Citations

Key points Staphylococcus aureus showed a significant increase in relative abundance in CRSwNP patients following endoscopic sinus surgery compared to pre‐surgery samples. Other Staphylococcus species were found to correlate positively with S. aureus in patients with nasal polyps; among those, S. caprae correlated strongly while being the most represented in samples. Patients with recurrent nasal polyp growth exhibited a substantially greater postoperative increase in the relative abundance of S. aureus .

Abstract INTRODUCTION New methods estimate amyloid positivity onset age (EAOA) from amyloid positron emission tomography (PET). We explore the genetics of EAOA to identify molecular factors underlying the earliest Alzheimer's disease (AD) changes. METHODS Harmonized amyloid PET data from 4216 participants were used in genome‐wide survival, tissue‐specific gene expression, and genetic covariance analyses of EAOA. RESULTS Variants in apolipoprotein E ( APOE ), ABCA7 , and RASGEF1C associated with earlier EAOA. APOE ε4/ε4 and ε3/ε4 converted 6.3 and 5 years earlier than ε3/ε3, respectively. ε2 was protective against earlier EAOA. rs4147929, an expression quantitative trait locus for ABCA7 , associated with a 4 year earlier EAOA. This variant was associated with lower brain expression of ABCA7 , which was associated with increased amyloid pathology at autopsy. Multiple immune‐related diseases shared genetic covariance with EAOA. DISCUSSION APOE , ABCA7 , and RASGEF1C associated with earlier EAOA, with supporting evidence from tissue‐specific expression analyses, offering insights into intervenable targets at early stages of AD. Highlights Novel methods estimate how long ago a patient converted to amyloid positivity. Estimating this amyloid clock allows us to determine the onset of the earliest Alzheimer's disease changes. We evaluated what genes influence when someone converts to amyloid positivity. Apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) , ABCA7 , and RASGEF1C associated with earlier age of amyloid positivity. Genetic results were supported by tissue‐specific expression analyses.

Abstract Objectives The aim of this work was to develop an American Headache Society position statement addressing diagnostic screening for migraine among girls and women. Background Despite its high prevalence and substantial negative impacts, migraine is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Diagnostic screening for migraine enables more patients to receive timely, appropriate, and effective management. Methods Development of this position statement followed the rules established by the American Headache Society Guidelines Committee. The published literature was reviewed to determine if migraine meets criteria for when disease screening is justified, to guide recommendations for screening tools, and to determine subpopulation(s) for which migraine screening is indicated. After author consensus was reached, the position statement was reviewed and approved by the American Headache Society Board of Directors. Results Migraine fulfills established criteria for conditions in which screening is appropriate since it is highly prevalent, results in significant morbidity, and exerts substantial economic and social costs. Migraine incidence and prevalence are exceptionally high among girls and women during adolescence and through menopause. Furthermore, there are valid and reliable diagnostic screening methods (e.g., ID Migraine) and effective treatments that reduce migraine symptoms and disease impact. Conclusion Yearly diagnostic screening for migraine should be included as part of women's preventive healthcare services, particularly from adolescence to menopause.

ABSTRACT Stroke remains one of the most devastating complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Although cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPDs) have emerged to mitigate patients' risks, their impact on stroke risk, as well as other clinical and neurocognitive outcomes after TAVI, remains uncertain. We aimed to assess whether CEPDs alleviate stroke risks and neurocognitive outcomes after TAVI. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and the Cochrane CENTRAL from inception until May 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness of CEPD compared to the control group (no CEPD) in adult patients (> 18 years) undergoing TAVI. The primary endpoint was the incidence of all‐cause stroke. In contrast, the secondary endpoints included disabling stroke, systemic bleeding, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Additionally, we assessed neurological outcomes, including changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, and the presence of new ischemic lesions. Nine RCTs comprising 11,696 patients were included in the final analysis. The use of CEPDs showed no statistical difference in reducing all‐cause stroke compared to the control group (OR = 0.91, 95% CI [0.73–1.15], p = 0.44). Additionally, there was no significant difference in other studies' secondary outcomes, including disabling stroke, MACCE, systemic bleeding, or neurological outcomes, such as worsening NISSS, decline in MoCA score, and the presence of new ischemic lesions. The use of CEPD during TAVI showed no benefit in reducing the risks of all‐cause stroke and other neurological outcomes studied.

