Citations

Background: Patients with immunocompromising conditions, including those affected by hematologic malignancies, have a disproportionately high burden of morbidity and mortality related to COVID-19 compared to individuals without such conditions.Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommend the use of remdesivir, a broad-spectrum antiviral, for treatment of mild to severeCOVID-19 in immunocompetent patients not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. While the CPGs issued by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2023), National Institutes of Health (NIH, 2023) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA, 2022) also recommended the use of remdesivir in patients with immunocompromising conditions at high risk for severe disease, there was limited evidence available at the time the recommendations were communicated, more than two years after the start of the pandemic. The European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL, 2022) guidelines include remdesivir among the treatment options for mild to moderate COVID-19 patients with hematologic malignancies. The lack of evidence for treatment efficacy and safety in patients with immunocompromising conditions, a population underrepresented or excluded from clinical trials, was mentioned in CPGs as a knowledge gap and as need for further research. In this research, we summarize the evidence for remdesivir efficacy and safety for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancies accumulated since the start of the pandemic. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases from January 2019 through December 2023 for interventional and observational studies examining remdesivir efficacy and safety. Case reports and case studies were excluded. A dual-reviewer approach was used for screening and data extraction. Results: Of the 7,654 references retrieved through the implementation of the extensive search strategy 59 (0.8%) reporting on patients with hematologic malignancies, unspecified cancers, or immunodeficiencies were identified and reviewed in full text. Only eight unique studies (8 of 59) were conducted in patients with hematologic malignancies, of which two reported remdesivir use in a minority of participants (n<5) and were excluded from further analyses. The remaining six studies, of which four were peer-reviewed original articles, one was a letter to editor and the last was a conference abstract, used a retrospective cohort design and reported efficacy outcomes for a combined total of 1,579 individuals across the studies. Three of the six studies were conducted during the pre-Omicron variant era (November 2021) while the remaining three started data collection in December 2021. There were four studies reporting number of deaths or the mortality rate, while a fifth study based on medical chart reviews of 313 patients in Israel found a significantly reduced risk of mortality among remdesivir recipients compared to patients not receiving remdesivir (OR: 0.297; 95% CI: 0.105, 0.834). In addition, a study including 466 patients from the Spanish Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation and Cell Therapy Registry reported mortality among remdesivir treated group related to baseline disease progression, use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 therapy and the presence of coinfections while B-cell malignancy as underlying disease, severe COVID-19, late antiviral initiation (≥5 days after first positive PCR) and longer treatment duration (≥5 days) were factors significantly associated with prolonged viral shedding. The same Spanish study reported safety outcomes indicating that adverse events of grade 3 or above were rare, occurring in 0.5% of remdesivir treated patients. Conclusion: Despite the call for research to fill the knowledge gap signaled by the CPGs, our comprehensive systematic literature review identified only a few publications conducted since the start of the pandemic in patients with hematological malignancies. In the current endemic era, these patients are among the most at risk for severe outcomes and COVID-19 related hospitalizations. While the limited evidence suggests that remdesivir use can reduce mortality in patients with hematologic malignancies, additional research will be instrumental to inform development and updating of evidence-based recommendations to support and guide clinical management of oncology patients.

Context.— Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is a promising new technology with the potential to transform communication and workflows in health care and pathology. Although new technologies offer advantages, they also come with risks that users, particularly early adopters, must recognize. Given the fast pace of GAI developments, pathologists may find it challenging to stay current with the terminology, technical underpinnings, and latest advancements. Building this knowledge base will enable pathologists to grasp the potential risks and impacts that GAI may have on the future practice of pathology. Objective.— To present key elements of GAI development, evaluation, and implementation in a way that is accessible to pathologists and relevant to laboratory applications. Data Sources.— Information was gathered from recent studies and reviews from PubMed and arXiv. Conclusions.— GAI offers many potential benefits for practicing pathologists. However, the use of GAI in clinical practice requires rigorous oversight and continuous refinement to fully realize its potential and mitigate inherent risks. The performance of GAI is highly dependent on the quality and diversity of the training and fine-tuning data, which can also propagate biases if not carefully managed. Ethical concerns, particularly regarding patient privacy and autonomy, must be addressed to ensure responsible use. By harnessing these emergent technologies, pathologists will be well placed to continue forward as leaders in diagnostic medicine.

