Citations

Abstract Background and Rationale: Axi-cel is a standard-of-care treatment for relapsed or refractory LBCL after 2 or more lines of systemic therapy. Some patients who would have been ineligible for ZUMA-1 criteria due to comorbidities have been treated with axi-cel in the real-world setting. We interrogated a large registry of patients treated with standard-of-care axi-cel for a definitive report on the impact of age or certain comorbidities on safety and efficacy outcomes after axi-cel infusion. Methods: From October 2017 to August 2020, 1500 patients were enrolled in the postapproval safety observational study of axi-cel treated at 79 centers. Patients eligible for the protocol and followed up for at least 6 months with complete data entry by the time of analyses were included. One patient rescinded consent and 1 was deemed ineligible. Patients previously treated with immune effector cell therapy (n=31), with incomplete follow-up reporting (n=92), or alive but last contacted <180 days postinfusion (n=32) were excluded from analysis. Main efficacy outcomes included complete and objective response rates (CR and ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS). Safety endpoints of interest included cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Outcomes were assessed and compared by age and preselected coexisting disease or organ impairment within 3 months prior to the infusion included in the hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index. Multivariate logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess the impact of age or coexistent organ dysfunction on outcomes via odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) and their 95% CIs. Results A total of 1343 patients were included in the analysis with a median 25.1 months (range, 10.3-42.7 months) for potential follow-up, defined from infusion to data cutoff date, and a median 11.8 months (range, 0.1-38.8 months) for actual follow-up time, defined from infusion to date of death or last contact. Of these, 38% were 65 years or older (median 62 years), 4% had a performance score ≥2, 13% had cardiac comorbidities, 16% had a prior cancer, 9% were obese, 2% had moderate to severe hepatic comorbidities, and 2% had renal comorbidities. Transformed lymphoma, double or triple-hit by fluorescence in situ hybridization, prior autologous transplant and refractory disease were present in 28%, 15%, 27% and 66%, respectively. Bridging therapy was administered in 21% of patients. Overall, ORR was 74%, (CR 56%), and probabilities of DOR, PFS, and OS at 18 months were 61% (95% CI, 57-65%), 42% (95% CI, 39-45%) and 52% (95% CI, 49-55%), respectively. Overall rates of CRS and ICANS were 83% and 55%, respectively. ORR was 78% (CR 62%, median OS 17.5 [95% CI, 16.0-not evaluated (NE)] months) for patients ≥65 years, ORR 57% (CR 29%; median OS 4.3 [95% CI, 2.5-8.3] months) for patients with hepatic dysfunction, ORR 70% (CR 43%; median OS 8.9 [95% CI, 3.8-NE] months) for patients with renal dysfunction; and ORR 47% (CR 20%, median OS 4 [95% CI, 2.6-6.9] months) for patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2 or 3. Multivariate analyses indicated that advanced age (≥65 years vs <65 years; OR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.05-1.83), moderate to severe pulmonary disease (yes vs no; OR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98), and ECOG (2-3 vs 0-1; OR 0.31, 95% CI, 0.18-0.53) impacted ORR (Table). Age ≥65 years did not have an impact on survival (HR 1.05, 95% CI, 0.88-1.26), although it was associated with CRS (OR 1.42, 95% CI, 1.03-1.96) and ICANS (OR 1.78, 95% CI, 1.39-2.28). Coexistent cardiac disease (HR 1.44, 95% CI, 1.12-1.83), renal disease (HR 2.13, 95% CI, 1.32-3.46) and hepatic dysfunction (HR 2.65, 95% CI, 1.69-4.14) had an impact on OS, but not on response, CRS, and ICANS. ECOG significantly impacted all efficacy outcomes. None of the other comorbidities tested significantly impacted outcomes. Conclusion: Advanced age (≥65 years) was not associated with worse efficacy outcomes after axi-cel, despite higher rates of CRS and ICANS, which require closer monitoring. Performance status rather than age should be accounted for in patient selection and treatment decisions with axi-cel. Most coexistent organ dysfunctions have no clinically significant impact on axi-cel objective response and safety outcomes. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Locke: Moffitt Cancer Center: Patents & Royalties: field of cellular immunotherapy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; EcoR1: Consultancy; Emerging Therapy Solutions: Consultancy; Gerson Lehrman Group: Consultancy; Iovance Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Takeda: Consultancy, Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Wugen: Consultancy, Other; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Umoja: Consultancy, Other; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Calibr: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Cowen: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Legend Biotech: Consultancy, Other; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role. Jacobson: Axis: Speakers Bureau; Nkarta: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Precision Biosciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Lonza: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Humanigen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Clinical Care Options: Speakers Bureau. Ma: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Dong: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Hu: Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Siddiqi: BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Oncternal: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ahmed: Seagen: Research Funding; Tessa Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Ghobadi: Atara: Consultancy; Wugen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Miklos: Pharmacyclics: Patents & Royalties; Kite, a Gilead Company, Amgen, Atara, Wugen, Celgene, Novartis, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Bioscience, Adicet, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Takeda, Adaptive Biotechnologies and Miltenyi Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Roche, Genentech, Becton Dickinson, Isoplexis, Miltenyi, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Biosciences, Adicet, Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies, Novartis, Juno/Celgene-BMS, Kite, a Gilead Company, Pharmacyclics-AbbVie, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, AlloGene, Precision Bioscience, Miltenyi Biotech, Adicet, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lin: Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Legend: Consultancy; Vineti: Consultancy; Sorrento: Consultancy; Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Perales: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria, Other; Miltenyi Biotec: Honoraria, Other; MorphoSys: Honoraria; NexImmune: Honoraria; Sellas Life Sciences: Honoraria; Cidara: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Omeros: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Other; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Other; Incyte: Honoraria, Other; Medigene: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Equilium: Honoraria. Lunning: Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Hill: Gentenech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte/Morphysis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene (BMS): Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Nikiforow: Kite/Gilead: Other: ad HOC Advisory Boards; Novartis: Other: ad Hoc Advisory Boards; Iovance: Other: ad Hoc Advisory Boards; Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK): Other: ad Hoc Advisory Boards. Xu: Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership ; Kite, A Gilead Company: Current Employment. Pasquini: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding.

