Citations

7526 Background: The TRANSFORM primary analysis (PA; NCT03575351) confirmed the superior efficacy of liso-cel vs SOC as 2L therapy in patients (pts) with primary refr or early rel LBCL (Abramson et al. Blood 2022). Response to first-line (1L) therapy (refr vs rel), which was a study randomization stratification factor, may influence future treatment response. Here, we present results for refr and rel LBCL subgroups from the TRANSFORM PA. Methods: TRANSFORM is a randomized phase 3 study of liso-cel vs SOC (salvage chemotherapy [CT] followed by high-dose CT [HDCT]/autologous SCT [ASCT]) in adults ≤ 75 y with LBCL primary refr to or rel ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy and eligible for HDCT/ASCT. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS); key secondary endpoints were CR rate, PFS, and OS. In this predefined subgroup analysis, refr was SD, PD, PR, or CR with rel < 3 mo after 1L therapy; rel was CR with rel ≥ 3 mo and ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy. Results: 92 pts were randomized to each arm. Most pts in the liso-cel and SOC arms had refr disease (73% and 76%, respectively; rel disease, 27% and 24%). Baseline characteristics in the refr and rel subgroups, respectively, were generally balanced: median LDH (U/L; liso-cel, 228.5 and 225; SOC, 259 and 259); median SPD (cm2; liso-cel, 11 and 12; SOC, 15.5 and 18); high-grade B-cell lymphoma (liso-cel, 27% and 16%; SOC, 27% and 9%); diffuse LBCL not otherwise specified (liso-cel, 58% and 56%; SOC, 49% and 73%). Consistent with the overall study population, EFS, CR rate, and PFS favored liso-cel vs SOC in both subgroups (Table). Safety was also consistent. Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurological events (NE) were low in refr (1% and 4%) and rel (0 and 4%) subgroups, respectively, with no grade 4/5 CRS or NEs. Conclusions: In TRANSFORM, liso-cel showed benefits in EFS, PFS, and CR rate vs SOC irrespective of prior response to 1L therapy. As refr LBCL is historically difficult to treat, outcomes for liso-cel in this subgroup are encouraging. Clinical trial information: NCT03575351 . [Table: see text]

TPS3640 Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients (pts) with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated it as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and pt groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation and improve quality of life for pts. Methods: In this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology randomized phase II trial (1:1), up to 312 pts with microsatellite stable LARC, clinical stage T4N0, any T, N+ or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Pts will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course CRT (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (w) + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Pts will undergo assessment 8-12 w post-TNT completion for the primary endpoint of cCR per previously validated criteria and recommended WW and surveillance if cCR is achieved or TME if an incomplete response is noted. Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (disease-free and overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Statistical power, based on cCR, incorporates a one-sided alpha = 0.048 and power = 90% yielding 312 patients (156 per arm). Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, matched / normal blood samples and serial rectal MRI will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and is actively recruiting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 Clinical trial information: NCT05610163 .

Pharmacogenetics can improve clinical outcomes by reducing adverse drug effects and enhancing therapeutic efficacy for commonly used drugs that treat a wide range of cardiovascular diseases. One of the major barriers to the clinical implementation of cardiovascular pharmacogenetics is limited education on this field for current healthcare providers and students. The abundance of pharmacogenetic literature underscores its promise, but it can also be challenging to learn such a wealth of information. Moreover, current clinical recommendations for cardiovascular pharmacogenetics can be confusing because they are outdated, incomplete, or inconsistent. A myriad of misconceptions about the promise and feasibility of cardiovascular pharmacogenetics among healthcare providers also has halted clinical implementation. Therefore, the main goal of this tutorial is to provide introductory education on the use of cardiovascular pharmacogenetics in clinical practice. The target audience is any healthcare provider (or student) with patients that use or have indications for cardiovascular drugs. This tutorial is organized into the following 6 steps: (1) understand basic concepts in pharmacogenetics; (2) gain foundational knowledge of cardiovascular pharmacogenetics; (3) learn the different organizations that release cardiovascular pharmacogenetic guidelines and recommendations; (4) know the current cardiovascular drugs/drug classes to focus on clinically and the supporting evidence; (5) discuss an example patient case of cardiovascular pharmacogenetics; and (6) develop an appreciation for emerging areas in cardiovascular pharmacogenetics. Ultimately, improved education among healthcare providers on cardiovascular pharmacogenetics will lead to a greater understanding for its potential in improving outcomes for a leading cause of morbidity and mortality.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short non-coding RNA sequences with the ability to inhibit the expression of a target mRNA at the post-transcriptional level, acting as modulators of both the degenerative and regenerative processes. Therefore, these molecules constitute a potential source of novel therapeutic tools. In this study, we investigated the miRNA expression profile that presented in enthesis tissue upon injury. For this, a rodent enthesis injury model was developed by creating a defect at a rat’s patellar enthesis. Following injury, explants were collected on days 1 (n = 10) and 10 (n = 10). Contra lateral samples (n = 10) were harvested to be used for normalization. The expression of miRNAs was investigated using a “Fibrosis” pathway-focused miScript qPCR array. Later, target prediction for the aberrantly expressed miRNAs was performed by means of the Ingenuity Pathway Analysis, and the expression of mRNA targets relevant for enthesis healing was confirmed using qPCRs. Additionally, the protein expression levels of collagens I, II, III, and X were investigated using Western blotting. The mRNA expression pattern of EGR1, COL2A1, RUNX2, SMAD1, and SMAD3 in the injured samples indicated their possible regulation by their respective targeting miRNA, which included miR-16, -17, -100, -124, -133a, -155 and -182. Furthermore, the protein levels of collagens I and II were reduced directly after the injury (i.e., day 1) and increased 10 days post-injury, while collagens III and X showed the opposite pattern of expression.

