Back to Authors

Berry, Nicholas

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8701-3258

Mayo Clinic

Berry Consultants, LLC (United States)

Citations 3

Cold and Room-Temperature Platelets in Cardiac Surgery
Spinella, Philip C., Zantek, Nicole D., Nicolson, Susan C., Khanna, Ashish K., Boisen, Michael L., Williams, Tiffany M. , Monteleone, Matthew, Pavey, Warren, Smith, Bradford B., Ahmed, M. Iqbal, Jeng, Eric, Flynn, B S, Joshi, Ravi V. , Preuss, James , Goswami, Dheeraj, Lewis, Choy, Tint, Hlaing , Kwak, Jenny , Sodha, Neel, Simon, Eric R. , Van, Philbert Y., Greilich, Philip E. , Booth, Frank V. McL., Carter, Camille, Keegan, Anastazia , Cap, Andrew P., Matuk, James, McGlothlin, Anna, Berry, Nicholas , Lewis, Roger , Steiner, Marie E., Group, CHIPS Investigator, Hu, Paula, Hawkins, Jaleah, Jobes, David R. , Fadeyi, Emmanuel A. , Reynolds, Abigail M.A., Bell, Carter G., Gandhi, Manish J., Montonye, Beth, Serna-Gallegos, Derek, Sultan, Ibrahim, Kinney, Stephanie , Molony, Kathleen, Hensch, Lisa, Resheidat, Ashraf, Malivers, Martine, Hahn, Rebbecca, Viellez, Annette Le, Pepperell, Dominic , Lu, Qun, Downey, Frank, Haeger, Kayla N., Baltagi, Sirine , Jaquiss, Robert D.B., Noland, Daniel K., Cole, Regina, Duffin, Aspen, Scott, John P., Zeng, Long, Ballew, Angie, Webb, Christopher, Jessen, Michael, Hopson, Erryn, Mickle, Peri, Kavanagh, Simon, Matzelle, Shannon, Mennie, Colleen, Davenport, Robertson, Chlebeck, Therese, Zenk, Emmy, Lotz, Daniel T., Choi, Warren , Hobbs, Rhonda, Baptise, Amanda, DeChristopher, Phillip, Schoenecker, Nancy, Rodheim, Dianna, Connor, Joseph, Griese, Daniel J., McGuire, Erin, VanSandt, Mandy, Sera, Valerie, O’Donovan, Justine , Marks, Denese, Johnson, Lacey, Viele, Kert , Cholette, Jill M., Selke, Frank, Silverman, Toby, Shea, Susan, Yazer, Mark, Young, P. J., Ness, Paul Van, Dean, J. Michael, Shaz, Beth, Stubbs, James, Klompas, Allan M. , Spinella, Philip C. , Zantek, Nicole D. , VanBuren, John M. , Nicolson, Susan Craig , Khanna, Ashish K. , Boisen, Michael L , Monteleone, Matthew P., Bashir, Dalia A. , Pavey, Warren , Niebler, Robert A. , Jeng, Eric I-Hun , Goswami, Dheeraj , Yamada, Chisa , Lewis, Choy R., Cohn, Claudia S. , Sodha, Neel R. , Cap, Andrew , Matuk, James , Smith, Mark M. , Montonye, Beth L., Kaplan, Alesia , Kinney, Stephanie , Resheidat, Ashraf M., Downey, Francis X. , Ballew, Angie , Matzelle, Shannon A, Crowe, Liz , DeChristopher, Phillip J., Griese, Daniel, Sera, Valerie, Marks, Denese C. , Johnson, Lacey , Cholette, Jill M., Levy, Jerrold H. , Silverman, Toby , Yazer, Mark H. , Strandenes, Geir , Shaz, Beth H. , Stubbs, James R.

JAMA | August 17, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1001/jama.2026.13328 Get It

