Citations

Background Studies have demonstrated neighborhood structural inequities are associated with cardiovascular outcomes among breast cancer survivors. We investigated the associations between bias in mortgage lending practices (contemporary redlining and racial lending bias) and cardiovascular outcomes in women with breast cancer. Methods Using the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results)–Medicare database, we identified 51 007 Black and White women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2010 and 2014 with follow‐up through 2020. We used Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data to calculate census‐tract contemporary redlining index and racial lending bias index, and assessed indices continuously and categorically (low, moderate, or high). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate multivariable‐adjusted, cause‐specific hazard ratios (HRs) for major adverse cardiovascular events, ischemic heart disease, heart failure, stroke, and cardiovascular death. Results In the overall population, a 10%‐unit increase in redlining was associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.02–1.06]). Among Black women, those in high redlining neighborhoods had an increased heart failure risk compared with those in low redlining neighborhoods (HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.05–1.41]). Similarly, White women in high redlining neighborhoods had an increased risk of ischemic heart disease (HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.15–1.30]) and stroke (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.03–1.16]). Black women in high racial lending bias neighborhoods had reduced cardiovascular mortality risk compared with those in low racial lending bias neighborhoods (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54–0.90]). Conclusions We identified associations between contemporary redlining and cardiovascular outcomes among breast cancer survivors. High racial lending bias was associated with reduced cardiovascular mortality risk among Black women. Bias in mortgage lending practices may serve as a structural driver of cardiovascular disparities.

Abstract Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) and HCL variant (HCLv) are distinct, rare, and chronic splenic B-cell lymphomas/leukemias that partially overlap in clinicopathologic presentation but differ in genetic basis, prognosis, and management. HCL is caused by the BRAF-V600E kinase–activating mutation in >95% of the patients, usually has excellent responses to chemotherapy with purine analogues, and is also amenable to BRAF inhibitor–based targeted treatments. In contrast, HCLv lacks BRAFV600E mutation, requires combined therapy with purine analogues in addition to rituximab, and generally shows less durable responses. Here, an international team of hematologists, experts on these rare diseases, was convened by the Hairy Cell Leukemia Foundation to update the previous guidelines (published in 2017) by providing a summary of current methods to diagnose and manage patients with HCL and HCLv as well as a prospective on newer targeted therapies to further improve outcomes.

Abstract Background The National Amyloidosis Centre (NAC) staging system for transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is used to classify patients into prognostic categories based on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The NAC staging system has been shown to predict ongoing survival throughout the course of ATTR-CM, with survival progressively decreasing from stage I to stage III. Acoramidis, a highly selective, oral transthyretin stabilizer that achieves near-complete (≥90%) transthyretin stabilization, has recently been approved in Europe and the USA for the treatment of wild-type or variant ATTR-CM in adults. In the phase 3 ATTRibute-CM study, acoramidis treatment was well tolerated and led to a 42% relative risk reduction in the composite of all-cause mortality and recurrent cardiovascular hospitalizations over 30 months compared with placebo (p=0.0005). Purpose To evaluate the ability of acoramidis treatment, as compared with placebo, to stabilize or improve NAC stage after 30 months in participants with ATTR-CM from the ATTRibute-CM study. Methods Participants in ATTRibute-CM were randomized 2:1 to receive acoramidis or placebo for 30 months. Efficacy analyses were conducted in the modified intention-to-treat population, which consisted of all randomized participants who had received at least one dose of acoramidis or placebo, had at least one efficacy evaluation after baseline and had a baseline eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2. NAC stage at baseline and Month 30 was assessed. Changes from baseline to Month 30 were categorized as "stable", "improved" or "worsened". The "stable" category comprised participants who stayed within the same NAC stage at baseline and Month 30. The "improved" category comprised participants who moved from a higher NAC stage at baseline to a lower stage at Month 30. The "worsened or missing" category comprised participants who moved from a lower NAC stage at baseline to a higher stage at Month 30 and participants whose Month 30 NAC stage was missing. The change in NAC stage was compared between treatment groups using a stratified Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test with stratification factors of genotype, NT-proBNP level and eGFR as recorded in the interactive voice/web response system at randomization. Results Overall, 611 participants were analysed (acoramidis: n=409; placebo: n=202). Baseline characteristics were comparable between treatment groups. Most participants had NAC stage I at baseline (acoramidis: 58.9%; placebo: 59.4%; Table). At Month 30, NAC stage remained stable or improved in 52.1% of acoramidis participants compared with 43.1% of placebo participants (p=0.0351; Figure). Conclusions Acoramidis treatment resulted in a greater proportion of participants whose NAC stage improved or remained stable at Month 30 compared with placebo, indicating better stabilization of their disease.

