Citations

ABSTRACT Objectives The purpose of this study is to compare the economics of in‐office tympanostomy tube placement using single use devices versus standard placement in the operating room (OR). Methods A retrospective chart review was completed for all pediatric patients who underwent in‐office tympanostomy tube placement (CPT 69433) along with insurance and date matched patients with placement in the OR (CPT 69436) between 12/1/21–3/1/24. Financial data were compared among the public vs. private insurance cohorts using the Wilcoxon rank‐sum test with a two‐sided significance level of 5%. Results One hundred and thirty‐six in‐office patients were identified, 102 private versus 34 public, and compared with 136 insurance and date matched OR patients. The average total payment for both privately insured patients, $647.14 in‐office versus $6873.45 in the OR, and publicly insured patients, $312.74 in‐office versus $2656.34 in the OR, was statistically significant. The average insurance payment for both privately insured patients, $301.58 in‐office versus $5445.73 in the OR, and publicly insured patients, $310.63 in‐office versus $2258.65 in the OR, was statistically significant. For the patient payment, public insurance usually has 0 copay and is therefore excluded. The patient payment of the private insurance cohort, $308.30 in‐office versus $670.61 in the OR, was not found to be statistically significant. Conclusion As expected, this study demonstrates significant reductions in overall cost with in‐office tympanostomy tube placement even with the added cost of single‐use devices compared to the standard placement in the OR, particularly for insurance companies, suggesting the potential benefit of providing reimbursement for these devices. Level of Evidence N/A.

Background Motor speech disorders are early, common, and functionally limiting features of atypical parkinsonian disorders (APDs) such as progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), corticobasal syndrome (CBS), and multiple system atrophy (MSA). These impairments are underrecognized and undertreated in neurology clinics. Objectives This review aims to characterize speech impairment in APDs, offer practical guidance for clinical evaluation, highlight the role of Speech‐Language pathologists (SLPs) in diagnosis and management, and outline current and emerging management strategies. Methods A narrative review was conducted by the Diagnosis and Treatment Working Group of CurePSP's Centers of Care, integrating literature and clinical experience to summarize evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of motor speech disorders in APDs. Results Speech changes in APDs are often mixed dysarthrias with hypokinetic, spastic, and/or ataxic components, and may include apraxia of speech; these are frequently more severe and progress quicker than in Parkinson's disease. These features can assist in differential diagnosis and should prompt early referral to SLPs. Despite the high prevalence of speech and voice changes, comprehensive assessment of motor speech disorders is uncommon in neurology clinics. Current evidence regarding the efficacy of interventions is mixed. Digital acoustic analysis and neuromodulation offer promising directions for diagnosis and treatment. Conclusions Early, collaborative management of motor speech impairment elevates care in APDs. Neurologists and SLPs must work together to improve recognition, diagnosis, and care. Future research should focus on objective biomarkers and personalized therapies to support communication, autonomy, and quality of life for individuals living with APDs.

Multiplex immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry (mIF/IHC) are increasingly employed antibody-based technologies that use tissue sparingly and facilitate the detection of co-localized or neighboring biomarkers. Specifically, these platforms enable spatial analyses of the tumor microenvironment as well as extended applications, for example, describing normal tissue anatomy, autoimmunity, infectious diseases, etc. mIF/IHC has greatly enhanced biomarker discovery efforts, and a growing number of studies suggest superiority to traditional IHC. Standardization of staining approaches, reporting of image analysis strategies and resultant data is critical for facilitating cross-study comparisons, validation, deployment, and generalization of findings. To address this challenge, The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) previously published two articles providing best practice guidelines for mIF/IHC staining, image analysis, and data sharing. Here, SITC convened stakeholders to develop the third article in the series, a consensus checklist for scientific reporting of mIF/IHC data to support and complement the best practice guidelines. The checklist includes critical components of mIF/IHC applications to be defined within publications such as detailed descriptions of analytical validation; image acquisition, selection, and registration methods; and cell clustering and spatial analysis strategies, amongst others. Such information will help with data reproducibility and comparison across studies towards future drug and assay development.

