Citations

Abstract Introduction: Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a plasma cell disease characterized by the deposition of insoluble amyloid fibrils into organs leading to organ dysfunction and death. The analysis at 6 and 12 months of the ANDROMEDA study (NCT03201965) showed that the addition of subcutaneous (SC) daratumumab to the standard of care combination of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCd) was superior to VCd alone, with higher rates of hematologic complete response (CR) and an acceptable safety profile. Based on these findings daratumumab with VCd (D-VCd) was approved for newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis in January 2021 in the US and June 2021 in the EU. Here, we present data from the analysis at 18 months of the ANDROMEDA study. Methods: ANDROMEDA is a randomized, open-label, active-controlled phase 3 study including patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis with measurable hematologic disease, ≥1 involved organ, cardiac stage I-IIIA, estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥20 mL/min, and absence of symptomatic multiple myeloma. Patients were randomized (1:1) to D-VCd or VCd for 6 28-day cycles. Bortezomib (1.3 mg/m 2), cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m 2 up to 500 mg per week), and dexamethasone (20-40 mg) were administered weekly. SC daratumumab (1800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 in 15 mL) was administered once weekly in cycles 1 and 2 and every 2 weeks in cycles 3 to 6. Patients in the D-VCd arm received only SC daratumumab after cycle 6, every 4 weeks (up to a total of 24 cycles from first dose). The primary endpoint was overall (ie, at any time) hematologic CR rate, defined here as normalization of free light chain (FLC) levels and ratio (FLCr) and negative serum and urine immunofixation, confirmed at a subsequent visit; normalization of uninvolved FLC level and FLCr were not required if involved FLC was lower than the upper limit of normal. Secondary endpoints included major organ deterioration progression-free survival (PFS), organ response rate, time to hematologic response, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: A total of 388 patients were randomized to receive D-VCd (N=195) or VCd alone (N=193). At the May 2021 clinical cutoff, the median duration of treatment for D-VCd and VCd arms was 21.3 and 5.3 months, respectively. In the D-VCd arm, 149 patients (77.2%) received daratumumab monotherapy after completing 6 cycles of D-VCd; of those, 17 (11.4%) were still receiving treatment. The rates of deep hematological responses favored the D-VCd treatment arm (Table). At a median follow-up of 25.8 months, the rate of hematologic CR was significantly higher in the D-VCd arm vs the VCd arm (59.5% vs 19.2%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)], 6.03 [3.80-9.58]; P<0.0001). Similarly, more patients achieved a very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) (D-VCd vs VCd, 79.0% vs 50.3%; odds ratio [95% CI], 3.74 [2.39-5.86]; P<0.0001). Among patients who responded, the median time from randomization to ≥VGPR was shorter in the D-VCd arm (0.56 months) vs the VCd arm (0.82 months). Comparable to the cardiac response analysis at 6 months (D-VCd vs VCd, 42% vs 22%), greater cardiac response rates were achieved with D-VCd compared with VCd at 18 months (53% vs 24%). Similarly, renal response rates remained superior with D-VCd vs VCd alone at 18 months (58% vs 26% compared with 6 months [54% vs 27%]). A total of 79 deaths occurred (D-VCd, N=34; VCd, N=45). In the D-VCd arm, only 1 additional grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event occurred over 18 months vs 12 months (119 [61.7%] vs 118 [61.1%] patients) and no additional infusion-related reactions were reported. OS will be analyzed and major organ deterioration PFS will be updated after approximately 200 events have occurred. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the sustained clinical benefits of D-VCd vs VCd in terms of hematologic and organ responses with longer follow-up, although it should be noted that many patients in the D-VCd arm received daratumumab monotherapy following 6 cycles of D-VCd, while patients in the VCd group stopped study treatment. Nevertheless, the study continues to support the use of D-VCd over VCd alone in patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis. Following its recent approval, D-VCd represents a new SOC for patients with AL amyloidosis. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Comenzo: Prothena Biosciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Unum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Caelum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Patents & Royalties: WO2016187546A1, Research Funding. Palladini: Pfizer: Honoraria; Siemens: Honoraria; Janssen Global Services: Honoraria, Other: advisory board fees. Kastritis: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria. Minnema: Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Other: Travel expenses; Alnylam: Consultancy; Cilag: Consultancy. Wechalekar: Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Caelum Biosciences: Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Consultancy. Jaccard: Pfizer: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Lee: Karyopharm: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopetides: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding. Sanchorawala: Oncopeptide: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sorrento: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Gibbs: AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, BMS and Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mollee: Janssen, Pfizer: Research Funding; Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Caelum, EUSA, Pfizer, SkylineDx, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: No personal fees received. Venner: BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Schönland: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Prothena: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Sanofi: Research Funding. Suzuki: Abie: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; ONO: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kim: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cibeira: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Akcea: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Beksac: Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Libby: Genentech: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Valent: Caelum Biosciences: Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Hungria: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings/travel ; Abbvie: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Support for attending meetings/travel ; Takeda: Honoraria. Wong: Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Fortis: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; GloxoSmithKlein: Research Funding; Dren Biosciences: Consultancy; Caelum: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenzweig: Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Akcea: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Onocopeptides: Speakers Bureau. Bumma: Amgen, Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Janssen, Oncopeptides, Sanofi: Consultancy. Tran: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Qin: Janssen: Current Employment. Khaled: Jazz: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Omeros: Honoraria; Janssen: Current Employment. Vermeulen: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Abstract Although the Sonic hedgehog (SHH) signaling pathway has been implicated in promoting malignant phenotypes of prostate cancer, details on how it is activated and exerts its oncogenic role during prostate cancer development and progression is less clear. Here, we show that GLI3, a key SHH pathway effector, is transcriptionally upregulated during androgen deprivation and posttranslationally stabilized in prostate cancer cells by mutation of speckle-type POZ protein (SPOP). GLI3 is a substrate of SPOP-mediated proteasomal degradation in prostate cancer cells and prostate cancer driver mutations in SPOP abrogate GLI3 degradation. Functionally, GLI3 is necessary and sufficient for the growth and migration of androgen receptor (AR)–positive prostate cancer cells, particularly under androgen-depleted conditions. Importantly, we demonstrate that GLI3 physically interacts and functionally cooperates with AR to enrich an AR-dependent gene expression program leading to castration-resistant growth of xenografted prostate tumors. Finally, we identify an AR/GLI3 coregulated gene signature that is highly correlated with castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer and predictive of disease recurrence. Together, these findings reveal that hyperactivated GLI3 promotes castration-resistant growth of prostate cancer and provide a rationale for therapeutic targeting of GLI3 in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Implications: We describe two clinically relevant mechanisms leading to hyperactivated GLI3 signaling and enhanced AR/GLI3 cross-talk, suggesting that GLI3-specific inhibitors might prove effective to block prostate cancer development or delay CRPC.