Abstract Secondary central nervous system (CNS) large B-cell lymphoma (SCNSL) occurs in the de novo setting, as a CNS-isolated relapse, or synchronous (concomitant CNS and systemic) relapse. SCNSL is a devastating event without therapeutic consensus. Thus, we aimed to evaluate treatment outcomes in an international cohort. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR, estimated using competing-risk models) were reported. Prognostic factors were identified in a 6-month landmark multivariate analysis. Outcomes after thiotepa autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy (CAR-T) delivered at relapse were compared after propensity score matching (PSM). A total of 1139 patients were included in the analysis (de novo: 537; relapsed SCNSL: 602). Two-year PFS estimates were 40.4%, 43.9%, and 16.2% for de novo SCNSL, CNS-isolated relapse, and synchronous relapse, respectively. Patients with CNS-isolated relapse demonstrated low rates of systemic recurrence (24-month CIR, 6%). Thiotepa-ASCT correlated with longer survival in de novo SCNSL (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; P = .005; and OS: HR, 0.62; P = .023) and CNS-isolated relapses (PFS: HR, 0.55; P = .002; and OS: HR, 0.39; P< .0001). ASCT (thiotepa or no thiotepa) also associated with improved survival in synchronous relapses (PFS: HR, 0.57; P = .023; and OS: HR, 0.48; P = .019). Higher survival with thiotepa-ASCT than CAR-T was observed after PSM (PFS: HR, 0.45; P = .005 and OS: HR, 0.41; P = .014). These data support thiotepa-ASCT in eligible patients, particularly de novo disease and CNS-isolated relapses. CNS-isolated relapse was infrequently associated with systemic recurrence, supporting treatment regimens adopted from primary CNS lymphoma.

PURPOSE STELLAR (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02796261 ) was a phase III, randomized, open-label trial of eflornithine + lomustine versus lomustine monotherapy in patients with recurrent grade 3 astrocytoma. METHODS At trial initiation, eligibility criteria included: age ≥18 years, anaplastic astrocytoma (2016 WHO CNS Tumor classification [WHO CNS4]), first recurrence ≥6 months after radiation and temozolomide (TMZ), Karnofsky performance status ≥70, and no imaging findings consistent with grade 4 glioblastoma. Random assignment (1:1) was stratified by isocitrate dehydrogenase ( IDH ) mutation, age, resection extent, and geography. Patients received eflornithine (2.8 g/m 2 orally, every 8 hours [2 weeks on, 1 week off]) + lomustine (90 mg/m 2 orally, once every 6 weeks), or lomustine monotherapy (110 mg/m 2 once every 6 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS Among 343 patients randomly assigned across 74 sites in eight countries, there was no difference in survival between eflornithine + lomustine and lomustine monotherapy (median OS 23.4 v 20.3 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.94). Following changes in classification and grading in the 2021 WHO CNS5, a subset analysis of patients with IDH- mutant, grade 3 astrocytoma (n = 196), defined in 2024, before unblinding, showed clinically meaningful improvements in median OS with eflornithine + lomustine versus lomustine monotherapy (34.9 v 23.5 months, HR, 0.64) and median progression-free survival (PFS, 15.8 v 7.2 months, HR, 0.57). No differences were observed among patients with CNS grade 4 disease. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events of relevance were related to reversible myelosuppression (eflornithine + lomustine 42% v lomustine monotherapy 29% of patients) and hearing impairment (24% v 0%). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION Clinically meaningful improvements were observed; eflornithine + lomustine doubled PFS and improved OS in patients with recurrent IDH -mutant, grade 3 astrocytoma, but not grade 4 tumors, after prior radiotherapy and TMZ, consistent with its cytostatic mechanism of action.

