Citations

PURPOSE Public reporting of health care outcomes can have unintended effects such as inappropriate risk aversion in patient selection. METHODS The center-specific survival analysis annually assigns all hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) centers in the United States a +1, −1, or 0 score for observed outcomes that are above, below, or within a center-specific predicted range of outcome. For each index year (2012-2016), centers receiving a −1 score after 0 scores in the preceding 2 years were compared with contemporaneous centers with as-predicted outcomes (0 score). Changes in the patient population characteristics in the 3 years before versus the 3 years after the index years were compared between the newly below-expected centers (NBCs) and the controls. A multivariate model adjusted for baseline patient population characteristics and center volume. RESULTS No differences in patient selection behavior were identified when comparing the NBCs with the controls across eight key patient population characteristics. For the statistically modeled (predicted) 1-year overall survival (OS), reflecting a holistic measure of centers' patient population risk, we observed no statistically significant difference in change (−0.23% [95% CI, −1.4 to 0.9]; P = .70). The observed OS increased in both NBCs and controls by 0.9% and 4.5%, respectively, without statistically significant difference in change. CONCLUSION Centers receiving a −1 score were not observed to deviate significantly from patient selection trends in the HCT field. These findings suggest that public reporting of HCT outcomes in the United States does not result in unintended bias against HCT for high-risk patients.

ImportancePatients with metastatic castration–resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring BRCA1/2 alterations are eligible to receive poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors as single agents or in combination with an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor after these agents showed survival improvement in their landmark clinical trials. However, data are limited regarding the uptake of PARP inhibitors in these patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the use of PARP inhibitors in patients with mCRPC harboring BRCA1/2 alterations.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used the deidentified Flatiron-Health electronic health record–derived database of US community and academic practices to extract patient-level data. The data cutoff date was May 31, 2024. Patients with mCRPC with evidence of harboring BRCA1/2 alterations and alive after August 15, 2020 (ie, 3 months after the approval of the first PARP inhibitor, rucaparib, in mCRPC) were included. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2024 to May 2025.ExposuresAge, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and practice type at the time of mCRPC diagnosis.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe receipt of PARP inhibitors. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to assess the association between the exposures and the main outcome.ResultsOf 24 105 patients with metastatic prostate cancer, 443 male patients (median [IQR] age, 72 [65-79] years) had mCRPC with BRCA1/2 alterations and were eligible and included in our analysis. Of these patients, 227 (51.2%) received a PARP inhibitor, whereas 216 (48.8%) did not. Compared with patients covered by a commercial health plan, those covered by Medicare were significantly more likely to receive a PARP inhibitor (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.66; P = .047). The odds of receiving a PARP inhibitor were not significantly higher in patients treated in community practice compared with those treated in academic centers (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.00-2.70; P = .05).Conclusions and RelevanceThis retrospective cohort study of patients with mCRPC and evidence of BRCA1/2 alterations found that approximately half of patients did not receive PARP inhibitors despite evidence of survival improvement in this population. These findings highlight the need to increase awareness of the survival data and access to life-prolonging therapies in patients with mCRPC.

Importance The definition of cure in stage II to III colon cancer (CC) remains unclear due to limitations in conventional end points, which include deaths and second primary tumors as events. These can complicate communication with patients regarding long-term outcomes. Objective To distinguish relapses from competing health-related events to classify long-term outcomes years after surgery and explore when the incidence of true relapses of the initial CC approaches 0% to define cure in this disease. Design, Setting, and Participants This pooled analysis of individual patient–level data from 15 phase 3 randomized clinical trials assessed time to CC-related relapse using Kaplan-Meier and Aalen-Johansen methods, with death and second primary tumors treated as competing risks. Cox regression models evaluated prognostic associations, stratified by sex, stage, and tumor. Patients with stage II to III CC who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy were included. All patients had undergone radical surgery for CC and received adjuvant chemotherapy with a median follow-up of at least 6 years. The Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints (ACCENT) and the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) databases included adjuvant studies conducted between 1996 and 2015. Data were analyzed from February 2022 to June 2025. Exposures Adjuvant chemotherapy regimens varied across trials, including fluoropyrimidines alone or in combination with oxaliplatin or biologic agents. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was time to CC-related recurrence. The predefined threshold for cure was a recurrence risk below 0.5%. Results Of 35 213 included patients, 19 346 (54.9%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 60.2 (10.8) years. The incidence rate of recurrence peaked at 6.4% (1993 of 31 373) between month 6 and month 12 and decreased continuously until year 10 of follow-up never exceeding 0.5%. Recurrence rate appeared to increase again after year 10 and peaked at 2.0% during year 12.5 to year 13, a pattern observed exclusively in the MOSAIC trial. Competing-event analysis revealed that death and second primary tumors inflated the apparent recurrence rate, especially for older patients. The overall cumulative incidence of relapse with death as competing risk was lower among female patients (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance In this pooled analysis of phase 3 randomized clinical trials, a recurrence rate less than 0.5% occurred after 6 years from surgery, supporting a practical definition of cure. Recognizing this milestone may improve patient communication, guide follow-up duration, and reduce unnecessary long-term surveillance.