Abstract We studied the performance of an algorithm combining multiplex polymerase chain reaction with phenotypic detection of extended-spectrum β-lactamases and carbapenemases directly from positive blood culture bottles in patients with gram-negative bacteremia and found good concordance with routine cultures. Such an algorithm may be a tool to improve time to optimal therapy in patients with gram-negative bacteremia.

Abstract BACKGROUND Open surgery has traditionally been preferred for the management of bifurcation middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysms. Flow diverting stents present a novel endovascular strategy for aneurysm treatment. OBJECTIVE To add to the limited literature describing the outcomes and complications in the use of flow diverters for the treatment of these complex aneurysms. METHODS This is a multicenter retrospective review of MCA bifurcation aneurysms undergoing flow diversion. We assessed post-treatment radiological outcomes and both thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications. RESULTS We reviewed the outcomes of 54 aneurysms treated with flow diversion. Four (7.4%) of the aneurysms had a history of rupture (3 remote and 1 acute). Fourteen (25.9%) of the aneurysms already underwent either open surgery or coiling prior to flow diversion. A total of 36 out of the 45 aneurysms (80%) with available follow-up data had adequate aneurysm occlusion with a median follow-up time of 12 mo. There were no hemorrhagic complications but 16.7% (9/54) had thromboembolic complications. CONCLUSION Flow diverting stents may be a viable option for the endovascular treatment of complex bifurcation MCA aneurysms. However, compared to published series on the open surgical treatment of this subset of aneurysms, flow diversion has inferior outcomes and are associated with a higher rate of complications.

Background: Lp(a) (lipoprotein [a]) levels are higher in individuals of African ancestry (AA) than in individuals of European ancestry (EA). We examined associations of genetically predicted Lp(a) levels with (1) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease subtypes: coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, and abdominal aortic aneurysm and (2) nonatherosclerotic cardiovascular disease phenotypes, stratified by ancestry. Methods: We performed (1) Mendelian randomization analyses for previously reported cardiovascular associations and (2) Mendelian randomization–phenome-wide association analyses for novel associations. Analyses were stratified by ancestry in electronic Medical Records and Genomics, United Kingdom Biobank, and Million Veteran Program cohorts separately and in a combined cohort of 804 507 EA and 103 580 AA participants. Results: In Mendelian randomization analyses using the combined cohort, a 1-SD genetic increase in Lp(a) level was associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease subtypes in EA—odds ratio and 95% CI for coronary heart disease 1.28 (1.16–1.41); cerebrovascular disease 1.14 (1.07–1.21); peripheral artery disease 1.22 (1.11–1.34); abdominal aortic aneurysm 1.28 (1.17–1.40); in AA, the effect estimate was lower than in EA and nonsignificant for coronary heart disease 1.11 (0.99–1.24) and cerebrovascular disease 1.06 (0.99–1.14) but similar for peripheral artery disease 1.16 (1.01–1.33) and abdominal aortic aneurysm 1.34 (1.11–1.62). In EA, a 1-SD genetic increase in Lp(a) level was associated with aortic valve disorders 1.34 (1.10–1.62), mitral valve disorders 1.18 (1.09–1.27), congestive heart failure 1.12 (1.05–1.19), and chronic kidney disease 1.07 (1.01–1.14). In AA, no significant associations were noted for aortic valve disorders 1.08 (0.94–1.25), mitral valve disorders 1.02 (0.89–1.16), congestive heart failure 1.02 (0.95–1.10), or chronic kidney disease 1.05 (0.99–1.12). Mendelian randomization–phenome-wide association analyses identified novel associations in EA with arterial thromboembolic disease, nonaortic aneurysmal disease, atrial fibrillation, cardiac conduction disorders, and hypertension. Conclusions: Many cardiovascular associations of genetically increased Lp(a) that were significant in EA were not significant in AA. Lp(a) was associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in four major arterial beds in EA but only with peripheral artery disease and abdominal aortic aneurysm in AA. Additionally, novel cardiovascular associations were detected in EA.

SummaryBackgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated an association between nonselective beta‐blockers (NSBBs) and lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhosis. However, there has been no population‐based study investigating the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients treated using carvedilol.AimsTo determine the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients with NSBBs including carvedilol.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study utilised the Cerner Health Facts database in the United States from 2000 to 2017. Kaplan‐Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to test the HCC risk among the carvedilol, nadolol, and propranolol groups compared with no beta‐blocker group.ResultsThe final cohort comprised 107 428 eligible patients. The 100‐month cumulative HCC incidence of NSBBs was significantly lower than the no beta‐blocker group (carvedilol (11.24%) vs no beta‐blocker (15.69%), nadolol (27.55%) vs no beta‐blocker (32.11%), and propranolol (26.17%) vs no beta‐blocker (28.84%) (P values < 0.0001). NSBBs were associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC (Hazard ratio: carvedilol 0.61 (95% CI 0.51‐0.73), nadolol 0.74 (95% CI 0.63‐0.87), propranolol 0.75 (95% CI 0.66‐0.84) after PSM in the multivariate cox analysis. In subgroup analysis, NSBBs reduced the risk of HCC in cirrhosis with complications and non‐alcoholic cirrhosis.ConclusionsNSBBs, including carvedilol, were associated with a significantly decreased risk of HCC in patients with cirrhosis when compared with no beta‐blocker regardless of complications status. Future randomised‐controlled studies comparing the incidence of HCC among NSBBs should elucidate which NSBB would be the best option to prevent HCC in cirrhosis.