Importance Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is an increasingly used treatment strategy for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Little research has been conducted on cancer care delivery during NT, and the standards for optimal delivery of NT have not been defined. Objective To develop consensus best practices for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Design, Setting, and Participants This study used a modified Delphi approach consisting of 2 rounds of voting, and a series of virtual conferences (from October to December 2023) to reach expert consensus on candidate best practice statements generated from a systematic review of the literature and expert opinion. An interdisciplinary panel was formed including 47 North American experts from surgical, medical, and radiation oncology, radiology, pathology, gastroenterology, integrative oncology, anesthesia, pharmacy, nursing, cancer care delivery research, and nutrition as well as patient and caregiver stakeholders. Main Outcome and Measures Statements that reached 75% agreement or greater were included in final consensus statements. Results Of the 47 participating panel members, 27 (57.64%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 47.6 (8.2) years. Physicians reported completing training a mean (SD) 14.6 (8.6) years prior and seeing a mean (SD) 110.6 (38.4) patients with PDAC annually; 35 (77.7%) were in academic practice. Final consensus was reached on 82 best practices for delivering NT. Of these, 38 statements focused on pre-NT practices, including diagnosis and staging (n = 15), evaluation and optimization (n = 20), and decision-making (n = 3); 29 statements defined best practices during NT, including initiation (n = 3), delivery of therapy (n = 8), restaging practices (n = 12), and management of complications during NT (n = 6); and 15 best practices were identified to guide treatment post-NT, focusing on surgery (n = 7), pathology (n = 4), and follow-up (n = 3). Conclusions Using a modified Delphi consensus technique, best practice guidelines were developed focusing on the optimal standards for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Given the prognostic importance of completing multimodality therapy, efforts to standardize and optimize the delivery of NT represent an immediate opportunity to decrease care variation and improve outcomes for patients with PDAC. Future research should focus on validating and implementing best practice standards into clinical practice.

The Neurohospitalist Core Competencies comprise a set of competency-based learning objectives that encapsulate the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of neurohospitalitists who specialize in the care of hospitalized patients with neurologic conditions. These competencies serve to characterize the rapidly expanding field of neurohospitalist medicine. The 27 chapters are divided into 3 sections entitled: neurological conditions, clinical interventions and interpretation of ancillary studies, and neurohospitalist role in the healthcare system. Each individual learning objective in the chapters describes a specific concept with an action verb to illustrate the behavior that the neurohospitalist exhibits. The individual neurohospitalist may not exhibit mastery in each of the topics included as individual practices vary in scope and practice pattern. A few examples of how the complete set of competencies may be used include in the creation of curricula for neurohospitalist fellowships, to assist in defining the scope of practice of neurohospitalists for administrative leaders of hospitals and departments, and in influencing the direction of further research and quality improvement in the field.