Background/Objectives: Cesarean section (C-section) is a common surgical procedure associated with an increased risk of 30-day postpartum hospital readmissions. This study utilized machine learning (ML) to predict readmissions using a nationwide database. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (2012–2022) included 54,593 patients who underwent C-sections. Random Forests (RF) and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) models were developed and compared to logistic regression (LR) using demographic, preoperative, and perioperative data. Results: Of the cohort, 1306 (2.39%) patients were readmitted. Readmitted patients had higher rates of being of African American race (17.99% vs. 9.83%), diabetes (11.03% vs. 8.19%), and hypertension (11.49% vs. 4.68%) (p < 0.001). RF achieved the highest performance (AUC = 0.737, sensitivity = 72.03%, specificity: 61.33%), and a preoperative-only RF model achieved a sensitivity of 83.14%. Key predictors included age, BMI, operative time, white blood cell count, and hematocrit. Conclusions: ML effectively predicts C-section readmissions, supporting early identification and interventions to improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs.

Abstract Purpose :Tamoxifen undergoes bioactivation to its active metabolite (Z)-endoxifen, which blocks estrogen-dependent breast tumor growth at high potency. We tested the feasibility and safety of supplementing standard tamoxifen therapy with low-dose (Z)-endoxifen in patients with breast cancer with compromised tamoxifen bioactivation. Patients and Methods :We conducted a prospective, interventional, three group randomized trial including 235 patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer who received standard tamoxifen therapy (20 mg/day). Patients were stratified by CYP2D6 genotype (n = 78), defining poor, intermediate, and normal metabolizers, or by baseline (Z)-endoxifen plasma concentration (n = 78), defining ≤15, 15 to 25, and ≥25 nmol/L. Co-treatment with (Z)-endoxifen 3 and 1.5 mg/day or placebo was performed, respectively. A control group (n = 79) received placebo regardless of metabolizer phenotype. The primary endpoint was the number of patients with (Z)-endoxifen levels &gt;32 nmol/L after 6 weeks of treatment. Adverse events were continuously monitored. Results: A higher proportion of patients in both intervention groups achieved target concentrations &gt;32 nmol/L compared with control (P &lt; 0.0001). At 3 mg (Z)-endoxifen supplementation, 92.3% of CYP2D6 poor metabolizer patients and all patients with baseline (Z)-endoxifen ≤15 nmol/L achieved the target concentration. At 1.5 mg (Z)-endoxifen supplementation, 88% of CYP2D6 intermediate metabolizer patients and 95% of patients with 15 to 25 nmol/L baseline (Z)-endoxifen levels achieved the target concentration. Similar proportions of patients receiving (Z)-endoxifen (6/80, 7.5%) or placebo (8/155, 5.2%) experienced grade 3 adverse events. Conclusions: Adding low-dose (Z)-endoxifen to standard tamoxifen is safe and provides a new approach to personalized antiestrogen treatment for patients with low endoxifen plasma levels.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Brainstem cavernous malformations (BSCM) can result in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), often resulting in significant morbidity. We aimed to assess the functional outcome and identify predictors of functional neurological outcome after single and multiple symptomatic hemorrhages. METHODS: As part of an international multicenter collaboration, institutional databases from 3 different tertiary referral centers included BSCM patients with complete baseline characteristics, MRI Data set, ≥1 ICH, and ≥1 follow-up examination followed at our institutions between 2003 and 2023. Functional neurological outcome was obtained using the modified Rankin Scale at diagnosis, before and after each ICH, and last follow-up. Patients were excluded after surgical removal of the lesion and/or loss of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 383 patients (41.47 ± 15.51 age; 220 [57.4%] female) were included and followed for an average of 63.16 ± 85.75 months. Functional neurological outcome deteriorated in 47.2% ( P = .010) after the second ICH and in 46.5% ( P = .007) after the third ICH. Moreover, the functional neurological status was impaired in 22.3% ( P < .001) of patients at last available follow-up compared with the time of BSCM diagnosis. CONCLUSION: In our study, we observed that the chance of full recovery might decrease with each ICH. We observed a significantly associated neurological deterioration after each ICH compared with initial ICH.