Citations

Abstract Since its introduction in 2002, left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has rapidly expanded as an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of stroke. Harmonized processes for data collection, analysis, and reporting in LAAC trials are essential to enhance research quality and improve clinical practice. The Left Atrial Appendage Academic Research Consortium (LAARC) initiative is an independent collaboration of academic research organizations, cardiology and neurology experts, clinical trialists, and regulatory authorities from the USA, Europe, and Asia. The consortium engaged clinical experts, regulators—including the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Notified Bodies, and Japan’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA)—and industry leaders to define standardized study elements and endpoints for LAAC trials. Key considerations included alignment with prior Academic Research Consortium initiatives, procedural and mechanistic insights, and clinical relevance. Consensus definitions were proposed for mortality, stroke, bleeding, and device performance, along with composite endpoints for safety and effectiveness. The proposed LAARC consensus definitions aim to standardize endpoint reporting, improve comparability across studies, and support regulatory and clinical trial applications for this evolving therapy through broad dissemination in the peer-reviewed literature.

Abstract Unvetted scientific claims about vaccines can spread rapidly and undermine decades of progress in immunization and public trust. A recent non-peer-reviewed analysis, promoted at political hearings, in the documentary “An Inconvenient Study,” and on social media, has been used to suggest that vaccinated children experience higher rates of chronic illness than unvaccinated peers. Despite standard regression models, critical flaws - uncontrolled confounding, exposure misclassification, unequal follow-up, and outcome multiplicity, invalidate causal inference. An independent group of international experts critically appraises this analysis and contrast its claims with the consistent evidence confirming vaccine safety and effectiveness. We also show how poorly designed studies can distort public discourse, amplify misinformation, and fuel vaccine hesitancy. We outline actions to strengthen research integrity, such as transparent data sharing, labeling of non-peer-reviewed content, and evidence-based communication. Safeguarding public health demands that vaccine evidence be methodologically sound, reviewed, and interpreted by qualified experts.

Patients with plasma cell leukemia (PCL) are generally excluded from pivotal T-cell redirecting bispecific antibody (BsAb) trials. We evaluated real-world outcomes in a multicenter retrospective study of 122 patients with primary or secondary PCL across 15 academic centers, categorized as 'active' (≥5% circulating plasma cells within 30 days of BsAb initiation) or 'historical'. In a heavily pretreated population, patients received teclistamab (37%), elranatamab (11%), talquetamab as a line of therapy (Tal LOT, 42%), or talquetamab as bridging therapy to CAR-T (Tal Bridge, 11%). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was grade 1-2 in 56% and grade 3-4 in 4%, whereas neurotoxicity was grade 1-2 in 16% and grade 3-4 in 5%. Among 110 evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 55%, including 61% with Tal LOT, 58% with Tal Bridge, 46% with elranatamab, and 33% with teclistamab. With a median follow-up of 8.3 months, talquetamab demonstrated superior survival. Tal LOT showed a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 5.5 months and a median overall survival (mOS) of 11.5 months, and both were unreached in the Tal Bridge cohort. In contrast, teclistamab and elranatamab showed a mPFS of 1.2 and 1.6 months and mOS of 8.1 and 3.6 months, respectively (P=0.007, P=0.023). In active PCL, Tal LOT achieved mPFS/mOS of 6.9/12.2 months versus 0.7/1.4 months with teclistamab and 1.0/3.1 months with elranatamab, respectively (P<0.001, P=0.002). Multivariable analysis associated active PCL with worse survival and Tal LOT with improved outcomes. BsAbs were safe in PCL, with talquetamab showing superior outcomes compared with BCMA-directed BsAbs.