Importance Patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass often require platelet transfusions for bleeding. Platelets are routinely stored at room temperature (20-24 °C) for up to 5 to 7 days; however, cold storage (1-6 °C) may allow for increased storage duration without loss of hemostatic function. Objective To determine the maximum cold-storage duration, up to 21 days, for which cold-stored platelets (CSPs) are noninferior or superior in hemostatic efficacy to room-temperature platelets (RTPs) when transfused in actively bleeding patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, partially blinded, adaptive, noninferiority, storage duration–ranging trial conducted in pediatric and adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery with planned cardiopulmonary bypass at 27 sites in the US and Australia from December 2021 to March 2025. Statistical analysis was conducted from September 9 to October 3, 2025. Intervention Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive CSPs with a maximum of 21 days of storage vs RTPs with a maximum of 7 days of storage. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was a hemostatic efficacy score with values ranging from 1 to 5 and higher values indicating greater bleeding. The noninferiority margin was 1 point. The success criterion was met if at least 1 cold-storage duration of 7 days or more had a posterior probability of noninferiority of at least 97.5%. The secondary outcome was 24-hour chest tube output. Results Of the 1000 patients who underwent platelet transfusion, 989 were included in the primary analysis (650 CSPs and 339 RTPs). The cohort had a mean (SD) age of 42.1 (30.1) years and 67.8% were male. CSPs were noninferior to RTPs for the primary outcome, with a probability of greater than 99.9% for all cold-storage durations. Pooled across storage durations, CSPs had a mean difference from RTPs of 0.09 (95% credible interval, −0.06 to 0.23). Median (IQR) chest tube output at 24 hours (8.9 mL/kg [5.2-15.4] for CSPs vs 8.4 mL/kg [5.5-15.9] for RTPs; difference in medians, 0.4 [95% CI, −1.0 to 1.5]) was not statistically different between study groups. In a post hoc analysis, as all storage durations were noninferior, considering the CSPs as a single group, the hemostatic efficacy score was similar between both groups: mean (SD) of 3.08 (1.15) CSPs vs 2.99 (1.10) RTPs. There were no differences in venous or arterial thrombotic events, transfusion-associated adverse events, acute respiratory distress syndrome, kidney failure, septic shock, and mortality between the study groups, except for increased reexploration rates in the CSP group. Conclusions and Relevance For patients undergoing cardiac surgery, CSPs stored up to 21 days are noninferior to RTPs for the control of active surgical bleeding. Use of CSPs may allow for increased availability of platelets by reducing wastage and shortages and may allow for incorporation of platelets into inventory at locations where platelets cannot be maintained due to the 5- to 7-day shelf life of RTPs. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04834414
Evaluation of Regorafenib in Newly Diagnosed and Recurrent Glioblastoma: GBM AGILE Phase II/III Bayesian Randomized Platform Trial
Wen, Patrick Y. , Berry, Donald A. , Buxton, Meredith , Colman, Howard , Groot, John de , Lim, Michael, Mellinghoff, Ingo K. , Perry, James, Weller, M, Blondin, Nicholas A., Butt, Omar H. , Damek, Denise M., Fuente, Macarena I. de la , Drappatz, Jan, Dunbar, Erin, Giglio, Pierre , Hyddmark, Emma Viktoria, Iwamoto, Fabio, Jaeckle, Kurt A. , Kim, Lyndon, Kling, Heather M., Lee, Eudocia Q., Mantica, Megan , Mikkelsen, Tom, Newton, Herbert B. , Walbert, Tobias , Weathers, Shiao‐Pei , Lassman, Andrew B. , Group, for the GBM AGILE Regorafenib Study, Alexander, Brian, Anker, Lars , Berry, Nicholas , Cloughesy, Tim, Connelly, Jennifer , Detry, Michelle A. , Fitzgerald, Mark, Gordon, Gary, Graves, Todd, Hu, Jethro , Hyddmark, Emma Maria Viktoria, Johnson, Adam, Kalabic, Marija, Lesser, Glenn J., Marion, Joe , Owen, Scott, Perry, James R, Peters, Katherine B., Powell, Ashley, Saunders, Christina T., Tanner, Kirk, Untch, Sarah, Wilcox, Emma, Yung, W. K. Alfred, Lim, Michael , Buxton, Meredith , de Groot, John , Mellinghoff, Ingo K , Weller, Michael , De La Fuente, Macarena , Lee, Eudocia Q , Mantica, Megan , Nabors, Louis Burt , Newton, Herbert B , Olson, Jeffrey J. , Schiff, David , Walbert, Tobias , Weathers, Shiao-Pei , Cloughesy, Timothy F , Lassman, Andrew B , Berry, Donald , Colman, Howard , Blondin, Nicolas, Drappatz, Jan , Iwamoto, Fabio M., Lee, Eudocia Q. , Mikkelsen, Tom , Nabors, Burt , Newton, Herbert B. , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Anderson, Mark D., Cavenee, Webster K. , Connelly, Jennifer , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Galanis, Evanthia , Gordon, Gary, Graber, Jerome J. , Khasraw, Mustafa , Lesser, Glenn J. , McGlothlin, Anna , Peters, Katherine B. , Saunders, Christina T. , Sulman, Erik P. , Tanner, Kirk, Yung, W.K. Alfred

Journal of Clinical Oncology | April 14, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 18 | Pages: 1676-1686

