top 20 new visit diagnoses; rates of visits for these diagnoses declined from 2-24 visits per 10,000 person-days 28-59 days after COVID-19 diagnosis to 1-4 visits per 10,000 person-days 120-180 days after diagnosis. The presence of diagnoses of COVID-19 and related symptoms in the 28-180 days following acute illness suggests that some nonhospitalized adults, including those with asymptomatic or mild acute illness, likely have continued health care needs months after diagnosis. Clinicians and health systems should be aware of post-COVID conditions among patients who are not initially hospitalized for acute COVID-19 disease.

BACKGROUND: In California, state prison inmates are employed to fight wildfires, which involves performing soil-disrupting work. Wildfires have become more common, including areas where Coccidioides, the soil-dwelling fungus that causes coccidioidomycosis, proliferates. However, work practices that place wildland firefighters at risk for coccidioidomycosis have not been investigated. METHODS: On August 17, 2017, the California Department of Public Health was notified of a cluster of coccidioidomycosis cases among Wildfire A inmate wildland firefighters. We collected data through medical record abstraction from suspected case-patients and mailed a survey assessing potential job task risk factors to Wildfire A inmate firefighters. We described respondent characteristics and conducted a retrospective case-control investigation to assess coccidioidomycosis risk factors. RESULTS: Among 198 inmate firefighters who worked on Wildfire A, 112 (57%) completed the survey. Of 10 case-patients (four clinical and six laboratory-confirmed), two were hospitalized. In the case-control analysis of 71 inmate firefighters, frequently cutting fire lines with a McLeod tool (odds ratio [OR]: 5.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-37.2) and being in a dust cloud or storm (OR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.1-17.4) were associated with illness. Two of 112 inmate firefighters reported receiving coccidioidomycosis training; none reported wearing respiratory protection on this wildfire. CONCLUSIONS: Wildland firefighters who use hand tools and work in dusty conditions where Coccidioides proliferates are at risk for coccidioidomycosis. Agencies that employ them should provide training about coccidioidomycosis and risk reduction, limit dust exposure, and implement respiratory protection programs that specify where respirator use is feasible and appropriate.

This manuscript provides nomenclature recommendations developed by an international workgroup to increase transparency and standardization of pharmacogenetic (PGx) result reporting. Presently, sequence variants identified by PGx tests are described using different nomenclature systems. In addition, PGx analysis may detect different sets of variants for each gene, which can affect interpretation of results. This practice has caused confusion and may thereby impede the adoption of clinical PGx testing. Standardization is critical to move PGx forward.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies indicate associations between TSER (thymidylate synthase enhancer region) genotypes and clinical outcomes in patients receiving 5-FU based chemotherapy, but well-controlled prospective validation has been lacking. METHODS: In this phase II study (NCT00515216 registered through ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00515216), patients with "good risk" TSER genotypes (at least one TSER*2 allele) were treated with FOLFOX chemotherapy to determine whether prospective patient selection can improve overall response rates (ORR) in patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers, compared with historical outcomes in unselected patients (estimated 43%). RESULTS: The ORR in genotype-selected patients was 39.1% (9 partial responses out of 23 evaluable patients, 95% CI, 22.2 to 59.2), not achieving the primary objective of improving ORR. An encouraging disease control rate (DCR, consisting of partial responses and stable diseases) of 95.7% was noted and patients with homozygous TSER*2 genotype showed better tumor response. CONCLUSIONS: In this first prospective, multi-institutional study in patients with gastric or GEJ cancers, selecting patients with at least one TSER*2 allele did not improve the ORR but led to an encouraging DCR. Further studies are needed to investigate the utility of selecting patients homozygous for the TSER*2 allele and additional genomic markers in improving clinical outcomes for patients with gastric and GEJ cancers.

A 53-year-old man with adult-onset diabetes mellitus developed confusion, fever, pneumonia and loss of vision in his right eye. He was treated intravenously with cefotaxime, levofloxacin and fluconazole. His medical condition stabilized after 2 weeks and he was transferred to our institution. On examination, the right eye had minimal light perception with proptosis, conjunctival oedema and a hypopyon (Fig. 1A). Cultures of the conjunctiva, cornea, aqueous and vitreous resulted in no growth of organisms, presumably because the eye had been sterilized by prior treatment with antibiotics. Vancomycin and ceftazidime were injected intravitreally. After light perception was lost, the painful blind eye was enucleated.

Recent advances in genomic research have demonstrated a substantial role for genomic factors in predicting response to cancer therapies. Researchers in the fields of cancer pharmacogenomics and pharmacoepidemiology seek to understand why individuals respond differently to drug therapy, in terms of both adverse effects and treatment efficacy. To identify research priorities as well as the resources and infrastructure needed to advance these fields, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop titled "Cancer Pharmacogenomics: Setting a Research Agenda to Accelerate Translation" on July 21, 2009, in Bethesda, MD. In this commentary, we summarize and discuss five science-based recommendations and four infrastructure-based recommendations that were identified as a result of discussions held during this workshop. Key recommendations include 1) supporting the routine collection of germline and tumor biospecimens in NCI-sponsored clinical trials and in some observational and population-based studies; 2) incorporating pharmacogenomic markers into clinical trials; 3) addressing the ethical, legal, social, and biospecimen- and data-sharing implications of pharmacogenomic and pharmacoepidemiologic research; and 4) establishing partnerships across NCI, with other federal agencies, and with industry. Together, these recommendations will facilitate the discovery and validation of clinical, sociodemographic, lifestyle, and genomic markers related to cancer treatment response and adverse events, and they will improve both the speed and efficiency by which new pharmacogenomic and pharmacoepidemiologic information is translated into clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, extensive resources have been invested to develop cellular, molecular and genomic technologies with clinical applications that span the continuum of cancer care. METHODS: In December 2006, the National Cancer Institute sponsored the first workshop to uniquely examine the state of health services research on cancer-related cellular, molecular and genomic technologies and identify challenges and priorities for expanding the evidence base on their effectiveness in routine care. RESULTS: This article summarizes the workshop outcomes, which included development of a comprehensive research agenda that incorporates health and safety endpoints, utilization patterns, patient and provider preferences, quality of care and access, disparities, economics and decision modeling, trends in cancer outcomes, and health-related quality of life among target populations. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, the successful adoption of useful technologies will depend on understanding and influencing the patient, provider, health care system and societal factors that contribute to their uptake and effectiveness in 'real-world' settings.