Background Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of migraine. Methods In the double-blind, phase 3 ADVANCE trial, participants with 4–14 migraine days/month were randomized to atogepant 10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. We evaluated the time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine. Analyses included change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days during each of the three 4-week treatment periods, change in weekly migraine days during weeks 1–4, and proportion of participants with a migraine on each day during the first week. Results We analyzed 873 participants (n = 214 atogepant 10 mg, n = 223 atogepant 30 mg, n = 222 atogepant 60 mg, n = 214 placebo). For weeks 1–4, mean change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.1 to −3.9 across atogepant doses vs −1.6 for placebo ( p < 0.0001). For weeks 5–8 and 9–12, reductions in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.7 to −4.2 for atogepant vs −2.9 for placebo ( p ≤ 0.012) and −4.2 to −4.4 for atogepant vs −3.0 for placebo ( p < 0.0002), respectively. Mean change from baseline in weekly migraine days in week 1 ranged from −0.77 to −1.03 for atogepant vs −0.29 with placebo ( p < 0.0001). Percentages of participants reporting a migraine on post-dose day 1 ranged from 10.8% to 14.1% for atogepant vs 25.2% with placebo ( p ≤ 0.0071). Conclusion Atogepant demonstrated treatment benefits as early as the first full day after treatment initiation, and sustained efficacy across each 4-week interval during the 12-week treatment period. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03777059

Abstract While the average human life span continues to increase, there is little evidence that this is leading to a contemporaneous increase in “healthy years” experienced by our aging population. Consequently, many scientists focus their research on understanding the process of aging and trialing interventions that can promote healthspan. The 2021 Midwest Aging Consortium consensus statement is to develop and further the understanding of aging and age-related disease using the wealth of expertise across universities in the Midwestern United States. This report summarizes the cutting-edge research covered in a virtual symposium held by a consortium of researchers in the Midwestern United States, spanning topics such as senescence biomarkers, serotonin-induced DNA protection, immune system development, multisystem impacts of aging, neural decline following severe infection, the unique transcriptional impact of calorie restriction of different fat depots, the pivotal role of fasting in calorie restriction, the impact of peroxisome dysfunction, and the influence of early life trauma on health. The symposium speakers presented data from studies conducted in a variety of common laboratory animals as well as less-common species, including Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila, mice, rhesus macaques, elephants, and humans. The consensus of the symposium speakers is that this consortium highlights the strength of aging research in the Midwestern United States as well as the benefits of a collaborative and diverse approach to geroscience.

Abstract In the present study, acute onset of severe lupus nephritis was successfully treated in mice using a new, benzamide‐linked, small molecule that targets immune modulation and the NLRP3 inflammasome. Specifically, 6‐(2,4‐difluorophenyl)‐3‐(3‐(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)‐2H‐benzo[e][1,3]oxazine‐2,4(3H)‐dione (Cf‐02) (a) reduced serum levels of IgG anti‐dsDNA, IL‐1β, IL‐6, and TNF‐α, (b) inhibited activation of dendritic cells and differentially regulated T cell functions, and (c) suppressed the NF‐κB/NLRP3 inflammasome axis, targeting priming and activating signals of the inflammasome. Moreover, treatment with Cf‐02 significantly inhibited secretion of IL‐1β in lipopolysaccharide‐stimulated macrophages, but this effect was abolished by autophagy induction. These results recommend Cf‐02 as a promising drug candidate for the serious renal conditions associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. Future investigations should examine whether Cf‐02 may also be therapeutic in other types of chronic kidney disease involving NLRP3 inflammasome‐driven signaling.

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.