Abstract BACKGROUND Recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma (AA), a grade 3 brain cancer, remains an unmet medical need. STELLAR was a phase III randomized, open-label trial of eflornithine (ornithine decarboxylase inhibitor) with lomustine versus lomustine alone, originally for patients with recurrent AA. However, as the WHO definition of AA evolved during trial conduct (e.g., excluding IDH wild-type disease), we determined results in both the original ITT population and by revised molecularly defined WHO 2021 diagnoses in pre-planned analyses. METHOD Key eligibility: age ≥ 18, AA (2016 WHO criteria), first recurrence ≥ 6 months after radiation and temozolomide, KPS ≥ 70, no imaging findings consistent with grade 4 glioblastoma. Stratification: IDH, age, resection extent, and geography. Patients were randomized to Arm A: eflornithine (2.8 g/m2 TID Q 2/3 weeks) with lomustine (90 mg/m2 Q 6 weeks) or Arm B: lomustine (110 mg/m2 Q 6 weeks). Primary endpoint was OS. The pre-specified hazard ratio (HR) goal was 0.667 based on projected median OS (mOS) increase to 18 months from 12 months. RESULTS 343 pts (172/171 Arms A/B) were randomized (105 sites, 8 countries). ITT analysis found no difference between arms (mOS 23.4 vs. 20.3 months, HR = 0.94). However, a pre-specified subset analysis in IDH mutant, 2021 WHO-defined grade 3 astrocytoma (n=194), showed significant improvement with eflornithine (mOS 34.9 vs. 23.5 months, HR = 0.64, log rank p = 0.016) and PFS (15.8 vs. 7.2 months, HR = 0.58, log rank p = 0.015). No difference was observed in the IDH wild-type subset. AEs were consistent with historic data. CONCLUSION There was no difference in OS between arms in the ITT analysis. However, medically meaningful and statistically significant OS and PFS benefits were observed with eflornithine in the pre-planned analysis of patients with molecularly defined 2021 WHO CNS grade 3 astrocytoma.

BACKGROUND: While initial data for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in aortic stenosis patients with mitral stenosis (MS) suggested a poor short-term prognosis, outcomes for contemporary balloon-expandable valves remain unknown. The aim of this retrospective multicenter registry study was to compare the potential impact of MS on TAVR outcomes with balloon-expandable valves. METHODS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims data were used to obtain a cohort of 327 925 patients who underwent TAVR with current balloon-expandable valves (SAPIEN 3, SAPIEN 3 Ultra, or SAPIEN 3 Ultra Resilia) between June 2015 and December 2022 across 791 sites. Severe MS (defined as >10 mm Hg mean gradient or <1.5 cm 2 area) was compared with mild or less MS (defined as <5 mm Hg mean gradient and >2 cm 2 area) using propensity matching to minimize confounding variables. RESULTS: Patients with severe MS (n=8500; 2.6%) had a higher number of comorbid conditions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores, and were more often women than patients with mild or less MS at the time of index TAVR. While patients with severe MS had worse outcomes at 30 days, when propensity-matched, patients exhibited similar 30-day rates of death (3.2% versus 3.0%), stroke (2.4% versus 2.2%), major vascular complications (1.6% versus 1.6%), device implant success (98.9% versus 99.2%), and new dialysis (0.7% versus 0.5%), with higher rates of pacemaker implantation (11.3% versus 9.4%; P <0.001). By 1 year, there was no difference in the change in the KCCQ (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire) overall score from baseline to 1 year (30.7±27.0 versus 31.9±27.0; P =0.07). By 3 years, an increase in the mortality rate (45.1% versus 40.9%; P <0.001) of patients with severe MS was observed. CONCLUSIONS: MS in isolation is not associated with worsened short-term outcomes among patients undergoing contemporary TAVR with balloon-expandable valves.

Introduction While incidentally discovered covert cerebrovascular diseases (id-CCD) are associated with future stroke, it is not known if patients with id-CCD are prescribed statins. Methods Patients age ≥50 with id-CCD on neuroimaging from 2009 to 2019 with no prior ischaemic stroke, transient ischaemic attack or dementia were identified using natural language processing in a large real-world cohort. Robust Poisson multivariable regression was used to assess statin prescription among patients without prior statins. Results Among 2 41 050 patients, 74 975 patients (31.1%; 4.7% with covert brain infarcts (CBI); 29.0% with white matter disease (WMD)) had id-CCD. 53.5% (95% CI 53.2 to 53.9%) were not on statins within 6 months prior to the scan. Of those, 12.0% (95% CI 11.7 to 12.3%) were prescribed statins in the next 6 months compared with 9.3% (95% CI 9.1 to 9.4%) in those without CCD, a 2.7% (95% CI 2.4 to 3.1%) absolute increase in statin prescription for those with id-CCD. In adjusted analyses, the presence of id-CCD was only associated with minor increases in statin prescription (CBI or WMD (risk ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.13), CBI alone (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.47), WMD alone (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09), and CBI and WMD (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.35)). Discussion Identification of id-CCD is not associated with substantial changes in statin prescription in routine clinical practice.

