Citations

Background: Limited information is available for patients with breast cancer (BC) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially among underrepresented racial/ethnic populations. Methods: This is a COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry-based retrospective cohort study of females with active or history of BC and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosed between March 2020 and June 2021 in the US. Primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on a five-level ordinal scale, including none of the following complications, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression model identified characteristics associated with COVID-19 severity. Results: 1383 female patient records with BC and COVID-19 were included in the analysis, the median age was 61 years, and median follow-up was 90 days. Multivariable analysis revealed higher odds of COVID-19 severity for older age (aOR per decade, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.32–1.67]); Black patients (aOR 1.74; 95 CI 1.24–2.45), Asian Americans and Pacific Islander patients (aOR 3.40; 95 CI 1.70–6.79) and Other (aOR 2.97; 95 CI 1.71–5.17) racial/ethnic groups; worse ECOG performance status (ECOG PS ≥2: aOR, 7.78 [95% CI, 4.83–12.5]); pre-existing cardiovascular (aOR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.63–3.15])/pulmonary comorbidities (aOR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.20–2.29]); diabetes mellitus (aOR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.66–3.04]); and active and progressing cancer (aOR, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.89–22.6]). Hispanic ethnicity, timing, and type of anti-cancer therapy modalities were not significantly associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. The total all-cause mortality and hospitalization rate for the entire cohort was 9% and 37%, respectively however, it varied according to the BC disease status. Conclusions: Using one of the largest registries on cancer and COVID-19, we identified patient and BC-related factors associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, underrepresented racial/ethnic patients experienced worse outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Funding: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to Tianyi Sun, Sanjay Mishra, Benjamin French, Jeremy L Warner; P30-CA046592 to Christopher R Friese; P30 CA023100 for Rana R McKay; P30-CA054174 for Pankil K Shah and Dimpy P Shah; KL2 TR002646 for Pankil Shah and the American Cancer Society and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research (MRSG-16-152-01-CCE) and P30-CA054174 for Dimpy P Shah. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH). The funding sources had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit it for publication. Clinical trial number: CCC19 registry is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701 .

Abstract Disclosure: S.H. Johnson: None. C. Zhang: None. P.T. Hangge: None. T.W. Yen: None. T. Shaik: None. K. Doffek: None. J.W. Findling: None. T.B. Carroll: None. D.B. Evans: None. S. Dream: None. T.S. Wang: None. Background: Secondary adrenal insufficiency (SAI) may occur in patients after unilateral adrenalectomy for adrenal-dependent hypercortisolism (HC) and/or primary aldosteronism (PA). Perioperative protocols include routine glucocorticoid replacement (GR) or selective GR based on postoperative day 1 (POD1) basal cortisol levels or cosyntropin stimulation testing (CST). This study aimed to assess if a POD1 basal cortisol level alone was predictive of an abnormal CST and the need for GR in patients following unilateral adrenalectomy for HC and/or PA. Methods: This is a single institution retrospective review of consecutive unilateral adrenalectomies performed for HC and/or PA from 9/2014-10/2022. Patients were grouped as overt hypercortisolism (OH;n=42), mild autonomous cortisol excretion (MACE;n=70), mixed PA/HC (n=22) or PA (n=73); 22 patients with PA did not have preoperative evaluation for HC. Preoperative morning cortisol after low-dose dexamethasone suppression testing (DST), was used to define MACE (1.8-4.9 µg/dL) and OH (≥5.0). POD1 CST was performed for all patients with HC and prior to 2021, all patients with PA. SAI was defined as basal cortisol ≤5 or stimulated ≤14 (≤18 before 4/2017). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) of cutoffs within the range of observed basal cortisol levels in predicting an abnormal CST and need for GR. Results: Of 207 patients, 152 had POD1 CST (93% OH, 96% MACE, 73% PA/HC, 41% PA). Of these, 80 (53%) had SAI (67% OH, 55% MACE, 44% PA/HC, and 33% PA). Of the 10 patients with PA and SAI, 5 did not have preoperative testing for HC. Overall, 81 patients were discharged on GR. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of GR was 246 (127,557), 55 (38,207), 74 (16,185), and 26 (15,36) days in patients with OH, MACE, PA/HC, and PA, respectively. At a median follow-up of 142 days (IQR 42,617), 12 patients (5 OH, 6 MACE, 1 PA/HC) remained on GR. The SN/SP of a basal cortisol ≤10 in predicting GR was 92%/77% in patients with OH and 94%/73% of patients with MACE. Compared to initiation of GR based on basal cortisol ≤10, CST identified 4 patients with SAI in the combined OH and MACE cohorts who would not have received GR, and 11 in the combined cohort who did not require GR. For patients with PA and PA/HC, a basal cortisol ≤10 had SN of 100% and SP of 85% and 67%, respectively. The optimal basal cortisol for predicting SAI in patients with PA/HC was ≤5 (SN,SP 100%). Area under the curve for all ROC curves was >0.9. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that in patients who underwent unilateral adrenalectomy for HC, PA, or mixed PA/HC, POD1 CST improved identification of patients at risk for SAI compared to basal cortisol levels alone. While basal cortisol levels alone may be considered in patients with PA or mixed HC/PA, all other patients with HC should have POD1 CST to determine need for postoperative GR. Presentation: Friday, June 16, 2023