10.1200/jco-25-01137 Get It

PURPOSE GBM AGILE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03970447 ) is a phase II/III Bayesian adaptive platform registration trial testing multiple arms against a common control; the primary end point is overall survival (OS). Regorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, showed OS benefit in recurrent (RD) glioblastoma in the phase II REGOMA trial and entered GBM AGILE as the first investigational arm. METHODS Patient subtypes included in the regorafenib arm of GBM AGILE were newly diagnosed unmethylated (NDU) and RD glioblastoma. Prospective defined sets of subtypes, or arm signatures, were NDU, RD, and all (NDU + RD). As the first investigational arm in GBM AGILE, regorafenib was equally randomized to the control arm. Treatment in the control arm is temozolomide + radiotherapy (in newly diagnosed) or lomustine (in RD). Efficacy was assessed by OS hazard ratio (HR), arm/control, and demonstrated when the Bayesian probability of benefit (HR <1.00) was ≥98%. Analysis was performed monthly for limited efficacy, which occurs when the Bayesian predictive power is <25% for all signatures, and determines stopping enrollment. Follow-up continued for 12 months after accrual stopped. RESULTS When the predictive power was <25% in all predefined signatures for regorafenib, accrual stopped for limited efficacy. The final analysis did not demonstrate OS improvement in the regorafenib arm in RD nor NDU glioblastoma. Median HRs were 1.05 (NDU), 1.07 (RD), and 1.07 (all) with final probabilities of benefit (HR <1.00) of 0.421 (NDU), 0.312 (RD), and 0.296 (all). Regorafenib was associated with increased toxicity relative to control. CONCLUSION GBM AGILE did not show superiority of regorafenib over control in RD (lomustine) or NDU (temozolomide + radiotherapy) glioblastoma, yet caused increased toxicities. Regorafenib has been removed from National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines as a treatment option for RD.
LTBK-02. EVALUATION OF PAXALISIB IN GBM AGILE PHASE 3 REGISTRATION PLATFORM TRIAL FOR NEWLY DIAGNOSED AND RECURRENT GLIOBLASTOMA
Mellinghoff, Ingo K. , Berry, Donald A. , Buxton, Meredith , Colman, Howard , Gordon, Gary, Lassman, Andrew B. , Lim, Michael , Perry, James , Wen, Patrick Y. , Yung, W.K. Alfred , Berry, Nicholas , Graves, Todd, Detry, Michelle A. , Hyddmark, Emma Maria Viktoria, Johnsson, Adam, Kling, Heather M., Powell, Ashley A., Untch, Sarah, Aquilanti, Elisa , Blondin, Nicholas, Boulmay, Brian C., Fuente, Macarena de la, Lobbous, Mina , Mikkelsen, Tom , Newton, Herbert B. , Schiff, David , Sherman, Wendy, Weathers, Shiao-Pei, Friend, John, Lee, E., Mellinghoff, Ingo K , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Alexander, Brian M. , Cavenee, Webster K. , Colman, Howard , Groot, John de , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Khasraw, Mustafa , Sulman, Erik P. , Weller, Michael , Wen, Patrick Yung , Johnsson, Adam, McGlothlin, Anna , Powell, Ashley, Drappatz, Jan , Jordan, Justin T. , Kaley, Thomas , Owen, Scott , Peters, Katherine B. , Schiff, David, Weathers, Shiao‐Pei , Youssef, Michael , Friend, John

Neuro-Oncology | November 22, 2024 | Volume: 26 | Issue: Supplement_8 | Pages: viii1-viii1

10.1093/neuonc/noae165.1302 Get It

Abstract GBM AGILE(NCT03970447) is a phase 2/3 Bayesian adaptive registration platform trial testing multiple therapies against a common control. Paxalisib, a PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, is the 3rd arm in the trial to conclude evaluation. METHODS Paxalisib was open to patients with newly diagnosed unmethylated (NDU) and recurrent (RD) glioblastoma, with three possible signatures: NDU, RD, and All(NDU+RD). Arm enrollment occurred Dec2020 through May2022. Control patients were enrolled from study initiation (July2019) and were treated with temozolomide(NDU) or lomustine(RD). GBM AGILE investigational arms have 1 or 2 stages, with adaptive randomization in stage 1 and fixed randomization if arms continue to stage 2. Efficacy is based on OS hazard ratio(HR) of Arm/Control. Efficacy goal is final Bayesian probability ≥ 98% for HR&lt;1.00 in combined Stages. An Arm continues to Stage 2 if Bayesian predictive power (PP) ≥ 0.8. An Arm stops accruing in Stage 1 if it reaches maximal sample size(N) or does not meet a minimum efficacy threshold (PP&lt;0.25 for all signatures when N&gt;50). Clinical cut-off is 12 months after accrual stops. The maximum N for paxalisib was approximately 150(Stage 1) and 50(Stage 2). RESULTS After paxalisib reached &gt;150 patients in Stage 1, accrual stopped [Paxalisib/control N 54/75(NDU), 100/188(RD)]. Neither PP thresholds for moving to Stage 2 nor stopping for minimum efficacy were met. Following an unplanned public disclosure that the arm did not continue to stage 2, clinical cut-off for final analysis (planned May2023) was updated to public disclosure date (August2022). At final analysis mean HRs were 0.89(NDU), 1.25(RD), 1.05(All), probabilities of HR&lt;1.00 of 0.72(NDU), 0.076(RD), 0.398(All). Model estimated median OS paxalisib/control (months) were 14.77/13.84(NDU) and 8.58/10.06(RD). CONCLUSION Paxalisib did not show survival benefit over cumulative control in final primary analysis; additional secondary analyses are being considered. GBM AGILE continues to rapidly and efficiently assess therapies in ND and RD glioblastoma.