Abstract Purpose: AXL, a receptor tyrosine kinase related to oncogenic processes, is aberrantly expressed in various cancers and associated with treatment resistance. Enapotamab vedotin (EnaV), a novel anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models, including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase 1/2 study assessed the safety and preliminary efficacy of EnaV in solid tumors. Patients and Methods: This study comprised dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases; both phases investigated EnaV once every 3 weeks (Q3W) and EnaV on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (3Q4W). Primary objectives determined the maximum tolerated dose (dose escalation) and safety (dose expansion). Pharmacokinetic profile, antitumor activity, and AXL expression were also assessed. Results: During dose escalation, 32 patients received EnaV Q3W; 15 received EnaV 3Q4W. The maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose were 2.2 mg/kg in Q3W and 1.0 mg/kg in 3Q4W schedules. In dose expansion, 189 patients received EnaV Q3W; 70 received EnaV 3Q4W. Common adverse events in dose expansion included fatigue, constipation, nausea, decreased appetite, and diarrhea. Overall response rates ranged from 4.5% to 12.5% with Q3W dose schedule and from 9.1% to 11.5% with 3Q4W dose schedule. Disease control rates for NSCLC cohorts were 40.9% to 50.0%. NSCLC subset analysis demonstrated correlation between radiomics signature and disease control. The relationship between clinical activity and AXL expression was not apparent. Conclusions: EnaV had an acceptable safety profile; however, because the evaluation of antitumor activity did not show clinically meaningful responses, clinical development of EnaV was discontinued. Significance: EnaV, an anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, showed single-agent antitumor activity in preclinical models. This phase 1/2 study of EnaV demonstrated a manageable safety profile and antitumor activity in selected tumor types. Further studies exploring alternative targeting modalities, patient selection, and/or combinations are needed.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic exenteration is the treatment of choice for selected patients with locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer. Involvement of major pelvic neurovascular structures and bone was historically considered a contraindication due to unacceptably high rates of morbidity and low R0 resection rates. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of these “high-complexity” exenterative resections to those of “conventional” pelvic exenteration. DESIGN: International multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Sixteen specialized exenteration centers. PATIENTS: Those who underwent total pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer between 2018 and 2023 at participating centers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative resource utilization, morbidity, mortality, and R0 resection rates were reported. RESULTS: Seven hundred sixty-three patients underwent total pelvic exenteration, of whom 478 (63%) and 285 (37%) required conventional and high-complexity procedures, respectively. High-complexity pelvic exenteration was associated with longer operating time (600 vs 480 minutes, p < 0.001 for locally advanced primary rectal cancer, 623 vs 480 minutes, p < 0.001 for locally recurrent rectal cancer), intensive care stay (2 vs 1 day, p < 0.001 and 3 vs 1 day, p < 0.001), hospital stay (19 vs 15 days, p = 0.008 and 23 vs 15 days, p < 0.001), and higher blood loss (2000 vs 1236 mL, p < 0.001 and 3000 vs 1600 mL, p < 0.001). Morbidity and mortality outcomes and R0 resection rates were similar between the groups. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability of findings outside of expert units. CONCLUSIONS: High-complexity pelvic exenteration for the treatment of rectal cancer is associated with similar morbidity, mortality, and R0 resection rates, but it has a significantly higher operative time, blood loss, and hospital resource utilization compared to conventional pelvic exenteration. In high-volume, specialized centers, these techniques are considered the standard of care for appropriately selected patients with tumors that involve major pelvic bone or neurovascular structures. See Video Abstract . EXENTERACIÓN PÉLVICA TOTAL CONVENCIONAL FRENTE A EXENTERACIÓN PÉLVICA TOTAL DE ALTA COMPLEJIDAD PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y LOCALMENTE RECURRENTE: UN ESTUDIO MULTICÉNTRICO INTERNACIONAL ANTECEDENTES: La exenteración pélvica es el tratamiento de elección para determinados pacientes con cáncer rectal primario y recurrente localmente avanzado. La afectación de las principales estructuras neurovasculares y óseas pélvicas se consideraba históricamente una contraindicación debido a las tasas inaceptablemente altas de morbilidad y a las bajas tasas de resección R0. OBJETIVO: Comparar los resultados de estas resecciones exenteración «de alta complejidad» con los de la exenteración pélvica «convencional». DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo multicéntrico internacional. ENTORNOS: Dieciséis centros especializados en exenteración. PACIENTES: Aquellos que se sometieron a una exenteración pélvica total por cáncer rectal primario y recurrente localmente avanzado entre 2018 y 2023 en los centros participantes. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS: Se informaron la utilización de recursos perioperatorios, la morbilidad, la mortalidad y las tasas de resección R0. RESULTADOS: 763 pacientes se sometieron a una exenteración pélvica total, de los cuales 478 (63 %) y 285 pacientes (37 %) requirieron procedimientos convencionales y de alta complejidad, respectivamente. La exenteración pélvica de alta complejidad se asoció con un tiempo quirúrgico más prolongado (600 frente a 480 minutos, p < 0,001 para el cáncer rectal primario localmente avanzado, 623 frente a 480 minutos, p < 0,001 para el cáncer rectal localmente recurrente), estancia en cuidados intensivos (2 frente a 1 día, p < 0,001 y 3 frente a 1 día, p < 0,001), estancia hospitalaria (19 frente a 15 días, p = 0,008 y 23 frente a 15 días, p < 0,001) y mayor pérdida de sangre (2000 frente a 1236 ml, p < 0,001 y 3000 frente a 1600 ml, p < 0,001). Los resultados de morbilidad y mortalidad, así como las tasas de resección R0, fueron similares entre los grupos. LIMITACIONES: Generalización de los resultados fuera de las unidades especializadas CONCLUSIONES: La exenteración pélvica de alta complejidad para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto se asocia con tasas similares de morbilidad, mortalidad y resección R0, pero con un tiempo quirúrgico, una pérdida de sangre y una utilización de recursos hospitalarios significativamente mayores en comparación con la exenteración pélvica convencional. En centros especializados con un gran volumen de casos, estas técnicas se consideran el tratamiento estándar para pacientes adecuadamente seleccionados con tumores que afectan a los huesos pélvicos principales o a las estructuras neurovasculares. ( AI-generated translation )

