Citations

PURPOSE This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of onvansertib, a polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) inhibitor, in combination with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) + bevacizumab for the second-line treatment of KRAS -mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS This multicenter, open-label, single-arm study enrolled patients with KRAS -mutated mCRC previously treated with oxaliplatin and fluorouracil with or without bevacizumab. Patients received onvansertib (15 mg/m 2 once daily on days 1-5 and 15-19 of a 28-day cycle) and FOLFIRI + bevacizumab (days 1 and 15). The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and tolerability. Translational and preclinical studies were conducted in KRAS -mutant CRC. RESULTS Among the 53 patients treated, the confirmed ORR was 26.4% (95% CI, 15.3 to 40.3). The median DOR was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.4 to not reached). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 62% of patients. A post hoc analysis revealed that patients with no prior bevacizumab treatment had a significantly higher ORR and longer PFS compared with patients with prior bevacizumab treatment: ORR of 76.9% versus 10.0% (odds ratio of 30.0, P < .001) and median PFS of 14.9 months versus 6.6 months (hazard ratio of 0.16, P < .001). Our translational findings support that prior bevacizumab exposure contributes to onvansertib resistance. Preclinically, we showed that onvansertib inhibited the hypoxia pathway and exhibited robust antitumor activity in combination with bevacizumab through the inhibition of angiogenesis. CONCLUSION Onvansertib in combination with FOLFIRI + bevacizumab showed significant activity in the second-line treatment of patients with KRAS -mutant mCRC, particularly in patients with no prior bevacizumab treatment. These findings led to the evaluation of the combination in the first-line setting (ClinicalTrails.gov identifier: NCT06106308 ).

Abstract Aims In the VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, the soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator vericiguat reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) or cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with recent worsening HF. The effect of vericiguat in patients with HFrEF without recent worsening HF remains unknown. The VICTOR (Vericiguat Global Study in Participants with Chronic Heart Failure) trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of vericiguat in patients with ejection fraction ≤40% without recent worsening HF on a background of current foundational HFrEF therapy. Methods The primary endpoint for VICTOR is time to first event for the composite of HHF or cardiovascular death. The trial will also assess the effect of vericiguat on time to cardiovascular death, time to HHF, total HHF, and all-cause death. As an event-driven trial, at least 1080 primary events are expected, but follow-up will continue until the targeted number of at least 590 cardiovascular deaths has been reached. Approximately 6000 participants will be randomized to vericiguat or placebo. Conclusion VICTOR is the first large event-driven HFrEF trial performed in the contemporary era of quadruple foundational guideline-directed medical therapy, in a compensated ambulatory HF population. VICTOR will add important information to the evidence of the effects of vericiguat across the spectrum of patients with HFrEF.

Background and Aims: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the performance of UroVysion® FISH based on the different definitions of a positive result used in published literature with the goal of determining the optimal FISH definition for detecting pancreaticobiliary malignancy. Methods: A systematic literature search identified studies from database inception to Sept 2024 that evaluated the diagnostic performance of FISH in determining malignancy among patients with biliary strictures. All thresholds for positive FISH, as defined by the individual study, were included in this review. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the definitions of positive FISH as follows: (1) polysomy only; (2) polysomy, tetrasomy, or trisomy; and (3) polysomy or 9p deletion. Results: Eighteen studies comprising 2516 FISH specimens were analyzed, including 1133 (45.0%) with malignancy. Using a threshold for positivity as defined in individual studies, the overall sensitivity of FISH was 57.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.4–65.4%), and the overall specificity was 87.8% (95% CI, 79.2–93.2%). Subgroup analysis showed that polysomy as the threshold for positive FISH yielded a sensitivity of 49.4% (95% CI, 43.2–55.5%), with an increased specificity of 96.2% (95% CI, 92.7–98.1%), while polysomy + tetrasomy/trisomy as positive FISH resulted in an increased sensitivity of 64.3% (95% CI 55.4–72.2%) but a decreased specificity of 78.9% (95% CI 64.4–88.5%). The addition of 9p deletion to polysomy as the criteria for a positive test resulted in a non-significant increase in sensitivity (54.7% (95% CI 42.4–66.5%) while maintaining specificity (95.1% (95% CI 84.0–98.6%). Conclusions: Based on these findings, polysomy only or polysomy/9p deletion should be considered as the criterion for defining a positive FISH test to improve diagnostic sensitivity while maintaining high specificity.

