Citations

Abstract Context Urine steroid metabolomics, combining mass spectrometry-based steroid profiling and machine learning, has been described as a novel diagnostic tool for detection of adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). Objective, Design, Setting This proof-of-concept study evaluated the performance of urine steroid metabolomics as a tool for postoperative recurrence detection after microscopically complete (R0) resection of ACC. Patients and Methods 135 patients from 14 clinical centers provided postoperative urine samples, which were analyzed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. We assessed the utility of these urine steroid profiles in detecting ACC recurrence, either when interpreted by expert clinicians or when analyzed by random forest, a machine learning-based classifier. Radiological recurrence detection served as the reference standard. Results Imaging detected recurrent disease in 42 of 135 patients; 32 had provided pre- and post-recurrence urine samples. 39 patients remained disease-free for ≥3 years. The urine “steroid fingerprint” at recurrence resembled that observed before R0 resection in the majority of cases. Review of longitudinally collected urine steroid profiles by 3 blinded experts detected recurrence by the time of radiological diagnosis in 50% to 72% of cases, improving to 69% to 92%, if a preoperative urine steroid result was available. Recurrence detection by steroid profiling preceded detection by imaging by more than 2 months in 22% to 39% of patients. Specificities varied considerably, ranging from 61% to 97%. The computational classifier detected ACC recurrence with superior accuracy (sensitivity = specificity = 81%). Conclusion Urine steroid metabolomics is a promising tool for postoperative recurrence detection in ACC; availability of a preoperative urine considerably improves the ability to detect ACC recurrence.

Abstract Background Diabetes is a prognostic factor for some malignancies, but its association with outcome in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is less clear. Methods This cohort study was nested within a randomized trial of first-line chemotherapy and bevacizumab and/or cetuximab for advanced or metastatic CRC. Patients were enrolled at 508 community and academic centers throughout the National Clinical Trials Network. The primary exposure was physician-documented diabetes at the time of enrollment. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. Tests of statistical significance were two-sided. Results Among 2326 patients, 378 (16.3%) had diabetes. The median follow-up time was 6.0 years. We observed 1973 OS events and 2173 PFS events. The median time to an OS event was 22.7 months among those with diabetes and 27.1 months among those without diabetes (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.13 to 1.44; P < .001). The median time to a PFS event was 9.7 months among those with diabetes and 10.8 months among those without diabetes (HR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.30; P = .02). Patients with diabetes were more likely to experience no less than grade 3 hypertension (8.1% vs 4.4%; P = .054) but were not more likely to experience other adverse events, including neuropathy. Conclusions Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of mortality and tumor progression in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC. Patients with diabetes tolerate first-line treatment with chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies similarly to patients without diabetes.

Abstract The Wilms tumor protein,WT1, is a potentially targetable tumor associated antigen that is overexpressed in a majority of pediatric leukemias. T cells with cytotoxic activity restricted to WT1 peptide can be expanded from the peripheral blood of normal donors using pulsed EBV transformed BLCLs as stimulators. As part of an ongoing clinical trial, a patient with multiply relapsed leukemia cutis was successfully treated with donor derived WT1 CTLs. The patient was initially diagnosed with MLL rearranged AML at 3 months of age with marrow and cutaneous involvement. By 3.5 years of age, he had undergone two stem cell transplants (SCT) from a sex-mismatched HLA matched unrelated donor. Multiple episodes of isolated cutaneous relapse starting two months after the second SCT were treated with DLI at escalating doses (3.3 x 10e8/kg) as well as local radiotherapy with continued development of new lesions. He was started on Interferon 2b alpha five months after second SCT with good response but was taken off of it for clinical intolerance and one month later again developed cutaneous lesions for which he received DLI, radiotherapy and was restarted on low dose Interferon 2b alpha with stabilization of disease. Biopsy of one of the lesions demonstrated the presence of MLL rearranged leukemic blasts that by PCR demonstrated WT1 expression. WT1 directed CTLs were generated from his SCT donor. These WT1 CTLs were restricted by HLA-DRB1 0801. The immunodominant epitopes presented by this allele were defined (281- 292 and 425-436) using overlapping pools of pentadecapeptides. The CTLs were cytotoxic at 25:1 E:T ratio against autologous BLCLs (33%) and autologous BLCLs loaded with the WT1 peptides (65%) but not against HLA mismatched BLCLs (2%) or K562 cells (0%). The line was composed of a mix of CD8 (64%) and CD4 (30%) T cells. The patient was treated on Day 0,7, 21 and 35 with 30 x 10e6/m2 of WT1 CTLs. The first cycle of therapy was associated with resolution of one of the skin lesions and he went on to receive two additional cycles of WT1 CTLs. Expansion of circulating WT1 and EBV specific precursors in the blood was detected after these infusions. One of two residual skin lesions was biopsied and demonstrated no active leukemic infiltrate and the presence of donor derived T cells. However, at no time prior to or following the WT-1 specific T-cell infusions has he developed any cutaneous or other evidence of GvHD. Based on uncertainty about the duration of WT1 CTL maintenance in vivo the patient has received multiple cycles of T cell infusions. Strikingly, each cycle of cells has resulted in an expansion of circulating WT1 and EBV specific precursors. The patient is now 5 years old and has been in continuous remission for 20 months. Prior studies have focused almost exclusively on vaccines and T-cell therapies specific for immunogenic epitopes of WT-1 presented by prevalent class I HLA alleles. This patient provides evidence underscoring the therapeutic potential of T-cells specific for immunogenic WT-1 peptides presented by HLA class II alleles. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Survival of patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is highly variable, ranging from months to even decades. Although treatment of PMF remains mostly palliative, the increasing use of allogeneic hemopoietic stem cell transplantation and introduction of newer therapies has raised the need for a better prognostic stratification of these patients. The initial features of 1,054 patients (638M/416F; median age 64 years, range 10–90) consecutively diagnosed with PMF in seven institutions from Europe and USA between 1980 and 2007 were evaluated for prognostic significance. Patients with the so-called “pre-fibrotic” form of PMF were not considered. The variables assessed were those previously shown to be of prognostic value in PMF, those clinically meaningful, and possible confounders (namely, diagnostic period and series of origin). The effect of the potential prognostic factors on survival was evaluated by the Cox proportional hazards regression and the proportional hazards assumption checked in every model by graphical methods and the Grambsch-Therneau test. A prognostic model was identified through a stepwise selection process, based on a z-test of the regression coefficients, and evaluated by calculating its discriminating power (measured by Harrell’s C concordance index), as compared to that of current PMF prognostic systems, and its positive predictive accuracy for actual survival longer (or shorter) than definite periods of time from diagnosis. The replicability of both the prognostic variables and the new prognostic score was tested by bootstrap re-sampling, in which 1,000 samples of the same size than the original series were built by random extraction with reposition. Median survival of the overall series was 69 months (95% CI: 61–76), with 49% of patients having died at the time of study. At multivariate analysis, five initial variables were associated with shorter survival: age > 65 years, constitutional symptoms (weight loss, fever, sweats), Hb < 10 g/dL, leukocyte count > 25×109/L, and blood blasts 1%. The hazard ratios of these variables did not differ substantially, ranging from 2.89 (95% CI: 2.46–3.61) for Hb < 10 g/dL to 1.80 (95% CI: 1.50–2.17) for blood blasts 1% and, therefore, one point was assigned to each one. Based on this, among the 1,001 patients of the series with all the necessary data available, four risk groups were identified with no overlapping in the 95% CI of their survival curves (figure): low risk (no factor, 22% of patients; median survival 135 months); intermediate risk-1 (one factor, 29% of patients; median survival 95 months); intermediate risk-2 (two factors; 28% of patients; median survival 48 months); and high risk (three factors, 21% of patients; median survival 27 months). The new prognostic score showed high predictive accuracy and replicability and had higher discriminating power than current risk-based PMF classifications. In the 409 patients with assessable metaphases, presence of cytogenetic abnormalities (observed in 30% of cases) was associated with shorter survival and contributed to prognosis, but only in patients in the intermediate-risk groups. No prognostic influence for either JAK2 V617F mutational status (n= 345) or blood CD34+ cell count (n= 150) was noted. This new prognostic scoring system substantially improves existing risk-based classifications of PMF and may help in treatment-decision making and in the design and analysis of newer therapies for the disease. Figure Figure