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is standard of care for T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). However, data on outcomes in high-risk T1a EAC are limited. We assessed and compared outcomes after EET of low-risk and high-risk T1a EAC, including intraluminal EAC recurrence, extraesophageal metastases, and overall survival. METHODS: Patients who underwent EET for T1a EAC at 3 referral Barrett's esophagus endotherapy units between 1996 and 2022 were included. Patients with submucosal invasion, positive deep margins, or metastases at initial diagnosis were excluded. High-risk T1a EAC was defined as T1a EAC with poor differentiation and/or lymphovascular invasion, with low-risk disease being defined without these features. All pathology was systematically assessed by expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Baseline and follow-up endoscopy and pathology data were abstracted. Time-to-event analyses were performed to compare outcomes between groups. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-eight patients with T1a EAC were included (high risk, n = 45; low risk, n = 143) with a median age of 70 years, and 84% were men. Groups were comparable for age, sex, Barrett's esophagus length, lesion size, and EET technique. Rates of delayed extraesophageal metastases (11.1% vs 1.4%) were significantly higher in the high-risk group ( P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rates of intraluminal EAC recurrence ( P = 0.79) and overall survival ( P = 0.73) between the 2 groups. DISCUSSION: Patients with high-risk T1a EAC undergoing successful EET had a substantially higher rate of extraesophageal metastases compared with those with low-risk T1a EAC on long-term follow-up. These data should be factored into discussions with patients while selecting treatment approaches. Additional prospective data in this area are critical.

Abstract Background and study aims Adequacy of endoscope disinfection in resource-limited settings is unknown. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) testing is useful for evaluation of endoscope reprocessing, and ATP <200 relative light units (RLUs) after manual endoscope cleaning has been associated with adequacy of endoscope disinfection. Methods Consecutive endoscopes undergoing reprocessing at five World Gastroenterology Organisation (WGO) training centers underwent ATP testing before and after an on-site educational intervention designed to optimize reprocessing practices. Results A total of 343 reprocessing cycles of 65 endoscopes were studied. Mean endoscope age was 5.3 years (range 1–13 years). Educational interventions, based on direct observation of endoscope reprocessing practices at each site, included refinements in pre-cleaning, manual cleaning, high-level disinfection, and endoscope drying and storage. The percentage of reprocessing cycles with post-manual cleaning ATP ≧200 decreased from 21.4% prior to educational intervention to 14.8% post-intervention (P=0.11). In multivariable logistic modelling, gastroscopes were significantly less likely (odds ratio [OR] 0.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.01–0.19; P<0.001) than colonoscopes to achieve post-manual cleaning ATP < 200. No other factor (educational intervention, study site, endoscope age) was significantly associated with improved outcomes. Endoscope ID was not significantly associated with ATP values, and sites that performed manual versus automated HLD did not have significantly different likelihood of post-manual cleaning ATP <200 (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.56–2.50; P=0.67). Conclusions In resource-limited settings, approximately 20% of endoscope reprocessing cycles may result in inadequate disinfection. This was not significantly improved by a comprehensive educational intervention. Alternative approaches to endoscope reprocessing are needed.

PURPOSE The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time, some limitations of these criteria were identified, and challenges emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. METHODS Informed by data from studies evaluating the different criteria, updates to the RANO criteria are proposed (RANO 2.0). RESULTS We recommend a standard set of criteria for both high- and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the postradiotherapy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), rather than the postsurgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for comparison with subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks after radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, are required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for the evaluation of treatment for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (two-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type glioblastoma, the nonenhancing disease will no longer be evaluated except when assessing response to antiangiogenic agents. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant nonenhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and nonenhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION The revised RANO 2.0 criteria refine response assessment in gliomas.