Abstract Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with TP53 alteration (TP53alt), including deletion (TP53del) detected by cytogenetics (CG) (karyotype, FISH, or genomic microarray) and/or TP53 mutation (TP53mut) identified by next-generation sequencing, is associated with poor prognosis. However, a subset of patients may achieve long-term survival after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Patient-, disease-, and transplant-related variables may inform risk stratification and improve treatment decision-making in this high-risk population. We used the CIBMTR registry to investigate outcomes of patients with TP53alt AML undergoing allo-HCT. Methods: We included adult patients with 2017 ELN adverse-risk AML who underwent first allo-HCT between 2013–2019 and had available CG and molecular data. TP53del was centrally reviewed by expert cytogeneticist. Patients were stratified into three TP53alt groups: Group 1 (TP53mut+/ TP53del+), Group 2 (TP53mut −/ TP53del+), and Group 3 (TP53mut+/ TP53del −). The control group comprised patients with 2017 ELN adverse-risk AML negative for both TP53mut and TP53del. Patients from embargoed centers, lacking consent or comprehensive research data, or missing CG and molecular information were excluded. Results: Of 6,474 patients with adverse-risk AML, 703 patients with TP53alt met inclusion criteria: Group 1 (n=203), Group 2 (n=271), Group 3 (n=229). The control group included 2,763 patients. Median age was 58 years (44% ≥60); 44% were female; 16% had Karnofsky score <90, and 52% had HCT-CI ≥3. Secondary AML was more frequent in TP53alt groups (32%, 27%, 27%) versus control (21%) (p<.01). Complex and monosomal karyotypes were most common in Group 1 (61%), followed by Group 2 (54%), Group 3 (31%), and control (6%), p<.01. More patients in Groups 1 and 2 (28% each) underwent HCT in primary induction failure/relapse (PIF/Rel) versus Group 3 (19%) and control (19%), p<.01. Median time from diagnosis to transplant was 5 months (1-331). Donor type was matched related in 23%, matched or mismatched unrelated in 50%, haploidentical in 18%, and umbilical cord blood in 7%. Conditioning intensity was myeloablative (MA) in 51%; reduced-intensity (RIC) in 36% , and 13% non-MA (NMA). Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) was used in 27%; and in vivo T-cell depletion (ATG or alemtuzumab) in 26%. After median follow-up of 66 months (3-130), 5-yr OS was 18% (Group 1), 18% (Group 2), 35% (Group 3) vs 46% in controls (p<0.001). 5-yr LFS was 14%, 15%, and 28%, respectively, vs 38% (p<0.001). 5-yr CIR was 69%, 66%, and 52% vs 43% (p<0.001). Transplant-related mortality (TRM) was similar across groups (1-year: 12–16%). On multivariate analysis, compared with controls, TP53del (with or without TP53mut) was independently associated with higher relapse risk: Group 1 HR 1.97, Group 2 HR 1.91, Group 3 HR 1.45 (all p<0.001). These findings translated into inferior OS (HR 1.94, 1.87, and 1.45, respectively, p<0.001). PIF/Rel and CR2+ were also associated with worse survival (HR 2.58 (p<0.001) and 1.18 (p<0.001, respectively). No significant difference was observed between MA and RIC for relapse, while non-myeloablative regimens (HR 1.65; p<0.001) were associated with higher CIR. In vivo T-cell depletion increased relapse risk (HR 1.22; p=0.004). TRM was not influenced by TP53alt status; it was impacted by age, KPS, time from diagnosis to HCT, and GVHD prophylaxis regiment (non-PTCy). Conclusions: This large, registry-based study with long term median follow-up showed that among patients with adverse-risk AML, TP53alt is a strong independent predictor of poor post-HCT outcomes in AML, particularly when TP53del is present. Patients with TP53del , with or without concurrent TP53mut, experienced the worst outcomes, followed by those with isolated TP53mut. Despite the limitations of registry data including lack of information on timing of TP53mut, variant allele frequency (VAF), number of mutations, or accurate information on measurable residual disease (MRD), these findings reinforce the adverse prognostic impact of TP53alt and support its inclusion in risk stratification frameworks. While some patients with TP53alt —particularly those with isolated mutations—may benefit from allo-HCT, relapse remains the dominant cause of failure. Future studies incorporating TP53 functional status, VAF, clonal architecture, specific CG, MRD, and novel transplant approaches are warranted.

