Citations

Abstract Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal, rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease of motor neurons for which therapeutics are limited. Improved biomarkers are imperative to improve patient care and therapeutic development. Here, we employed 35-plex isobaric tandem mass tag labeling based on isobutyl-proline reporter group (TMTpro) to perform unbiased proteomic analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma from control (n= 28, n= 31) and sporadic ALS (sALS) (n= 39, n= 41), from the Target ALS Global Natural History Study (TALS GNHS). We identified 2,875 proteins in CSF and 1,118 proteins in plasma and identified known and novel differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) between controls and sALS, some of which were orthogonally validated using immunoassay. Comparison of TMTpro-MS and Olink proximity extension assay proteomics revealed common and non-overlapping differentially expressed proteins illustrating strengths unique to each platform. This initial cross-sectional proteomic study of biofluids from the TALS GNHS, with unrestricted availability of study results to the research community, highlights the potential of this resource as a potent platform for ALS biomarker discovery.

5606 Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends that patients with endometrial cancer under age 50 undergo germline genetic testing. Despite this recommendation, completion rates are suboptimal for patients with gynecologic malignancies. The reasons for failure to complete testing are unknown, but oncology providers may not refer patients to genetic counselors, who frequently order this testing. Best practice advisories (BPAs) in electronic medical records can alert providers of patients who meet guideline-based treatments and testing criteria. It is unknown how oncology providers interact with a BPA indicating patients with endometrial cancer meet NCCN germline testing criteria. The objective of this study is to evaluate genetic counseling referral patterns after implementing a BPA. Methods: Our team developed a BPA to prompt oncology providers to order genetic counseling referrals for patients diagnosed with endometrial or uterine cancer under age 50. We reviewed all provider-BPA interactions between go-live (January 2022) and January 2023. Patient demographic, histopathologic, and cancer treatment data were collected. Provider actions, including BPA cancellation and order placement, were collected. The Chi-Square goodness of fit test was used to identify differences in referral rates by patient or disease characteristics. Results: The BPA displayed 1121 times for 103 patients. Attending physicians received 535 alerts, fellow physicians – 269, and advanced practice providers (APPs) – 317. The median number of alerts per patient was 7 (range 1-87). Of the 103 patients, 23 were excluded from analysis due to no diagnosis of endometrial cancer, patient declined referral, previously completed, or a lack of provider visits within the study period. Of the 80 eligible patients, 36 (45%) received referrals; 18 were placed by attending physicians, 17 by fellows, and one by an APP. Patients under age 40 versus age 40-49 were more likely to be referred (65% vs. 35%; p = 0.011). Patients with active disease were more likely to be referred than those in surveillance (65% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). There were no differences in referral rates by primary language, race, body mass index ≥40, fertility-sparing versus definitive treatment, stage I versus stage II-IV disease, or grade 1-2 versus three tumors. Conclusions: Despite implementing a BPA, only 45% of eligible patients received indicated referrals. Attending and fellow physicians frequently manage patients with active disease and often order referrals; however, APPs frequently manage patients in surveillance and infrequently place referrals, highlighting an opportunity for education. In addition, patients aged 40-49 are less likely to be referred, suggesting a need for new strategies to improve referral rates. Further research is indicated to identify referral barriers for patients undergoing active treatment.

AbstractBackgroundKnown risk alleles for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) account for approximately 40% of the heritability for EOC. Copy number variants (CNVs) have not been investigated as EOC risk alleles in a large population cohort.MethodsSingle nucleotide polymorphism array data from 13 071 EOC cases and 17 306 controls of White European ancestry were used to identify CNVs associated with EOC risk using a rare admixture maximum likelihood test for gene burden and a by-probe ratio test. We performed enrichment analysis of CNVs at known EOC risk loci and functional biofeatures in ovarian cancer–related cell types.ResultsWe identified statistically significant risk associations with CNVs at known EOC risk genes; BRCA1 (PEOC = 1.60E-21; OREOC = 8.24), RAD51C (Phigh-grade serous ovarian cancer [HGSOC] = 5.5E-4; odds ratio [OR]HGSOC = 5.74 del), and BRCA2 (PHGSOC = 7.0E-4; ORHGSOC = 3.31 deletion). Four suggestive associations (P &lt; .001) were identified for rare CNVs. Risk-associated CNVs were enriched (P &lt; .05) at known EOC risk loci identified by genome-wide association study. Noncoding CNVs were enriched in active promoters and insulators in EOC-related cell types.ConclusionsCNVs in BRCA1 have been previously reported in smaller studies, but their observed frequency in this large population-based cohort, along with the CNVs observed at BRCA2 and RAD51C gene loci in EOC cases, suggests that these CNVs are potentially pathogenic and may contribute to the spectrum of disease-causing mutations in these genes. CNVs are likely to occur in a wider set of susceptibility regions, with potential implications for clinical genetic testing and disease prevention.