Background: Previous studies in the SCN5A- encoded Na channel showed that amino acid substitutions at one position affected function of a Na channel containing a pathogenic mutation elsewhere. The first and most commonly used SCN5A cDNA clone (hH1) is the minor alternatively spliced transcript with an extra glutamine at position 1077 (Q1077), and also differs from the Na channel found in nearly all humans by virtue of a rare amino acid substitution (R1027Q). We hypothesized that R1027Q in previous studies using hH1 may have increased expression levels of the Brugada syndrome (BrS)-associated mutation (R1512W) and the common polymorphism (H558R). Methods: We generated mutations in the alternatively-spliced SCN5A transcript containing Q1077 (as in the hH1 clone) as the wild type (WT) channel to generate channels with the following amino acid substitutions in addition to Q1077ins: H558R, H558R/R1027Q, R1512W, and R1027Q/R1512W. These channels were expressed in HEK-293 cells and current densities measured by whole cell voltage clamp. Results: The current density for H558R was reduced dramatically (−7±2 pA/pF) whereas H558R/R1027Q exhibited normal current density (−297±56 pA/pF) comparable to WT (−310±52 pA/pF). The BrS mutation, R1512W-hH1, was characterized originally as having only subtle inactivation defects but normal current density. However, when we expressed R1512W in the patient’s true WT background (i.e. without R1027Q), the current density was attenuated significantly (−79±19 pA/pF) whereas the double mutant (R1027Q/R1512W) which replicated R1512W-hH1 showed nearly normal density (−180±21 pA/pF, −253±35 pA/pF for hH1, n=10–25 cells). Conclusions: R1027Q, the rare genetic variant present in the hH1 cDNA clone, rescues expression of Na current for channels with H558R and the BrS1-associated mutation, R1512W. Using the hH1 clone which contains R1027Q as background (as is the case for nearly all previous studies of SCN5A mutations) may yield erroneous conclusions regarding the functional impact assigned to putative pathogenic mutations. It may be critical to study mutations in either true WT clones or in the patient’s own genetic background. This research has received full or partial funding support from the American Heart Association, AHA Midwest Affiliate (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota & Wisconsin).

The zebrafish has emerged as an excellent model for cardiovascular research thanks to its ex-utero and rapid embryonic development, its embryonic transparent nature, and its capacity to survive in the absence of a functional cardiovascular system during the first week of development, which enables functional characterization of mutations that would otherwise induce lethality in traditional murine models. The aim of this project is to identify and characterize novel genes involved in zebrafish cardiovascular development using mutagenic gene trapping, a technique that generates random insertional mutations across the genome. We use the well-defined RP2 gene-breaking transposon system, which not only mutates, but also fluorescently tags the trapped gene product(s) (Clark, Nat Methods, 2011). RP2 also introduces loxP sites into the mutant locus, which can be used for Cre-mediated phenotype rescue by microinjection of Cre recombinase, or by crossing to tissue-specific Cre lines. From over 3000 RP2-injected embryos, 141 fish showed germline transmission. Among them, 51 expressed strong fluorescence in different tissues, including the heart, vessels, notochord, central nervous system (CNS), and eyes. Three cardiovascular lines were selected for phenotypic characterization and functional studies. RP2#C2 strain expressed fluorescence in the heart valves, CNS, eyes and pectoral fin buds. Inverse PCR in RP2#C2 demonstrated a trapped gene at meis4.1a, which encodes a homeobox transcription factor that has not been previously studied in zebrafish. RP2#121 strain expressed strong fluorescence in cardiac and skeletal muscles. RP2#91 strain showed expression in the vasculature and demonstrated a trapped gene at pdgfra. Homozygous RP2#91 mutants showed severe defects in the heart, blood flow, and other body parts including the head and musculature. We are currently creating a panel of tissue-specific Cre lines targeting tissues such as cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells for spatiotemporal rescuing of the mutant phenotype. The generated zebrafish protein-trap lines are invaluable tools to annotate gene function, dissect the molecular mechanisms of cardiovascular development, and potentially serve as disease models.

Spinal cord hemisection at C2 (SH) disrupts descending drive to ipsilateral phrenic motoneurons (PMNs) causing unilateral diaphragm muscle (DIAm) paralysis. Previously, we found a decrease in motoneuron size at 2 weeks post‐SH. Recently, we found neuregulin (NRG) in synaptic boutons surrounding PMNs. NRG is a trophic factor known to regulate development of the neuromuscular junction, but the effect of NRG on motoneurons is unknown. We hypothesized that 1) NRG input to PMNs is supraspinal in origin, and 2) SH disrupts NRG input to PMNs. Adult male Sprague‐Dawley rats underwent SH or sham‐surgery. PMNs were retrogradely labeled by intramuscular injection of Alexa488‐conjugated cholera toxin B. Using laser capture microdissection, we found that PMNs express mRNA for the NRG receptors ErbB2 and ErbB3, providing a functional substrate for a NRG effect. Two weeks post‐SH, labeled PMNs and NRG boutons were imaged using confocal microscopy. PMN morphology and the number of NRG boutons in the vicinity of PMNs were determined using a computerized, semi‐automated reconstruction algorithm. NRG boutons were fairly homogeneously distributed on motoneurons independent of size. Following SH, few NRG boutons were observed. We conclude that 1) NRG input to PMNs derives from a supraspinal source; and 2) SH removes NRG input to PMNs. It is possible that NRG input exerts a trophic influence on PMNs. Supported by NIH grants HL37680, AR51173 and Mayo Clinic