Abstract Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is an epidemic with tremendous public health impacts because there are currently no disease-modifying therapeutics. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for prevention of AD dementia often use clinical endpoints that take years to manifest (e.g., cognition) or surrogate endpoints that are costly or invasive (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). Blood biomarkers represent a clinically applicable alternative surrogate endpoint for RCTs that would be both cost-effective and minimally invasive, but little is known about their value as surrogate endpoints for treatment responses in the prevention of AD dementia. Methods: The objective of this study is to investigate blood neuropathological, neurodegenerative, and neurotrophic biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for treatment responses to 3 interventions in older adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI, a prodromal stage of AD): aerobic exercise; cognitive training; and combined aerobic exercise and cognitive training (ACT). We chose these three sets of biomarkers for their unique mechanistic associations with AD pathology, neurodegeneration and neurogenesis. This study is built on the ACT Trial (1R01AG055469), a single-blinded, multi-site, 2×2 factorial Phase II RCT that examines the synergistic effects of a 6-month ACT intervention on cognition and MRI biomarkers (AD-signature cortical thickness and hippocampal volume) (n=128). In this ACT Trial Blood Biomarkers Study, we will enroll 120 ACT Trial aMCI participants and measure blood biomarkers at baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 18 months. The goals are to: (1) Determine the effect of interventions on blood biomarkers over 6 months; (2) Evaluate blood biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for predicting cognitive responses to interventions over 18 months; and (3; exploratory) Examine blood biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for predicting brain MRI biomarker responses to interventions over 18 months. Discussion: This study aims to identify new blood biomarkers that can track cognitive decline or AD-related brain atrophy among aMCI patients subjected to a regimen of aerobic exercise and cognitive training. Findings from this study will drive the further use of blood biomarkers in developing effective prevention and treatment strategies for AD dementia. Trial registration number: This study is an ancillary study of the ACT Trial which was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313895.

Abstract Background: We sought to retrospectively analyze the clinical differences, at diagnosis and throughout the disease course, between patients with primary myeloifbrosis whom undergo blastic transformation (PMF-BP) and those whom expire from PMF complications without undergoing transformation. Methods: An international collaborative database of patients with PMF which progressed to PMF BP, and a control group of individuals with PMF who expired secondary to PMF was created. Data regarding clinical course, bone marrow, karyotypic, quantitative JAK2V617F analysis (when able), laboratory values, and therapy at the diagnosis of PMF, PMF BP and up to 4 return visits (R1-4) in between these milestones was abstracted. Results: COMPARISON AT DIAGNOSIS OF PMF: 136 cases of PMF who eventually underwent PMF-BP were included, with a control group of 42 PMF patients, were analyzed. Both groups of patients had similar demographic (median age at diagnosis 59 years (range 23–83)/ 59.1 (15–93); and disease parameters (median hemoglobin 10 g/dL (range 2–15.7) /9.8 (4.9–14.6); median platelet count 181 x 109/L (range 7–1400)/168 (16–1916)), and Lille PMF prognostic scores (p = n.s.) for PMF-BP vs. PMF control group respectively. Additionally, blasts (peripheral blood /marrow) were a median of 0% (range 0–18%)/ 2% (range 0–16%) for the study group versus 0.25% (range 0–5%)/ 3% (range 0–4%) (p = n.s. for both) for the control group, respectively. Both groups had similar rates of requiring therapy (86%; 93%) and survival from diagnosis (median 34 months (range 2–441); 29 months (1–236)) (p = n.s.). However, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (although high in both groups) was higher at diagnosis (median 802 IU/L (range 83–10353) vs. 416 IU/L (124–2197)) (p=0.04), as well as an abnormal marrow karyotype (85% vs. 25%; p<0.001) amongst the PMF BP group. SUBSEQUENT CLINICAL COURSE: Analyzing the clinical evolution between groups demonstrated persistently higher LDH and worsening thrombocytopenia in the PMF-BP cohort (see figure). Decreasing Platelets Approaching PMF BP Decreasing Platelets Approaching PMF BP Peripheral blood blasts increased in both groups, but values above 10% were unique to the PMF BP group. Additionally marrow karyotype displayed clonal evolution developed in 56% of the PMF-BP patients as opposed to 14% of controls (p<0.001). Initial and serial quantitative JAK2V617F mutation analysis (available from 20 /19 patients from the PMF-BP and control group at diagnosis, with 11 / 12 serial samples) showed no difference between the groups, nor a pattern of mutation burden elevation with transformation to leukemia in the study group. Conclusions: Increasing LDH, peripheral blood blast percentages >10%, and clonal evolution are features commonly seen in PMF patients whom evolve to blast phase and may be a harbinger of movement towards PMF BP.