426 Background: Testing for DPYD gene variations prior to administration of fluoropyrimidines ([FP] e.g. 5-FU or capecitabine) can determine if patients are at risk of significant toxicity and may benefit from dose reduction or elimination of chemotherapy. Barriers to testing include lack of recommendations in US guidelines for routine DPYD testing, absence of insurance coverage, and limitations in provider support. We designed an electronic health record (EHR)-based intervention to support shared decision-making (SDM) between providers and patients regarding DPYD testing. Methods: We built an EHR alert identifying all patients initiating FP without DPYD testing. The alert fired to remind providers upon signing FP. Clinical decision support (CDS) was included in the alert to help with DPYD testing selection along with an educational note template containing the incidence of DPYD deficiency, rationale for testing, test costs, and turnaround time. Interactions with the EHR were recorded to determine why providers declined ordering pharmacogenomic testing. Testing rates and results for patients initiating FP were collected from the EHR. Finally, providers were surveyed to determine the impact of the alert on conversations with patients as well as the utility of the embedded CDS and educational note template. Results: Within the first 8 months after alert activation, 34 patients completed DPYD testing of 444 starting FP (testing rate of 7.7%) vs the baseline testing rate in the 3 months prior to alert go-live of 6.8% (p = 0.86 via chi-squared analysis, two-tailed). Of the 34 patients, 5 were intermediate DPYD metabolizers. Reasons for alert dismissal per provider selection were: “Patient already tolerated prior fluoropyrimidines” (15.7%), “Patient declines” (12.9%), “Will order separately” (5.7%), “Not discussed as not appropriate” (5.3%), and “Not discussed, deferred” (60.4%). Thirty-nine providers (n = 77 eligible) responded to the survey; 22 prescribed FP in their practice and had encountered the alert. 21 (95.5%) of these reported the alert was “Very Useful” or “Somewhat Useful” and 18 (81.8%) used the DPYD testing options available in the alert. Sixteen (72.7%) discussed DPYD testing more frequently with patients as a result of the alert. Barriers to DPYD testing were “Concerned about the impact of lowering FP dosing” and “Lack of knowledge about DPYD testing”, while “Cost of DPYD testing” was scored lowest. Conclusions: Utilizing an EHR alert with embedded CDS had a positive impact on provider awareness and led to more discussions regarding DPYD pharmacogenomic testing with patients in line with current FDA recommendations. Limitations in provider knowledge regarding DPYD testing and concerns about lowering chemotherapy doses posed barriers to ordering testing. Further interventions including additional education are required.

Intravoxel incoherent motion MRI parameters derived from two software packages demonstrated diagnostic value for breast cancer, with multivariable combinations of histogram metrics achieving high diagnostic accuracy.