AbstractIntroductionRemote smartphone assessments of cognition, speech/language, and motor functioning in frontotemporal dementia (FTD) could enable decentralized clinical trials and improve access to research. We studied the feasibility and acceptability of remote smartphone data collection in FTD research using the ALLFTD Mobile App (ALLFTD‐mApp).MethodsA diagnostically mixed sample of 214 participants with FTD or from familial FTD kindreds (asymptomatic: CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0 [N = 101]; prodromal: 0.5 [N = 49]; symptomatic ≥1 [N = 51]; not measured [N = 13]) were asked to complete ALLFTD‐mApp tests on their smartphone three times within 12 days. They completed smartphone familiarity and participation experience surveys.ResultsIt was feasible for participants to complete the ALLFTD‐mApp on their own smartphones. Participants reported high smartphone familiarity, completed ∼ 70% of tasks, and considered the time commitment acceptable (98% of respondents). Greater disease severity was associated with poorer performance across several tests.DiscussionThese findings suggest that the ALLFTD‐mApp study protocol is feasible and acceptable for remote FTD research.HIGHLIGHTS The ALLFTD Mobile App is a smartphone‐based platform for remote, self‐administered data collection. The ALLFTD Mobile App consists of a comprehensive battery of surveys and tests of executive functioning, memory, speech and language, and motor abilities. Remote digital data collection using the ALLFTD Mobile App was feasible in a multicenter research consortium that studies FTD. Data was collected in healthy controls and participants with a range of diagnoses, particularly FTD spectrum disorders. Remote digital data collection was well accepted by participants with a variety of diagnoses.

ImportanceEvidence on the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 therapies across a diverse population with varied risk factors is needed to inform clinical practice.ObjectiveTo assess the safety of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nMAbs) for the treatment of COVID-19 and their association with adverse outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study included 167 183 patients from a consortium of 4 health care systems based in California, Minnesota, Texas, and Utah. The study included nonhospitalized patients 12 years and older with a positive COVID-19 laboratory test collected between November 9, 2020, and January 31, 2022, who met at least 1 emergency use authorization criterion for risk of a poor outcome.ExposureFour nMAb products (bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab) administered in the outpatient setting.Main Outcomes and MeasuresClinical and SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequence data and propensity-adjusted marginal structural models were used to assess the association between treatment with nMAbs and 4 outcomes: all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, death, and a composite of hospitalization or death within 14 days and 30 days of the index date (defined as the date of the first positive COVID-19 test or the date of referral). Patient index dates were categorized into 4 variant epochs: pre-Delta (November 9, 2020, to June 30, 2021), Delta (July 1 to November 30, 2021), Delta and Omicron BA.1 (December 1 to 31, 2021), and Omicron BA.1 (January 1 to 31, 2022).ResultsAmong 167 183 patients, the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (18.5) years; 95 669 patients (57.2%) were female at birth, 139 379 (83.4%) were White, and 138 900 (83.1%) were non-Hispanic. A total of 25 241 patients received treatment with nMAbs. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with lower odds of ED visits within 14 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.85), hospitalization within 14 days (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.45-0.59), and death within 30 days (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.20). The association between nMAbs and reduced risk of hospitalization was stronger in unvaccinated patients (14-day hospitalization: OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.59), and the associations with hospitalization and death were stronger in immunocompromised patients (hospitalization within 14 days: OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.24-0.41]; death within 30 days: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.06-0.27]). The strength of associations of nMAbs increased incrementally among patients with a greater probability of poor outcomes; for example, the ORs for hospitalization within 14 days were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.72) among those in the third (moderate) risk stratum and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.32-0.53) among those in the fifth (highest) risk stratum. The association of nMAb treatment with reduced risk of hospitalizations within 14 days was strongest during the Delta variant epoch (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.31-0.43) but not during the Omicron BA.1 epoch (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.68-2.47). These findings were corroborated in the subset of patients with viral genomic data. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with a significant mortality benefit in all variant epochs (pre-Delta: OR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.08-0.33]; Delta: OR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.09-0.22]; Delta and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03-0.35]; and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.02-0.93]). Potential adverse drug events were identified in 38 treated patients (0.2%).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, nMAb treatment for COVID-19 was safe and associated with reductions in ED visits, hospitalization, and death, although it was not associated with reduced risk of hospitalization during the Omicron BA.1 epoch. These findings suggest that targeted risk stratification strategies may help optimize future nMAb treatment decisions.