Abstract BACKGROUND Volumetric analysis of brain metastatic lesions is of great relevance in neuro-oncology. Since manual annotation of a lesion is a laborious and time-consuming task, utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) tools for automated segmentation of brain metastases has shown promising potential, but published algorithms are not incorporated into clinical practice because of poor generalizability across institutions. Large publicly available and well-annotated datasets from across the world are critical for further clinical translation. MATERIAL AND METHODS The Brain Tumor Segmentation - Metastases (BraTS-METS) 2025 Lighthouse Challenge provides a competitive environment where scientists from various disciplines can benchmark their AI-based algorithms for automatic segmentation of pre- and post-treatment brain metastases on a well-curated publicly available brain metastasis dataset comprising 1,778 multiparametric brain MRI cases. Each case consists of T1-weighed, T1 post-contrast and FLAIR sequences. The cases were retrospectively obtained from 8 institutions in the USA and overseas, and underwent 3D nnU-Net pre-segmentation, followed by manual refinements performed by medical students and neuroradiologists, and a final approval by two independent board-certified neuroradiologists. A testing dataset was prepared through four rounds of annotation: two completed ‘from scratch’ and two following 3D nnU-Net pre-segmentation, all conducted by two independent neuroradiologists, with the segmentation process screen recorded for future analysis. This allowed us to establish inter- and intra-rater variability in brain metastases segmentation and create a reference standard dataset that will be publicly available after the conclusion of the challenge. The model performance of the participating teams in the challenge will be assessed via the following metrics: Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Normalized Surface Distance (NSD), sensitivity, and precision of the model. RESULTS A multi-annotator testing dataset of 75 MRI cases of brain metastases and 300 segmentations (150 created ‘from scratch’ and 150 from 3D nnU-Net pre-segmentations of the cases) was developed as a new reference standard. The mean intra- and inter-rater DSC for the segmentations ‘from scratch’ were 0.68 and 0.59, respectively. The mean intra- and inter-rater DSC for the segmentations built upon 3D nnU-Net pre-segmentations were 0.88 and 0.77, respectively. CONCLUSION The BraTS-METS 2025 Lighthouse Challenge is a key initiative designed to advance the use of AI to improve characterization of brain metastases by providing algorithms for automatic segmentation of all lesions and peritumoral edema that are measured against a novel reference standard based on rigorous multi-annotator brain MRI segmentations.

