Citations

Abstract Background Young age is a known risk factor for breast cancer recurrence and mortality, particularly in hormone receptor-positive disease. However, no specific evidence exists on whether age at diagnosis influences clinical behavior and outcomes among carriers of germline BRCA pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs). Methods The BRCA BCY Collaboration (NCT03673306) is an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study including women with germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 PVs and diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer at the age of 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020. The present analysis aimed to evaluate clinical features and outcomes of breast cancer in young BRCA carriers according to age at diagnosis, by comparing patients aged ≤30 years with those aged 31-35 and 36-40 years at breast cancer diagnosis. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), adjusting for risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) (time-dependent), and stratifying by country, year of diagnosis, tumor size, nodal involvement, tumor grade and hormone receptor status. Results From 109 centers in 5 continents, 5350 young BRCA carriers were included, of whom 1106 (20.7%) were ≤30 years of age, 1945 (36.4%) were 31-35 years and 2299 (43.0%) were 36-40 years at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. Compared to patients aged 31-35 and 36-40 years, those aged ≤30 years were more likely to harbor BRCA1 PVs (71.3%, 62.4%, 61.1%, respectively), to present with high-grade (G3 in 71.3%, 66.6%, 65.0%, respectively), triple-negative breast cancer (56.3%, 48.1%, 46.6%, respectively), and less frequently smaller tumor size (T1: 31.7%, 36.6% and 39.5%, respectively). Consequently, chemotherapy was administered more frequently among patients aged ≤30 years (94.4%, 92.6%, 89.7%, respectively). At a median follow-up of 8.2 years (IQR, 4.7-12.8), 8-year DFS rate was 65.0% among patients aged ≤30 years, 64.7% in the 31-35 years group, and 65.8% in the 36-40 years group. No significant association between age at diagnosis and DFS outcome was observed (31-35 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.03, 95% CI 0.89-1.19; 36-40 vs. ≤30 years aHR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.16). Similarly, no significant association between age at diagnosis and OS was observed (31-35 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86-1.41; 36-40 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.11, 95% CI 0.87-1.43). Subgroup analyses by specific BRCA gene, tumor subtype, tumor size, nodal status, and chemotherapy use revealed no statistically significant interaction with age at diagnosis in terms of DFS or OS (all p for interaction > 0.05). Specifically, no significant differences between age groups were observed among patients with luminal-like tumors for both DFS and OS. Conclusions In this unique international cohort of BRCA carriers diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age (≤40 years), we found no significant differences in DFS nor OS across different age groups. Notably, very young age (≤30 years) at diagnosis was not associated with worse outcomes compared to 31-35 years or 36-40 years. Age per se should not be considered a negative prognostic factor in BRCA carriers when appropriate treatment is provided. Citation Format: E. Blondeaux, A. Meacci, M. Fragío Gil, E. Klocker, F. Coussy, H. Kim, R. Bernstein Molho, F. Hilbers, A. Di Meglio, A. Kwong, K. Pogoda, J. Bajpai, H. Wildiers, E. Agostinetto, J. Balmana, H. C. Moore, K. Phillips, A. H. Partridge, C. Rousset-Jablonski, F. A. Peccatori, A. Toss, T. Renaud, C. Anghelone, A. Benitez Cruz, S. Paluch-Shimon, J. Lee, R. Fruscio, W. Cui, S. M. Wong, M. Lee, M. Rozenblit, C. Vernieri, C. Villarreal-Garza, A. Matikas, M. Dieci, L. De Marchis, J. K. Plichta, K. J. Ruddy, D. Can Guven, F. Puglisi, Z. Kemp, P. A. Meireles, L. Del Mastro, V. Delucchi, M. Lambertini. Association between age at diagnosis and survival among young BRCA carriers with breast cancer: results from an international multicenter hospital-based cohort study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-07.

Abstract Exercise training improves cardiovascular health and reduces the risk for future cardiovascular events and mortality. However, emerging evidence suggests that Masters athletes may have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular abnormalities, such as atrial arrhythmias, coronary atherosclerosis, aortic dilatation, and myocardial fibrosis, compared to their less active peers. The clinical management of Masters athletes may be challenging as available guidelines for such conditions are generally based on data derived from symptomatic sedentary patients, limiting their applicability to highly trained individuals. Other unique challenges in the clinical assessment of Masters athletes include differences in symptomatic presentations compared to sedentary individuals, potential resistance to the initiation of pharmacologic treatment, and the increasing availability of consumer wearable health data that may provide relevant information on their cardiovascular health status. The purpose of this joint EAPC/ESC and ACC Clinical Consensus Statement is to provide an in-depth update on the current state of knowledge on abnormal cardiovascular findings in Masters athletes. We present an expert-based approach on the diagnostic assessment, management, and prognosis of (i) atrial fibrillation, (ii) bradyarrhythmias, (iii) ventricular arrhythmias, (iv) coronary atherosclerosis, (v) aortic dilatation, (vi) myocardial fibrosis, and (vii) exercise-induced arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. Clinical challenges, areas of ongoing controversy, and uncertainty and the potential underlying mechanisms are discussed. We also present future perspectives and research directives to further refine current best practice strategies. This includes the need for clinical outcome studies, dedicated randomized controlled trials in athletes, and international registries with diverse populations and longitudinal follow-up to evaluate the natural history of cardiac abnormalities and facilitate development of evidence-based approaches in the clinical management of Masters athletes with cardiovascular abnormalities.