Abstract Objectives Disease flares in the post–coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). Methods The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with &gt;7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models. Results Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7–235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P &lt; 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. Conclusion A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post–COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient- and physician-reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.

ImportancePlasma phosphorylated tau217 (p-tau217), a biomarker of Alzheimer disease (AD), is of special interest in corticobasal syndrome (CBS) because autopsy studies have revealed AD is the driving neuropathology in up to 40% of cases. This differentiates CBS from other 4-repeat tauopathy (4RT)–associated syndromes, such as progressive supranuclear palsy Richardson syndrome (PSP-RS) and nonfluent primary progressive aphasia (nfvPPA), where underlying frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is typically the primary neuropathology.ObjectiveTo validate plasma p-tau217 against positron emission tomography (PET) in 4RT-associated syndromes, especially CBS.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis multicohort study with 6, 12, and 24-month follow-up recruited adult participants between January 2011 and September 2020 from 8 tertiary care centers in the 4RT Neuroimaging Initiative (4RTNI). All participants with CBS (n = 113), PSP-RS (n = 121), and nfvPPA (n = 39) were included; other diagnoses were excluded due to rarity (n = 29). Individuals with PET-confirmed AD (n = 54) and PET-negative cognitively normal control individuals (n = 59) were evaluated at University of California San Francisco. Operators were blinded to the cohort.Main Outcome and MeasuresPlasma p-tau217, measured by Meso Scale Discovery electrochemiluminescence, was validated against amyloid-β (Aβ) and flortaucipir (FTP) PET. Imaging analyses used voxel-based morphometry and bayesian linear mixed-effects modeling. Clinical biomarker associations were evaluated using longitudinal mixed-effect modeling.ResultsOf 386 participants, 199 (52%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 68 (8) years. Plasma p-tau217 was elevated in patients with CBS with positive Aβ PET results (mean [SD], 0.57 [0.43] pg/mL) or FTP PET (mean [SD], 0.75 [0.30] pg/mL) to concentrations comparable to control individuals with AD (mean [SD], 0.72 [0.37]), whereas PSP-RS and nfvPPA showed no increase relative to control. Within CBS, p-tau217 had excellent diagnostic performance with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for Aβ PET of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76-0.98; P &amp;lt; .001) and FTP PET of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.83-1.00; P &amp;lt; .001). At baseline, individuals with CBS-AD (n = 12), defined by a PET-validated plasma p-tau217 cutoff 0.25 pg/mL or greater, had increased temporoparietal atrophy at baseline compared to individuals with CBS-FTLD (n = 39), whereas longitudinally, individuals with CBS-FTLD had faster brainstem atrophy rates. Individuals with CBS-FTLD also progressed more rapidly on a modified version of the PSP Rating Scale than those with CBS-AD (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.5] vs 0.8 [0.8] points/year; P = .005).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, plasma p-tau217 had excellent diagnostic performance for identifying Aβ or FTP PET positivity within CBS with likely underlying AD pathology. Plasma P-tau217 may be a useful and inexpensive biomarker to select patients for CBS clinical trials.

Abstract Objective Flares of autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are a particular concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs, using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. Methods The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. Results Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a–d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P &lt; 0.001) and autoimmune disease multimorbidity (AIDm) (P &lt; 0.001). In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7; P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective. A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Flares occur in nearly 1 in 10 individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination; people with comorbidities (especially AIDm), MHDs and those receiving the Moderna vaccine are particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.