Abstract Background The increasing reliance on accelerated approvals and surrogate endpoints for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer therapies raises concerns about their clinical benefit and long-term patient outcomes. The shift toward single-arm trials in regulatory decisions further complicates treatment evaluation. Material and Methods This retrospective observational study evaluated all FDA approvals for GI cancer therapies from January 2006 through January 2025. Data were extracted from FDA archives, ClinicalTrials.gov, and PubMed. Approvals were categorized by regulatory pathway (accelerated vs regular), trial design (single-arm vs randomized), and primary endpoint (surrogate vs overall survival [OS]). Clinical benefit was assessed based on OS improvement and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The primary outcome was the proportion of approvals based on surrogate versus OS endpoints. Secondary outcomes included use of single-arm designs, frequency of accelerated approvals, OS gain, and the proportion meeting ESMO-MCBS substantial benefit (score ≥ 4). Results The FDA granted 60 GI cancer drug approvals from 67 trials. Approvals rose from 15 (25%) in 2006-2014 to 45 (75%) in 2015-2025. Single-arm trials increased to 24%, and surrogate endpoints were used in 41.8% (ORR 20.9%, PFS 19.4%). Median OS improvement was 2.1 months (IQR: 1.6-2.65). Only 24.3% of trials met ESMO-MCBS substantial benefit. Of 15 accelerated approvals, 66.7% remained pending, 13.3% received full approval, and 20% were withdrawn. Conclusion Expedited approvals have improved drug access in GI oncology, but modest benefits highlight the need to balance speed with outcomes that truly matter to patients.

Abstract Background: Eltrombopag and romiplostim are thrombopoietin receptor agonists approved for treating thrombocytopenia in various conditions. Post-marketing surveillance data provide valuable insights into their real-world safety profiles. Objective: To analyze adverse event reports for eltrombopag and romiplostim from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to characterize their safety profiles and identify potential safety signals. Methods: We analyzed FAERS reports for eltrombopag and romiplostim from 2015 to 2024. Reports were classified by System Organ Class (SOC), seriousness criteria, patient demographics, time to onset, and clinical outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize adverse event patterns. Results: A total of 3500 adverse event reports were identified (eltrombopag: n=2262; romiplostim: n=1238). Mean patient age was 57.5 years for eltrombopag and 58.5 years for romiplostim, with female predominance (57.6% and 56.4%, respectively). For eltrombopag, the most frequently reported adverse events were hepatic disorders, with 29.8% of reports involving hepatobiliary events. The top adverse events included ALT increased (n=124), bilirubin increased (n=120), jaundice (n=117), AST increased (n=109), and hepatic failure (n=107). Thrombotic events occurred in 20.5% of eltrombopag reports. The serious adverse event rate was 51.3%, with a mortality rate of 3.3%. For romiplostim, injection site reactions were the most common adverse events, occurring in 18.3% of reports. The most frequently reported events were injection site reaction (n=80), injection site erythema (n=76), and injection site pain (n=71). Thrombotic events occurred in 23.3% of romiplostim reports. The serious adverse event rate was 48.6%, with a mortality rate of 2.7%. The median time to onset was similar for both drugs (eltrombopag: 74 days; romiplostim: 73 days), with most events occurring within 90 days of treatment initiation. Geographic distribution showed predominant reporting from the United States, followed by Japan and European countries. Conclusions: This FAERS analysis confirms known safety profiles of both thrombopoietin receptor agonists. Eltrombopag demonstrates a clear hepatic safety signal requiring regular liver function monitoring, while romiplostim shows expected injection site reactions. Both drugs exhibit similar rates of thrombotic complications. These findings support current prescribing guidelines emphasizing the need for appropriate patient monitoring and risk-benefit assessment in clinical practice. Keywords: eltrombopag, romiplostim, thrombopoietin receptor agonists, FAERS, pharmacovigilance, thrombocytopenia, adverse drug reactions