ABSTRACT Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) is the most common endocrine malignancy, accounting for 90%–95% of all thyroid cancers worldwide. For many years, treatment options for patients with locally advanced or metastatic radioiodine refractory disease were limited. Advances in understanding oncogenic and angiogenic signaling pathways, such as vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, fibroblast growth factor receptors, platelet derived growth factor receptor, rearranged during transfection ( RET) , and BRAF have led to the development of targeted therapies that have transformed management over the past two decades. Multikinase inhibitors such as lenvatinib, sorafenib, vandetanib, and cabozantinib have demonstrated clinical efficacy in randomized clinical trials. Most recently, mutation-specific kinase inhibitors such as selpercatinib for RET -fusion positive cancers, and the combination of dabrafenib with trametinib for BRAF V600E -mutant disease, have been approved and further expanded treatment options for these patients. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapies for metastatic thyroid cancer and discuss their clinical impact.

Abstract Introduction: CD20xCD3 bispecific antibodies (BsAb) have been approved for use in relapsed/refractory (RR) large B-Cell lymphomas (LBCLs) with manageable toxicities. The main adverse events of clinical interest are cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). The risk factors for CRS and ICANS are not well understood. Knowledge of variables that contribute to increased risk may help clinicians identify and tailor management for high-risk patients (pts) and increase the comfort level for providers using these therapies in community practices. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study at 21 US centers evaluating pts with RR LBCLs receiving commercially available epcoritamab (epco) or glofitamab (glofit) between 2023 and 2025. We obtained baseline characteristics, safety and efficacy outcomes. Univariate analysis was performed to identify associations between CRS, ICANS, and clinical variables of interest. Results: As of May 31, 2025, a total of 312 pts with RR LBCLs were treated with BsAb, Epco n=193 (62%), Glofit n= 119 (38%); median age 68; 63% male; 70% ECOG PS 0-1. Most common histologic type was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (DLBCL, NOS) (n=239, 84%) followed by high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL) (n=46, 16%). 179 pts (57%) were previously treated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, with 47% receiving CAR-T <6 months (mo) prior to BsAb. Among pts with prior CAR-T, CRS with CAR-T therapy of any grade occurred in 63%, with 26% ≥ grade 2. ICANS of any grade (G) occurred in 25% of pts (9.4% ≥ G3). Overall and complete response (ORR and CR) rates to BsAb were 51% and 29%, respectively. With a median follow up of 5 mo, median progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS) were 2.3 and 7.3 mo, respectively. With BsAb treatment, CRS of any grade occurred in 117 (39%) patients: 24% G1, 8.7% G2, 4% G3, 1% G4 and 1% G5. The max grade CRS occurred most frequently after the third dose of epco (35%) and the first dose of glofit (23%). CRS was managed with additional steroids in 24% of pts and tocilizumab in 22%. 13% of pts experienced ICANS: 5.8% G1, 3.4% G2, 2% G3, 1% G4 and 0.3% G5. Factors that increased the risk for any grade CRS included: bulky disease ≥ 7.5 cm at time of BsAb treatment (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.17 – 3.55, p = 0.012), elevated LDH (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.45– 4.76, p = 0.002) and treatment with epco compared to glofit (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.04- 2.77, p = 0.036). As G ≥2 CRS generally requires inpatient monitoring and management, we next compared the risk factors between pts with no CRS or G1 CRS and G ≥2 CRS. Factors associated with increased risk for high grade CRS included: bone marrow involvement by lymphoma (OR 3.47, 95% CI 0.97 – 11.3, p = 0.043), platelet count ≤ 75 (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.21 – 4.87, p = 0.011), ≥ 2 extra nodal sites (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.07 – 3.97, p = 0.032) and ≥G2 CRS with prior CAR-T (OR 3.35, 95% CI 1.13 – 9.97, p = 0.027). Factors that increased the risk for ICANS included: bulky disease (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.28 – 5.49, p = 0.008), elevated Cr ≥ 1.5x ULN (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.25 – 10.4, p = 0.012), elevated AST/ALT ≥ 3x ULN (OR 4.65, 95% CI 0.92 – 19.9, p = 0.042), low albumin (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.49 - 5.5, p = 0.002), and co-occurrence of CRS with BsAb (OR 9.1, 95% CI 3.85- 25, p < 0.001). No other clinical variables including older age, histologic subtype, ECOG PS, B symptoms, IPI score, cell of origin or histologic subtype, baseline labs such as ALC, CRP, fibrinogen or D-dimer were significantly associated with CRS or ICANS risk. There was no difference in ORR or CR rates in patients who experienced CRS or ICANS. Conclusions: Our analysis of pts treated with commercial BsAb for LBCL shows an increased risk for CRS and ICANs based on clinical variables that are routinely obtained at baseline including tumor bulk, sites of disease, laboratory parameters, and history of prior CRS with CAR-T therapy. Differences in baseline populations receiving epco and glofit treatments in this real-world analysis have been previously reported (Brooks et al, Blood 2025) and the comparative risk for CRS between these treatments remains unclear. Future plans including multivariable analysis may allow for development of a predictive model to identify pts at high risk of CRS and ICANS with BsAb treatment, potentially leading to prospective clinical trials evaluating prophylactic interventions for high-risk pts.