Objective To establish a framework for validating candidate biomarkers of cerebral small vessel diseases (SVD) associated with cognitive impairment and characterize individuals enrolled by the MarkVCID2 consortium under this framework. Methods Participants age 60 to 90 years were enrolled across 17 MarkVCID2 sites. Recruitment was targeted to enrich in cognitive symptoms (mild dementia, mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive decline), defined risk factors (diabetes mellitus, advanced hypertension), and Black/African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino subgroups. Enrolled participants underwent baseline visits that included cognitive testing, multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and biofluid collection. Provisional risk for SVD‐related cognitive decline was estimated primarily by baseline cognitive symptoms plus SVD risk factors. Adjudicated risk status was estimated by cognitive symptoms plus presence of moderate‐to‐severe white matter hyperintensities, microbleeds, or lacunes on baseline MRI. Results MarkVCID2 enrolled 1883 individuals age 73.4 ± 7.5 years, 65.0% female, 24.2% Hispanic, and 27.1% non‐Hispanic Black. Among enrollees, 44.8% were provisionally designated high‐risk. After baseline MRI, 48.5% were categorized as adjudicated high‐risk status, with substantial recategorization both from low‐ to high‐risk (primarily because of MRI lesions without SVD risk factors) and high‐ to low‐risk (primarily suspected cognitive impairment at screening not confirmed by baseline testing). Interpretation MarkVCID2 baseline data indicate successful enrollment of diverse individuals enriched in factors associated with SVD‐related cognitive decline. Changes over 3 years of longitudinal follow‐up will be analyzed to validate the candidate biomarkers for 2 projected contexts of use: subject selection (identifying likelihood of future SVD progression) and study outcome (efficiently measuring SVD progression). ANN NEUROL 2026;99:449–458

Introduction Despite growing evidence to characterise cancer-associated cognitive decline (CACD) in women with breast cancer, interventions to mitigate CACD are limited. Emerging evidence suggests aerobic exercise may enhance cognition after breast cancer diagnosis and treatment; yet, CACD remains an understudied outcome of exercise, and few high-quality studies have been conducted. In addition to knowledge gaps in effectiveness, the translation of exercise interventions to community settings remains challenging. The Breast cancer Reasoning and Activity INtervention (BRAIN) investigates the effectiveness of aerobic exercise training, delivered in a community-based setting, for improving cognitive function in women with breast cancer and gathers information on the implementation success of the intervention. Methods and analysis This Hybrid Type I effectiveness–implementation study is conducted at an academic medical centre in the southwestern United States in partnership with a non-profit, community health and wellness organisation. The study enrols 160 women diagnosed with stage I–IIIa breast cancer and within 3–36 months of treatment completion into a 1:1 randomised controlled trial. Individuals randomised to the exercise group receive a 6-month, individually tailored aerobic exercise programme delivered by exercise trainers employed at local community fitness centres. The programme is progressive in nature and designed to help participants achieve aerobic exercise levels consistent with guidelines for cancer survivors. Individuals randomise to the control group receive a 6-month health education control intervention delivered virtually by hospital-based health educators. Cognitive performance (primary), self-reported cognition, patient-reported outcomes, physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness are measured at baseline, 6 months (postintervention) and 12 months (follow-up). Brain structure and function are measured via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at baseline and 6 months. Implementation outcomes are defined by the RE-AIM framework, which includes reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance. RE-AIM outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 months, 12 months and ongoing during the study. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (#23-000020). All participants provide informed consent prior to participation. Findings will be disseminated to scientific, clinical and community audiences through manuscripts, presentations and newsletters. Trial registration number NCT04816006.