Abstract Background Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has been revolutionary in the treatment of blood cancers, but has been associated with arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation (AF). Whether the incidence of AF has changed over time and if contributing risk factors are present remains to be defined. Methods Leveraging the Mayo Electronic Medical Record, we extracted a cohort of patients who underwent CAR T-cell therapy between 2016 and 2022. From this cohort, we identified those who had a diagnosis of AF at any point. We then defined the endpoint of interest as the first episode of new or recurrent AF during or after CAR T-cell infusion. Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard modeling was used to calculate the association of patient characteristics to the endpoint of interest. Variables with P&lt;0.20 in univariate modeling were chosen for the multivariate model. Significance was defined as P&lt;0.05. Results There were 328 patients who underwent CAR T-cell therapy between 2016 and 2022. Of this cohort, 27 (8.2%) patients had a pre-existing diagnosis of AF, of which 6 had recurrence of AF after CAR T (22.2%), while 21 (77.8%) did not. Of the 301 patients without a prior history of AF, 8 (2.7%) patients developed new-onset AF after CAR T. The majority of the 14 new or recurrent AF events (4.3% overall incidence) occurred within 30 days of receiving CAR T (N=10, 71.4%), the remainder after 180 days (Figure 1). No trend in declining incidence over time was noted. Prior AF, neurotoxicity, and inflammation (cytokine release syndrome and macrophage activating syndrome-like (MAS-L)) were strongly associated with the risk of developing new or recurrent AF (Table 1). Only presence of MAS-L remained an independent predictor in the multivariate model (HR 15.4, 95% CI 3.9-61.2, P&lt;0.001). Conclusion AF is mainly seen early following CAR T-cell therapy, and mainly in association with severe inflammatory responses. Early and aggressive treatment of CRS and MAS-L may be recommendable for patients undergoing CAR-T therapy, especially for those with a prior history of AF.

Abstract Background Concern for acute kidney injury (AKI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a major determinant in the decision to pursue cardiac catheterization if otherwise indicated. A bedside AKI risk prediction model derived from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), most recently updated in 2023, employs relatively complex parameters for AKI prediction. Purpose To test the efficacy of a simplified pre-procedural 5-variable bedside score for post-PCI AKI prediction based on the NCDR model. Methods We analyzed our institution’s NCDR-reported catheterization laboratory registry between Q2 2022 and Q1 2023. Inclusion criteria, variable selection, and definitions were based on the NCDR model. A bedside prediction model was validated, including 5 pre-procedural variables: anemia (hemoglobin &lt;10 mg/dl), history of heart failure, stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (glomerular filtration rate &lt;30 mg/dl), cardiac arrest, and shock status. Results We included 840 patients, of which 593 (70.6%) were men. Mean age was 69 (±12.5). Most procedures were performed on an urgent basis (444, 52.9%). AKI developed in 107 (12.7%) patients. Compared to the non-AKI group, patients who developed AKI were older (age 74±11.5 vs 68.3 ±12.5), and more frequently had anemia (23.6% vs 7.4%), diabetes (51.4% vs 35.2%), severe frailty (45.8% vs 23.7%), heart failure (62.6% vs 29.7%), cardiac arrest (13.1% vs 2.9%), CKD (30.8% vs 6%), shock (12.1% vs 1.5%), and mechanical circulatory support (7.5% vs 2.9%), p&lt;0.001. Utilizing integer scores, the simplified bedside model employing 5 pre-procedural variables demonstrated discrimination similar to the bedside NCDR model, with a C-statistic of 0.77 (0.60-0.88) and excellent calibration (intercept of 0.31 and slope of 1.03) (Figure), indicating the robust performance of the model (compared to bedside NCDR model with a C-statistic 0.793, intercept of -0.197, and slope of 0.957). Conclusion A simplified NCDR-based bedside score using 5 pre-procedural variables is an effective tool for predicting AKI as a complication of PCI, with comparable performance to the 2023 updated bedside NCDR AKI risk model.