Consistent differences between males and females have been shown in land-based measurements of anaerobic power and capacity. However, these differences have not been investigated for a tethered 30-s maximal swimming test (TST). The purpose of this study is to explore gender differences in land and pool-based assessments of anaerobic power (Fpeak) and capacity (Fmean), as well as the influence of body composition. Thirteen males and fifteen females completed land (Wingate (WAnT)) and pool-based (TST) measures of anaerobic power and capacity previously described in the literature. Additionally, the subjects completed assessments of body composition via air displacement plethysmography. The males produced higher force than the females for Fpeak (p < 0.001) and Fmean (p = 0.008) during the TST. However, linear regression analysis determined that lean mass significantly predicted Fpeak (p = 0.002) and Fmean (p < 0.001) during the TST, while gender was no longer significant (p = 0.694 and p = 0.136, respectively). In conclusion, increases in anaerobic power and capacity (Fpeak and Fmean) may be a function of increased lean mass in males and females, warranting future research on the impact of resistance training programs on force production and swimming performance.

Abstract Background. —Under the auspices of the College of American Pathologists, the current state of knowledge regarding pathologic prognostic factors (factors linked to outcome) and predictive factors (factors predicting response to therapy) in colorectal carcinoma was evaluated. A multidisciplinary group of clinical (including the disciplines of medical oncology, surgical oncology, and radiation oncology), pathologic, and statistical experts in colorectal cancer reviewed all relevant medical literature and stratified the reported prognostic factors into categories that reflected the strength of the published evidence demonstrating their prognostic value. Accordingly, the following categories of prognostic factors were defined. Category I includes factors definitively proven to be of prognostic import based on evidence from multiple statistically robust published trials and generally used in patient management. Category IIA includes factors extensively studied biologically and/or clinically and repeatedly shown to have prognostic value for outcome and/or predictive value for therapy that is of sufficient import to be included in the pathology report but that remains to be validated in statistically robust studies. Category IIB includes factors shown to be promising in multiple studies but lacking sufficient data for inclusion in category I or IIA. Category III includes factors not yet sufficiently studied to determine their prognostic value. Category IV includes factors well studied and shown to have no prognostic significance. Materials and Methods. —The medical literature was critically reviewed, and the analysis revealed specific points of variability in approach that prevented direct comparisons among published studies and compromised the quality of the collective data. Categories of variability recognized included the following: (1) methods of analysis, (2) interpretation of findings, (3) reporting of data, and (4) statistical evaluation. Additional points of variability within these categories were defined from the collective experience of the group. Reasons for the assignment of an individual prognostic factor to category I, II, III, or IV (categories defined by the level of scientific validation) were outlined with reference to the specific types of variability associated with the supportive data. For each factor and category of variability related to that factor, detailed recommendations for improvement were made. The recommendations were based on the following aims: (1) to increase the uniformity and completeness of pathologic evaluation of tumor specimens, (2) to enhance the quality of the data needed for definitive evaluation of the prognostic value of individual prognostic factors, and (3) ultimately, to improve patient care. Results and Conclusions. —Factors that were determined to merit inclusion in category I were as follows: the local extent of tumor assessed pathologically (the pT category of the TNM staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer [AJCC/UICC]); regional lymph node metastasis (the pN category of the TNM staging system); blood or lymphatic vessel invasion; residual tumor following surgery with curative intent (the R classification of the AJCC/UICC staging system), especially as it relates to positive surgical margins; and preoperative elevation of carcinoembryonic antigen elevation (a factor established by laboratory medicine methods rather than anatomic pathology). Factors in category IIA included the following: tumor grade, radial margin status (for resection specimens with nonperitonealized surfaces), and residual tumor in the resection specimen following neoadjuvant therapy (the ypTNM category of the TNM staging system of the AJCC/UICC). Factors in category IIB included the following: histologic type, histologic features associated with microsatellite instability (MSI) (ie, host lymphoid response to tumor and medullary or mucinous histologic type), high degree of MSI (MSI-H), loss of heterozygosity at 18q ( DCC gene allelic loss), and tumor border configuration (infiltrating vs pushing border). Factors grouped in category III included the following: DNA content, all other molecular markers except loss of heterozygosity 18q/DCC and MSI-H, perineural invasion, microvessel density, tumor cell–associated proteins or carbohydrates, peritumoral fibrosis, peritumoral inflammatory response, focal neuroendocrine differentiation, nuclear organizing regions, and proliferation indices. Category IV factors included tumor size and gross tumor configuration. This report records findings and recommendations of the consensus conference group, organized according to structural guidelines defined herein.