Abstract Introduction: Epcoritamab (epco) and glofitamab (glofit) are bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with multiply relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Though response rates are relatively high, most patients (pts) eventually experience progression of disease (POD). We sought to investigate the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes following POD post-BsAb for r/r LBCL Pts, as this has not previously been described. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study including 21 US centers evaluating pts with r/r LBCL receiving commercially available epco or glofit between 2023 and 2025. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Efficacy and survival outcomes were assessed by site investigators and included overall response rate (ORR), complete and partial response (CR, PR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: As of May 15, 2025, a total of 312 pts with r/r LBCLs were treated with BsAb, of whom a total of 168 (53.8%) pts experienced POD [104 of 193 (53.8%) treated with prior epco and 64 of 119 (53.8%) treated with prior glofit]. Pts with POD had a median age at BsAb start of 67 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58-76), most were male (68.4%), and the most common histology was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified (n=122 [71.8%]). Sixty-seven of 168 pts (39.9%) with POD after BsAb had experienced primary refractory disease defined as failure to achieve PR or CR to frontline therapy. A total of 102 (60.7%) pts with POD to BsAb had received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy prior to BsAbs, with 33.3% of these pts being refractory to CAR T and 30.4% progressing within 6 months of CAR T-cell infusion. The median time to progression following BsAb start was 48 days. Following POD, 70 pts received no further anti-lymphoma therapy. Among 98 pts receiving subsequent therapy, 85 initially received systemic therapy and 13 initially received local therapy with radiation (concurrently with systemic therapy in 8 pts). The most commonly-used next line of systemic therapies included: loncastuximab tesirine in 19 pts (ORR 16.7%, all PR); commercial CAR T in 11 pts (ORR 50% [CR 36.4%, PR 18.2%); tafasitamab with lenalidomide in 7 (no responses); and other chemotherapy in 46 pts (ORR 27.6% [CR 24.1%]). The median follow-up time from POD was 9.2 months among survivors (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.8-13.3). Among those who initiated subsequent-line therapy following BsAbs, the median progression-free survival (PFS2) was 1.9 months (95% CI 1.5-2.4) and median overall survival (OS) from initiation of subsequent-line therapy was 3.9 months (95% CI 2.4-5.5). The estimated 1-year OS following initiation of next therapy was 12%. Conclusions: We report the outcomes of largest cohort of pts with POD post-BsAbs in r/r LBCL. Progression events occurred early after initiation of single agent BsAbs, and almost half of pts who progressed did not receive subsequent therapy. For those who received standard subsequent-line therapy after POD, response rates and survival outcomes were poor. Pts with POD after BsAB should be strongly considered for clinical trials of novel therapeutics or combination therapies.