Abstract Background Patients with carotid artery disease undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) appear to be at high risk of all-cause mortality during their follow-up. However, the possible predictors of this adverse outcome are not elucidated yet. Purpose We aimed to test cardiovascular (CV) risk factors as possible predictors of all-cause mortality in patients undergoing CEA and to determine whether there is a difference between the mortality rate of our study cohort and the general population. We hypothesize that CEA-treated patients have a higher mortality rate during follow-up after surgery than the general population, which is not related to the presence of CV risk factors. Methods We prospectively enrolled and followed up patients undergoing CEA. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression were performed to test whether common CV risk factors (demographics, laboratory values, comorbidities, and events before CEA) were predictive of all-cause mortality. We then compared the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of our population and the age-sex-matched Minnesota (MN) general population at 5,10, and 21 years of follow-up after CEA. Results A total of 710 patients were followed for a median of 7.1 [2.9-11.9] years after CEA. Mortality occurred in 198 (27.0%) patients during the follow-up. The median time to event was 11.0 [10.0-12.0] years. Age was the only predictor of all-cause mortality in CEA-treated patients in multivariable models adjusted for known CV risk factors (Model 1: HR 1.03 [95%CI 1.01-1.06]; p=0.004; Model 2: HR 1.02 [95%CI 1.00-1.04]; p=0.023) (Table 1). However, the CEA-treated group had a higher mortality rate than would have been expected in the MN population (log-rank p&lt;0.001) (Fig.1A). Compared to the MN population, at 5 years of follow-up only patients &lt;60 years old had a higher SMR (4.53 [1.95-8.92]; p=0.001), whereas, at 10 years and 21 years of follow-up, our study population had a higher mortality rate at any age (Fig.1B). Conclusions The elevated mortality risk post-CEA in our cohort cannot be solely attributed to chronological aging. The underlying process of atherosclerosis likely contributes to all-cause mortality, and plaque characteristics may offer additional insight into the risk stratification of this patient group.All cause mortality predictors after CEAStudy population vs. MN population SMR

Joyce, Kelsey E., Catherine A. Campbell, Arthur R. Bradwell, Samuel J.E. Lucas, Christopher T. Lewis, Rebekah A.I. Lucas, and Mark Edsell; for the Birmingham Medical Research Expeditionary Society (BMRES). The environmental impact of a high-altitude medical research expedition. High Alt Med Biol. 26:140–147, 2025. Introduction: Scientists must begin examining the environmental cost(s) of their research. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a component of the environmental impact of a high-altitude medical research expedition by totaling the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions calculated from as many direct and indirect sources as possible. Methods: Eighteen individuals flew from London to Bagdogra (via Delhi), and then drove onward to Lachung (via Gangtok) where they began their ascent on foot to 4,800 m (Kanchenjunga National Park, Sikkim). Several research experiments were conducted throughout the expedition, which required use of a laboratory centrifuge, solid CO 2 (specimen storage), rechargeable laptop computers and battery-powered oximeters. International Civil Aviation Organization calculators estimated aviation CO 2 production. Land emissions were calculated for Mahindra vehicles. Solid waste was weighed and CO 2 emissions estimated for its incineration. Results : Total CO 2 emissions equated to ∼16.7 tonnes from the following sources: air and land transportation of expedition team (87.3%); sublimation and transportation of solid CO 2 (7.7%), waste incineration (0.58%), generator transportation and gasoline (12 l) combustion (0.48%), and battery transportation (3.3%). Conclusions : Air travel contributed the most to the overall environmental cost of the research expedition. Further investigation is required to contextualize these findings in relation to lab-based alternative(s).