Abstract Introduction: Pirtobrutinib, a highly selective non-covalent BTK inhibitor, demonstrated encouraging efficacy in Richter transformation (RT) of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the BRUIN trial (Wierda et al, Lancet Haematology, 2024). However, a control arm was not included in this phase 1/2 trial, and how pirtobrutinib compares to usual care is unknown. To address this gap of knowledge, we sought to compare efficacy outcomes in BRUIN to that in a control cohort consisting of RT patients treated with usual care at Mayo Clinic. Methods: The study was approved by the Mayo Clinic IRB. Patient-level data from BRUIN (n=79; investigator-assessed) were obtained from the study sponsor. Patients with histologically confirmed RT (large B-cell lymphoma) who received at least one line of therapy (n=230) were identified from the Mayo Clinic CLL Database. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to calculate propensity scores for baseline covariates (ie, age at RT treatment line, number of prior lines of CLL treatment [truncated at 3], number of prior lines of RT treatment [truncated at 3], and LDH). For each Mayo patient, propensity scores for each line of RT therapy were calculated, and the line with the highest propensity score was chosen as the index RT treatment line. Using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) methodology, individual weights were computed, and standardized mean differences (SMDs) were examined for each of the unadjusted and weighted baseline covariates to ensure that balance was obtained between BRUIN cases and Mayo controls. Overall survival (OS; the primary endpoint) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using unweighted and weighted Cox proportional hazards models. Unweighted and weighted overall response rates (ORRs) and complete response (CR) rates were analyzed using logistic regression. Results: The final analysis dataset contained 79 BRUIN cases (median age 67 [range 26-95], 66% male) and 204 Mayo controls (median age 69 [range 30-89], 74% male). The BRUIN cohort had more patients with ECOG PS ≥1 (61% vs 40%, p=0.001) and elevated LDH (81% vs 63%, p=0.003) than the Mayo cohort. The proportion of patients with TP53 aberration was not statistically different in both cohorts (57% vs. 44%, p=0.15). The index line of RT treatment in the Mayo cohort included chemoimmunotherapy (n=167, 80%) and novel agent-based therapy (eg, cBTKi, venetoclax, PI3Ki, immune checkpoint inhibitor, etc; n=42, 20%). Median lines of prior CLL therapy were 2 (IQR 1-4) vs 1 (IQR 0-3) in the BRUIN and Mayo cohorts, respectively; median lines of prior RT therapy were 2 (IQR 1-2) vs 0 (IQR 0-2). The SMDs of the weighted baseline factors met pre-determined criteria (-0.25≤SMD≤0.25), indicating that balance between the two cohorts was achieved. The median follow-up was 18.3 months (range 0.7-32.9) in the BRUIN cohort and 122.8 months (range 0-280.2) in the Mayo cohort. The unweighted median OS was 12.5 months (95% CI 7.0-20.6) in the BRUIN cohort and 5.7 months (95% CI 3.9-10.7) in the Mayo cohort. The unweighted HR was 0.76 (95% CI 0.54-1.07, p=0.12). After IPTW, the weighted HR was 0.63 (95% CI 0.50-0.78, p<0.001), significantly favoring the BRUIN cohort. The unweighted median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI 2.8-5.1) in the BRUIN cohort and 3.1 months (95% CI 2.5-4.3) in the Mayo cohort. The unweighted HR was 0.98 (95%CI 0.72-1.34, p=0.92). After IPTW, the weighted HR was 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.95, p=0.01), again favoring the BRUIN cohort. Response was evaluable/available in 69 patients in BRUIN and 182 patients in Mayo cohort. The unweighted ORR was 58% vs 53% in BRUIN and Mayo cohorts, respectively (OR=0.83, 95% CI 0.47-1.45, p=0.51), and the CR rate was 16% vs 36% (OR=2.94, 95% CI 1.43-5.88, p=0.003). After IPTW, the weighted OR was 0.65 (95% CI 0.45-0.93, p=0.02) for ORR, favoring the BRUIN cohort, and 1.89 (95%CI 1.23-2.86, p=0.02) for CR rate, favoring the Mayo cohort. Conclusions: This individual patient-level IPTW-based analysis demonstrated that single agent pirtobrutinib is associated with improved OS, PFS, and ORR compared to usual care in patients with RT. These results support the choice of pirtobrutinib over traditional therapies for RT. Although these results are encouraging, the durability of response to pirtobrutinib remains suboptimal. Ongoing trials and other future research will evaluate the efficacy of pirtobrutinib in combination with other treatments in this setting.