Abstract Purpose: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common aggressive primary malignant brain tumor in adults with a median age of onset of 68 to 70 years old. Although advanced age is often associated with poorer GBM patient survival, the predominant source(s) of maladaptive aging effects remains to be established. Here, we studied intratumoral and extratumoral relationships between adult patients with GBM and mice with brain tumors across the lifespan. Experimental Design: Electronic health records at Northwestern Medicine and the NCI SEER databases were evaluated for GBM patient age and overall survival. The commercial Tempus and Caris databases, as well as The Cancer Genome Atlas were profiled for gene expression, DNA methylation, and mutational changes with varying GBM patient age. In addition, gene expression analysis was performed on the extratumoral brain of younger and older adult mice with or without a brain tumor. The survival of young and old wild-type or transgenic (INK-ATTAC) mice with a brain tumor was evaluated after treatment with or without senolytics and/or immunotherapy. Results: Human patients with GBM ≥65 years of age had a significantly decreased survival compared with their younger counterparts. While the intra-GBM molecular profiles were similar between younger and older patients with GBM, non-tumor brain tissue had a significantly different gene expression profile between young and old mice with a brain tumor and the eradication of senescent cells improved immunotherapy-dependent survival of old but not young mice. Conclusions: This work suggests a potential benefit for combining senolytics with immunotherapy in older patients with GBM.

PURPOSE The Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) is a phase II platform trial that uses response adaptive randomization and genomic profiling to efficiently identify novel therapies for phase III testing. Three initial experimental arms (abemaciclib [a cyclin-dependent kinase [CDK]4/6 inhibitor], neratinib [an epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR]/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 inhibitor], and CC-115 [a deoxyribonucleic acid–dependent protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor]) were simultaneously evaluated against a common control arm. We report the results for each arm and examine the feasibility and conduct of the adaptive platform design. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed O 6 -methylguanine–DNA methyltransferase-unmethylated glioblastoma were eligible if they had tumor genotyping to identify prespecified biomarker subpopulations of dominant glioblastoma signaling pathways (EGFR, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and CDK). Initial random assignment was 1:1:1:1 between control (radiation therapy and temozolomide) and the experimental arms. Subsequent Bayesian adaptive randomization was incorporated on the basis of biomarker-specific progression-free survival (PFS) data. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and one-sided P values are reported. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02977780 ). RESULTS Two hundred thirty-seven patients were treated (71 control; 73 abemaciclib; 81 neratinib; 12 CC-115) in years 2017-2021. Abemaciclib and neratinib were well tolerated, but CC-115 was associated with ≥ grade 3 treatment-related toxicity in 58% of patients. PFS was significantly longer with abemaciclib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.06; one-sided P = .046) and neratinib (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.02; one-sided P = .033) relative to the control arm but there was no PFS benefit with CC-115 (one-sided P = .523). None of the experimental therapies demonstrated a significant OS benefit ( P > .05). CONCLUSION The INSIGhT design enabled efficient simultaneous testing of three experimental agents using a shared control arm and adaptive randomization. Two investigational arms had superior PFS compared with the control arm, but none demonstrated an OS benefit. The INSIGhT design may promote improved and more efficient therapeutic discovery in glioblastoma. New arms have been added to the trial.

Abstract Tumor-related epilepsy (TRE) is a frequent and major consequence of brain tumors. Management of TRE is required throughout the course of disease and a deep understanding of diagnosis and treatment is key to improving quality of life. Gross total resection is favored from both an oncologic and epilepsy perspective. Shared mechanisms of tumor growth and epilepsy exist, and emerging data will provide better targeted therapy options. Initial treatment with antiseizure medications (ASM) in conjunction with surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy is typical. The first choice of ASM is critical to optimize seizure control and tolerability considering the effects of the tumor itself. These agents carry a potential for drug–drug interactions and therefore knowledge of mechanisms of action and interactions is needed. A review of adverse effects is necessary to guide ASM adjustments and decision-making. This review highlights the essential aspects of diagnosis and treatment of TRE with ASMs, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy while indicating areas of uncertainty. Future studies should consider the use of a standardized method of seizure tracking and incorporating seizure outcomes as a primary endpoint of tumor treatment trials.