Abstract Introduction: Epcoritamab (epco) and glofitamab (glofit) are bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs). Their use is associated with relatively high response rates, with some patients experiencing prolonged remission. It is unclear whether continuous treatment beyond 12 months for pts in remission is beneficial, as continued immunosuppression may result in additional toxicity. We sought to report the outcomes of pts with prolonged remission and survival following BsAb administration. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study including 21 US centers evaluating pts with r/r LBCLs receiving commercially available epco or glofit between 2023 and 2025. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Efficacy and survival outcomes were assessed by site investigators and included overall response rate (ORR), complete and partial response (CR, PR) rates. Pts who responded to BsAbs and had ≥365 days of follow-up from initiation of BsAb treatment were included in the analysis. Results: As of May 15, 2025, a total of 312 pts with r/r LBCLs were treated with BsAbs (epco n=193, glofit n=119) with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range [IQR] 59-73) at BsAb start. Most were male (64.5%), had advanced stage disease (77.4%) and had ECOG performance status of ≤1 (93.3%) at BsAb start. Of 207 pts who had initiated treatment with BsAb ≥12 months prior to data cutoff, we identified 31 pts (15.0%) who had a response to BsAbs (19 epco, 12 glofit) and were alive without progression at 12-months post-BsAb initiation and included them in this landmark analysis. Of the cohort of 19 pts treated with epco, 6 discontinued due to reasons other than disease progression including CAR-T cell therapy (n=2), secondary malignancy (n=2), allogeneic transplant (n=1), or other reasons (n=1). Thirteen of 19 pts received ≥12 months of epco treatment, and, with a median follow-up of 16 months from the start of BsAb, 12 of 13 pts continued receiving epco beyond 12 months with one pt discontinuing after 12 months (observed for an additional 41 days prior to censoring). Of the cohort of 12 pts treated with glofit, 8 pts were observed after completing all planned therapy and 4 patients underwent allogeneic transplant. Among all 31 BsAb-treated patients alive and in remission at 12 months, at the time of data cutoff, 5 pts (12.9%) had progressed (2 previously treated with epco and 3 with glofit). Three of the 4 pts who underwent allogeneic transplant after prior glofit treatment experienced disease relapse. A total of 24 pts (77.4%) were alive at the time of last follow-up, with the causes of death being disease progression (n=1), secondary malignancy (n=1), infection (n=1), and unknown cause (n=4). Conclusions: In this large cohort of r/r LBCL pts treated with BsAbs monotherapy in the standard of care setting, a relatively small proportion of pts (15%) achieve the 12 month PFS landmark. In the absence of robust evidence for what constitutes best practice, different strategies are employed, including continuation of BsAb, observation as well as consolidation with allogeneic transplant or CAR T-cell therapy. Additional follow-up will be reported to help guide clinical decision making regarding the optimal management strategy for this high risk pt population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a standardized tool for assessing malnutrition in patients with cancer. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of preoperative nutritional status as measured by PG-SGA on survival in patients requiring surgical intervention and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases. METHODS: Patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery and/or radiation therapy for symptomatic spinal metastases were enrolled in the AO Spine Metastatic Tumor Research and Outcomes Network, a prospective international multicenter research registry, between September 2017 and August 2022. Using the PG-SGA, nutritional status was classified into 3 categories: A, well nourished; B, moderately malnourished; and C, severely malnourished. RESULTS: A total of 589 patients met the inclusion criteria; 362 were classified as well nourished (61%), 159 were moderately malnourished (27%), and 68 were severely malnourished (12%). The median survival was 491 days, 328 days, and 117 days for well-nourished, moderately malnourished, and severely malnourished patients, respectively. In the multivariate analyses, severe malnourishment (HR 2.5 95% CI 1.4-4.3, P < .01) and an ECOG performance status of 3 or 4 (HR 2.7 95% CI 1.2-6.0) remained associated with significantly worse survival. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition as measured by the PG-SGA demonstrated to be significantly and independently associated with postoperative survival. The PG-SGA is a simple and useful tool to identify spinal metastases patients at risk of early postoperative mortality, and inclusion in the preoperative evaluation of these patients should be considered.

Background: Cardiac arrest is a major global health concern, contributing significantly to mortality rates. While conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has long been the standard care approach, emerging research indicates that extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) may provide superior survival advantages. Studies suggest that timely application of ECPR can lead to improved outcomes, particularly in terms of survival rates and neurological recovery. The comparative efficacy of ECPR is further corroborated by various randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as retrospective and prospective studies. Search Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, PLOS One, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ScienceDirect from 2014 to 2025. Our analysis included 3 RCTs, 3 prospective, and 5 retrospective studies (n=154,216). Inclusion criteria involved patients undergoing cardiac arrest managed in inpatient or outpatient settings. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4, calculating safety endpoints as odds ratios for ROSC, favorable neurological outcomes , and survival rates. Results: Findings indicated that ECPR was associated with a significantly higher rates of ROSC (OR 0.36, 95% CI [0.24–0.54], p<0.00001) and favorable neurological outcome (OR 0.47 , 95% CI [0.37–0.60], p<0.00001). The Survival at 6 months was significantly better in the ECPR group (OR 0.21, 95% CI [0.12–0.36], p<0.00001). Although CCPR showed higher odds for survival to ICU (OR 1.31, 95% CI [0.86–2.00], p=0.21) and discharge (OR 1.42, 95% CI [0.90–2.25], p=0.13), these did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: ECPR shows improved ROSC and neurological outcomes over conventional CPR, with higher six-month survival rates, emphasizing the need to adopt ECPR in cardiac arrest management.