The adult chronic pancreatitis (CP) working group, formed at the inception of the Consortium for the Study of Chronic Pancreatitis, Diabetes, and Pancreatic Cancer (CPDPC), has developed a robust framework and infrastructure to conduct clinical, translational, and mechanistic studies of CP. At its core is PRO spective Evaluation of C hronic Pancreatitis for E pid E miologic and Translational Stu D ies (PROCEED), the first longitudinal cohort study of CP in US adults, launched in 2017. PROCEED has developed a well-annotated clinical data set of over 2000 deeply-phenotyped participants, a biorepository and an imaging repository. Investigators have published promising data on blood-based and imaging-based biomarkers of CP diagnosis and pain, which are awaiting validation. Clinical observations include classification of patients into mechanism-based pain phenotypes using responses to PROMIS questionnaires, prevalence and predictors of opioid use, prevalence of psychological comorbidity, and osteopathy in CP patients. Pilot clinical trials have evaluated the effect of oral indomethacin on pancreatic fluid prostaglandin E2 levels and Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic pain. Results of pilot trials have led to an ongoing definitive randomized clinical trial for CBT. The rich environment and resources have facilitated mentorship and academic development of many early-stage investigators. Investigators outside of the consortium have opportunities for collaboration. In the next 5 years, the working group plans to further strengthen the research platform, complete primary and key secondary analyses of PROCEED and ancillary studies, continue efforts to develop biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of CP, and complete ongoing clinical trials to address unanswered questions in the field.

Abstract Patients with atypical variants of Alzheimer's disease (AD) often present at a younger age with predominantly non‐amnestic impairments and a more aggressive disease course. Historically, individuals with atypical presentations have not been included in large‐scale clinical trials, which typically focus on late‐onset, sporadic amnestic‐predominant AD. Consequently, treatment options and research efforts specific to atypical AD remain limited. The emergence of amyloid‐targeting therapies that slow disease progression underscores these challenges, as evidence supporting their efficacy in early‐onset amnestic and non‐amnestic AD variants is scarce. This perspective article argues that atypical AD represents an excellent disease model for clinical trials and proposes strategies to address critical gaps in clinical trial design for this population. Key considerations include optimizing participant selection approaches, establishing syndrome‐specific or surrogate biological and clinical endpoints, and fostering advocacy to enhance early and accurate diagnosis, equitable representation, and outcomes for these populations.

Abstract Objective This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of responsive thalamic stimulation as adjunctive therapy for drug‐resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) with generalized tonic–clonic seizures (GTCSs). Methods NAUTILUS is a prospective, multicenter, single‐blind, randomized sham‐controlled pivotal trial. Patients were ≥12 years of age with drug‐resistant IGE and ≥2 GTCSs over a 3‐month baseline. Bilateral depth leads were targeted to the centromedian thalamus. One month later, patients were randomized to Active (responsive stimulation, n = 44) or Sham (no stimulation, n = 43). The effectiveness evaluation period (EEP) began 3 months postimplant through 1 year. After a second GTCS in the EEP, patients transitioned to open‐label active stimulation. The primary safety endpoint was the serious adverse device‐related event (SADE) rate at 84 days postimplant. The primary effectiveness endpoint was time‐to‐second‐GTCS during the EEP. Additional endpoints included median percent change in days with any generalized seizure, GTCS frequency, and responder rate (RR). Results Eighty‐seven patients were implanted across 23 US centers. The SADE rate was significantly below the performance goal (6.9%, p < .0001), with no adverse effects on cognition, mood, or sleep. The prespecified primary effectiveness endpoint was not significant. However, a post hoc mixed‐effects model considering all EEP days demonstrated greater GTCS reduction in the originally randomized Active group (61%) compared to patients originally randomized to Sham (49%, p = .030). Eighteen‐month outcomes included 76.8% median GTCS reduction, 62.5% RR, 40% GTCS‐free at that timepoint, and 77.8% median reduction in days with any generalized seizure. More than 90% of patients and 86% of physicians reported improvement on Global Impression of Change scales. Significance NAUTILUS is the first randomized controlled neuromodulation trial in IGE. Responsive thalamic stimulation provided a clinically meaningful and durable reduction in seizures with an acceptable safety profile, offering a much‐needed option for drug‐resistant IGE.