Importance The prognosis for patients with glioblastoma is poor following standard therapy with surgical resection, radiation, temozolomide, and tumor-treating fields. Objectives To evaluate the combination of veliparib and temozolomide in glioblastoma based on preclinical data demonstrating significant chemosensitizing effects of the polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase 1/2 inhibitor veliparib when combined with temozolomide. Design, Setting, and Participants Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with MGMT promoter hypermethylation who had completed concomitant radiation and temozolomide were enrolled between December 15, 2014, and December 15, 2018, in this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trial. The data for this analysis were locked on April 21, 2023. Interventions Patients were randomized and treated with standard adjuvant temozolomide (150-200 mg/m 2 orally, days 1-5) combined with either placebo or veliparib (40 mg orally, twice daily, days 1-7) for 6 cycles. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point for the phase 3 portion of the trial was overall survival (OS). Results There were 322 patients randomized during the phase 2 accrual period and an additional 125 patients randomized to complete the phase 3 accrual, for a total of 447 patients in the final phase 3 analysis. The median (range) age for patients was 60 (20-85) years and 190 patients (42.5%) were female. The median OS was 24.8 months (90% CI, 22.6-27.7) for the placebo arm and 28.1 months (90% CI, 24.3-33.3) for the veliparib arm ( P = .17). The difference in survival did not meet the prespecified efficacy end point. However, there was a separation of the survival curves that favored the veliparib arm over 24 to 48 months of follow-up. The experimental combination was well tolerated with an acceptable elevation in grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance This trial found that adding veliparib to adjuvant temozolomide did not significantly extend OS in patients with newly diagnosed, MGMT -hypermethylated glioblastoma. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02152982

AbstractBackgroundThere is growing interest in global health (GH) among medical trainees in the United States. However, providing GH training opportunities at the fellowship level presents several challenges. Understanding of barriers and facilitators to implementing GH training is essential for addressing these challenges.MethodsWe developed a comprehensive survey of 65 Likert‐scale multiple‐choice and open‐ended questions to assess perspectives of pediatric hematology/oncology fellowships leaders on GH training. The survey was electronically distributed to program leaders at all ACGME‐accredited pediatric hematology/oncology fellowships programs, and data were summarized using descriptive analysis.ResultsOf 73 eligible programs, we had a 45.2% response rate with 27 complete and 6 partial responses. Respondents represented programs across the United States, including 19 (57.6%) affiliated with NCI‐Designated Cancer Centers. Fourteen programs (43.8%) currently offer GH training opportunities, whereas 18 programs expressed interest in future opportunities (15, 83.3%) or plan to offer them soon (3, 16.7%). Major barriers identified include competing training priorities (23, 82.1%), lack of faculty mentors in the division (23, 82.1%), and lack of dedicated institutional funding (20, 71.4%). Key facilitators include the interest and initiative of current fellows (27, 96.4%), dedicated institutional funding (26, 92.8%), and having established international partnerships (26, 92.8%).ConclusionsThe study reveals strong interest in GH training in pediatric hematology/oncology fellowships. Despite challenges such as competing priorities and a lack of mentors, significant facilitators include current fellows’ initiatives, dedicated funding, and established international partnerships. These insights can help shape future initiatives to incorporate GH into pediatric oncology/hematology fellowship training.