Importance Tau positron emission tomography (PET) allows in vivo detection of neurofibrillary tangles, a core neuropathologic feature of Alzheimer disease (AD). Objective To provide estimates of the frequency of tau PET positivity and its associated risk of clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants Longitudinal study using data pooled from 21 cohorts, comprising a convenience sample of 6514 participants from 13 countries, collected between January 2013 and June 2024. Cognitively unimpaired individuals and patients with a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), AD dementia, or other neurodegenerative disorders were included. Exposures Tau PET with flortaucipir F 18, amyloid-β (Aβ) PET, and clinical examinations. Tau PET scans were visually rated as positive according to a US Food and Drug Administration– and European Medicines Agency–approved method, designed to indicate the presence of advanced neurofibrillary tangle pathology (Braak stages V-VI). Main Outcomes and Measures Frequency of tau PET positivity and absolute risk of clinical progression (eg, progression to MCI or dementia). Results Among the 6514 participants (mean age, 69.5 years; 50.5% female), median follow-up time ranged from 1.5 to 4.0 years. Of 3487 cognitively unimpaired participants, 349 (9.8%) were tau PET positive; the estimated frequency of tau PET positivity was less than 1% in those aged younger than 50 years, and increased from 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) at 60 years to 19% (95% CI, 16%-24%) at 90 years. Tau PET positivity frequency estimates increased across MCI and AD dementia clinical diagnoses (43% [95% CI, 41%-46%] and 79% [95% CI, 77%-82%] at 75 years, respectively). Most tau PET–positive individuals (92%) were also Aβ PET positive. Cognitively unimpaired participants who were positive for both Aβ PET and tau PET had a higher absolute risk of progression to MCI or dementia over the following 5 years (57% [95% CI, 45%-71%]) compared with both Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–negative (17% [95% CI, 13%-22%]) and Aβ PET–negative/tau PET–negative (6% [95% CI, 5%-8%]) individuals. Among participants with MCI at the time of the tau PET scan, an Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–positive profile was associated with a 5-year absolute risk of progression to dementia of 70% (95% CI, 59%-81%). Conclusions and Relevance In a large convenience sample, a positive tau PET scan occurred at a nonnegligible rate among cognitively unimpaired individuals, and the combination of Aβ PET positivity and tau PET positivity was associated with a high risk of clinical progression in both preclinical and symptomatic stages of AD. These findings underscore the potential of tau PET as a biomarker for staging AD pathology.

4558 Background: In the past 7 years, 4 immuno-oncology (IO) based combinations have been approved for mRCC. However, QOL data on these combinations are limited to trials in which collection and reporting was not standardized, which further limits cross trial comparisons. Real-world QOL data with multiple treatment regimens are needed to understand how these regimens are tolerated in practice. Methods: ODYSSEY is a multi-site, prospective observational study of 500 US pts with mRCC. Pts must have mRCC (any histology), no prior ST, and follow up at a PCORnet study site. Exclusion criteria include treatment for cancer except mRCC. The primary objective is to determine patterns of change in QOL and symptom burden of pts with mRCC. Minimally important differences (MID) are 3 points for FKSI-19 total score, 1 point for the FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms (DRS) subscale and 7 points for FACT-G. Results: As of 1/6/25, 392 pts were enrolled of whom 299 were managed with ST. Of pts on ST, 114 were treated with IO-IO, 108 with IO-TKI, 33 with IO alone, 27 with Other, and 18 with TKI alone. Median follow up for all pts is 8.8 months (IQR 2.9, 16.2). IO-IO pts are median age 64 yrs, 81% male, 84% white, 56% prior nephrectomy, 84% clear cell; IO-TKI pts median age 66 yrs, 76% male, 92% white, 43% prior nephrectomy, 66% clear cell; IMDC risk profiles are similar. IO-IO pts are more likely to be KPS 100; whereas, IO-TKI pts have a higher median number of metastatic sites and are more likely to have bone or liver metastasis. With median follow-up of 6.0 (IQR 1.8, 14.9) and 8.8 months (4.5, 17.8) in the IO-IO and IO-TKI cohorts, 17 (15%) and 21 (19%) pts had died with a median time to death of 5.4 (2.5, 6.4) and 5.7 months (4.4, 12.8), respectively. 