Abstract Introduction: The Duffy null variant (genotype or phenotype) is associated with lower circulating absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) without increased risk for infection. It is found in ~66% of people identifying as Black or African American vs <1% of people of Asian or European ancestry. Many ANC reference intervals (RI) are not representative of the Duffy null population. There are no adult Duffy null WBC RI and no pediatric Duffy null ANC or WBC RI. Thus, we aimed to assess Duffy null ANC and WBC distributions as well as develop WBC and ANC RI for adults and pediatrics. Methods: Twenty-three sites across the United States collected samples with all sites excluding participants with conditions or medications that could impact ANC or WBC. Only Duffy null participants were included. Sex, race, ethnicity, age, sample collection type, practice setting, Duffy testing method, ANC, and WBC were recorded. The non-parametric method for determining lower limit of normal (LLN), upper limit of normal (ULN), and 90% confidence intervals (CI) around the limits was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Specific ULN and LLN are not reported as these are preliminary data. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare sex and prior data; differences by age groups were assessed with Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 316 participants 18+ years-old (y/o) were assessed of whom 62.3% (n=197) are female, 97.5% (n=308) identified as Black or African American, and 94.9% (n=300) identified as non-Hispanic. Median age was 47 y/o (IQR: 32-60.5). Median ANC was 2600/uL (IQR: 1860-3530; range: 400-7400); 28.6% (n=90) of participants had ANC <2000/uL, 13.6% (n=43) had ANC <1500/uL, and 2.5% (n=8) had <1000/uL. The 90% CI around the LLN was 810-1070/uL and 5570-7130/uL around the ULN. Consistent with prior data, there was a difference in median ANC by sex (male: 2400/uL; female: 2710/uL; p=0.02). There was no significant difference between this ANC data and previously published Duffy null ANC data (p=0.28). Median WBC was 5.4x109/L (IQR: 4.4-6.5; range: 2.10-11.64) with 4.1% (n=13) of participants with WBC <3.0x109/L. The 90% CI around the LLN is 3.68-4.30x109/L and 11.02-12.97x109/L around the ULN. 515 participants between 0-17 y/o were assessed with 51.8% (n=267) females, 94.8% (n=488) identified as Black or African American, and 94.0% (n=484) identified as non-Hispanic. Among pediatric participants, 56.8% (n=291) had ANC <2000/uL, 38.7% (n=198) had ANC <1500/uL, and 14.4% (n=74) had ANC <1000/uL. For those <1 y/o (n=29), median ANC was 950/uL (IQR: 840-1360; range: 111-3910). There are currently too few samples to predict ULN and LLN. Median WBC was 8.85x109/L (IQR: 7.03-10.16; range: 4.17-13.53). For those 1-5 y/o (n=143), median ANC was 1735/uL (IQR: 1100-2550; range: 207-5810) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 207-820/uL and 4020-5810/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 6.72x109/L (IQR: 5.64-8.25; range: 3.68-12.97). For those 6-11 y/o (n=128), median ANC was 1590/uL (IQR: 1090-2470; range: 420-5490) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 420-910/uL and 4340-5490/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 5.42x109/L (IQR: 4.45-6.70; range: 2.80-10.50). For those 12-17 y/o (n=215), median ANC was 2190/uL (IQR: 1460-2930; range: 204-5850) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 540-930/uL and 4350-5510/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 5.06x109/L (IQR: 4.26-6.20; range of 2.04-9.91). There is a significant difference in ANC by age category (p<0.0001). Conclusion: This is the first report of healthy pediatric Duffy null ANC and WBC data and the first large-scale verification of adult Duffy null ANC and WBC data. Final RI are expected in September 2025. Among adults with the Duffy null phenotype, ANC LLN are likely between 810-1070/uL. Pediatric ANC LLN are likely as low as 207-820/uL (1-5 y/o), 420-910/uL (6-11 y/o), and 540-930/uL (12-17 y/o). These findings redefine “normal” as a significant proportion of healthy participants have ANC or WBC below current RI or below thresholds typically defined as disease. Limitations include heterogeneous sample populations and collection methods. Future analyses will assess differences between collection sites or methods. Ultimately, this work lays the foundation for a more scientifically sound and equitable approach to medical care by ensuring that RI accurately reflects health for the entire community. Healthcare systems are strongly encouraged to adopt Duffy null-specific ANC and WBC RI.