Renal artery stenosis (RAS) may lead to hypertension and renal injury. Reversibility of renal tubular dysfunction in RAS upon revascularization is unclear. We tested the hypothesis that percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) would restore tubular function assessed as medullary oxygenation response to furosemide, a diuretic that inhibits medullary tubular transport. This was studied in 16 pigs after 6 wks of RAS, using blood oxygen level dependent magnetic resonance imaging (BOLD MRI) before and after furosemide. Renal blood flow (RBF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were determined with multidetector computed tomography. Pigs were then randomized for PTRA or sham (n=8 each) and studied again 4 wks later; 8 normal pigs served as controls. Results Stenotic kidney RBF, GFR, and BOLD MRI responses were reduced in RAS shams (Figure). PTRA decreased the degree of stenosis (11±7 vs. 71±5% in untreated RAS) and blood pressure (108±3 vs. 130±9 mmHg, p<0.05). Renal and tubular function were improved in RAS+PTRA, although not to normal (Figure). Non‐stenotic kidneys showed no change in tubular function. Therefore, tubular solute transport‐related oxygen consumption can be partially restored and detected by BOLD MRI 4 wks after PTRA in post stenotic swine kidneys. This noninvasive method may be useful to assess the functional status of kidneys in RAS patients. Supported by NIH, HL085307.

Background and Purpose: XO (xanthine oxidase) is a key enzyme of uric acid metabolism and is thought to contribute to oxidative pathways that promote atherosclerotic plaque progression, yet its role in plaque destabilization is not well elucidated. We hypothesized that XO is expressed in carotid plaque from symptomatic patients in association with cardiovascular risk factors. Methods: Patients were stratified by symptoms, defined as presentation with an ipsilateral cerebral ischemic event. Carotid atherosclerotic plaques were obtained from 44 patients with symptomatic plaque and 44 patients without ischemic cerebral events. Protein expression of XO was evaluated by immunohistochemical staining and the percentage of cells expressing XO and CD68 (macrophage marker) compared between the groups. Biochemical and demographic cardiometabolic risk factors of study participants also were measured. Results: Carotid atherosclerotic plaques from symptomatic patients were associated with significantly higher XO expression versus asymptomatic plaque (median [interquartile range]: 1.24 [2.09] versus 0.16 [0.34]; P <0.001) and with significantly higher circulating uric acid levels (mean±SD: 7.36±2.10 versus 5.37±1.79 mg/dL; P <0.001, respectively). In addition, XO expression in atherosclerotic carotid plaque was inversely associated with serum high-density lipoproteins cholesterol levels ( P =0.010, r =−0.30) and directly with circulating uric acid levels ( P <0.001, r =0.45). The average percentage of macrophages that expressed XO was significantly higher in symptomatic versus asymptomatic plaques (median [interquartile range]: 93.37% [25] versus 46.15% [21], respectively; P <0.001). Conclusions: XO overexpression in macrophages is associated with increased serum uric acid and low high-density lipoproteins cholesterol levels and may potentially have a mechanistic role in carotid plaque destabilization. The current study supports a potential role for uric acid synthesis pathway as a target for management of carotid atherosclerosis in humans.