20 (18%) and 16 (15%) pts on IO-IO and IO-TKI had discontinued therapy at a median of 3.0 (IQR 2.0, 4.0) and 6.4 months (2.4, 13.0), respectively. Rates of discontinuation for disease progression and toxicity are similar. Baseline PROs for pts on ST are shown in the Table (higher score indicates better QOL), with RCT data for reference (NA, not assessed). Conclusions: In our prospective multi-center ODYSSEY study, we demonstrate that real world pts treated with contemporary ST have worse baseline QOL than those enrolled on pivotal RCTs. One-third of IO-IO and IO-TKI pts died or discontinued therapy within 6 months of initiation. Our data on real world vs RCT differences in baseline QOL may partially explain the limitations of current IO combination regimens in practice and support development of alternative treatment approaches. Instrument, Mean (SD) ODYSSEYIO-IO(N=114) CheckMate214(N=425) ODYSSEYIO-TKI(N=108) KEYNOTE426(N=402) CheckMate9ER(N=323) CLEAR(N=351) FKSI-19 total 56.0 (12.5) 60.1 (9.8) 53.8 (11.8) NA 58.7 (10.6) NA FKSI-DRS 27.5 (6.3) 30.7 (4.5) 27.0 (5.8) 32 (4.2) 30.2 (5.2) 31.3 (4.4) FACT-G 82.4 (16.7) 82.6 (15.0) 78.5 (16.0) NA NA NA

4553 Background: AS is a recognized strategy in select pts with mRCC to maximize QOL and delay potential toxicity of systemic therapy (ST); however, only 2 prospective studies of AS in mRCC have been published: only 1 with patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and none in the IO-TKI era. Methods: ODYSSEY is a prospective observational study of 500 US pts with mRCC. Eligible pts must have mRCC (any histology), no prior ST, age ≥19. Pts were excluded if treated for non-mRCC cancers or if not followed at a PCORnet study site. Pts completed QOL surveys at baseline, by phone every 3 months for 2 years and then every 6 months until end of follow up. The primary objective is to determine patterns of change in QOL and symptom burden of pts with mRCC. Minimally important differences (MID) are 3 points for FKSI-19 total score, 1 point for the FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms (DRS) subscale and 7 points for FACT-G. Here we report baseline pt characteristics in AS pts compared to ST pts, and baseline QOL differences between these cohorts. Results: As of 1/6/25, 392 pts were enrolled of whom 299 were managed with ST, and 93 pts deferred ST; of these, 53 pts (57%) were classified as AS. Pts on AS are median age 68 yrs, 66% male, 94% white, 81% clear cell, 50% favorable risk, 44% intermediate risk. Compared with ST pts, AS pts were more likely to have undergone nephrectomy (91% vs 53%), favorable risk profile (50% vs 15%), pancreatic metastasis (15% vs 5%), and longer time since RCC diagnosis (median 58 vs 3.3 months); and less likely to have bone, brain, or liver metastasis. After median 8.8 months follow-up (IQR 2.9, 16.2), 2 pts (4%) on AS had died compared with 45 pts (15%) on ST. One pt (2%) on AS started first-line therapy and 45 pts (15%) discontinued ST. Mean baseline QOL (FKSI-19 total, DRS and FACT-G) for AS and ST ODYSSEY pts is shown in the Table (higher score indicates better QOL), with RCT data for reference (NA, not assessed). ODYSSEY pts on AS had higher QOL for all measures compared with ODYSSEY pts on ST. FSKI-DRS was the same or lower for pts on AS compared to the pivotal trials, while ODYSSEY pts on ST had both lower FKSI-19 total and DRS. Conclusions: In our large prospective cohort from ODYSSEY, pts on AS had higher median QOL scores than pts on ST, but similar to those included in RCTs. These results suggest that some RCT pts could have benefitted from AS. Further follow up is needed to determine long term outcomes in pts on AS and how they respond to deferred ST. Clinical trial information: NCT04919122 . Instrument, Mean (SD) ODYSSEY AS (N=53) ODYSSEY ST (N=299) ODYSSEY Difference, AS vs ST (95% CI) CheckMate 214 (N=425) KEYNOTE 426 (N=402) CheckMate 9ER (N=323) CLEAR (N=351) FKSI-19 total 63.4 (9.2) 56.3 (12.5) 7.0(4.0, 10.1) 60.1 (9.8) NA 58.7 (10.6) NA FKSI-DRS 30.8 (4.2) 27.9 (6.0) 2.9(1.5, 4.7) 30.7 (4.5) 32 (4.2) 30.2 (5.2) 31.3 (4.4) FACT-G 87.9 (14.0) 82.4 (16.7) 5.6(1.1, 10.0) 82.6 (15.0) NA NA NA