Abstract Background: Patients on systemic therapy for cancer are at varying risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and its consequences. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended in hospitalized medical and surgical cancer patients, but most VTE occurs in ambulatory cancer patients where risk can be estimated with a validated score. However, the benefit of extended outpatient thromboprophylaxis is uncertain with heparins and has not been tested with direct oral anticoagulants. Methods: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study in adult ambulatory patients with various cancers initiating a new systemic regimen and at increased risk for VTE (defined as Khorana score ≥ 2). Enrolled subjects were screened for deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and if none found randomized 1:1 to rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily or placebo up to day 180. Subjects were screened with lower extremity ultrasounds every 8 weeks on study. Primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of objectively confirmed symptomatic or asymptomatic lower-extremity proximal DVT, symptomatic upper- or lower-extremity distal DVT, symptomatic or incidental pulmonary embolism and VTE-related death. ISTH-defined major bleeding was the primary safety endpoint. All endpoints were adjudicated by blinded independent committees. Analyses for efficacy endpoints were conducted for intent-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients) for the up-to-day 180 observation period (primary) and the on-treatment period (supportive). Safety analyses were conducted for on-treatment period only for patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Results: Of 1,080 patients who provided consent, 49 (4.53%) had DVT on baseline screening and another 190 screen-failed due to other reasons. Of 841 randomized patients, 274 (32.6%) had pancreatic cancer; 698 (83%) were white and 428 (50.9%) were male. The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in 25 of 420 patients (5.95%) and 37 of 421 patients (8.79%) (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.09; p=0.101) in the rivaroxaban and placebo groups respectively (number needed to treat, NNT=35) in the up-to-day 180 observation period (Figure 1A). Of all patients with VTE, 38.70% experienced events after discontinuing study drug. In a pre-specified analysis of all randomized patients during the on-treatment period, the primary endpoint occurred in 11 of 420 patients (2.62%) and 27 of 421 (6.41%) in rivaroxaban and placebo groups respectively (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.80, p=0.007) (NNT=26) (Figure 1B). Major bleeding occurred in 8 of 405 (1.98%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 4 of 404 (0.99%) patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 0.59 to 6.49; p=0.265) (number needed to harm, NNH=101). Clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 2.72% and 1.98% of rivaroxaban and placebo groups, respectively (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.54 to 3.32; p=0.53) (NNH=135). Adverse events were comparable between groups. For secondary efficacy endpoints, a pre-specified analysis of the composite of primary endpoint with addition of arterial and visceral thromboembolic events in the up-to-day 180 observation period showed significantly fewer events in rivaroxaban versus placebo group (6.90% versus 10.70% respectively; HR, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39, 0.99; p=0.04). All-cause mortality occurred in 20.0% of patients in rivaroxaban group and 23.8% in placebo group (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.62, 1.11; p=0.213). A pre-specified composite of the primary endpoint with all-cause mortality occurred in 23.1% of patients in rivaroxaban group and 29.5% in placebo group (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.97; p=0.03) (Figure 1C). Conclusions: Rivaroxaban significantly reduced VTE and VTE-related death during the on-treatment period but not during the full study period; over one-third of events occurred post discontinuation of study drug. The incidence of major bleeding was low. The Khorana risk score cut-off of ≥2 identified cancer patients at high risk of thrombotic events both at baseline (4.53%) and during study (8.79% with additional 1.66% arterial events in placebo group). These results should inform future recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis in at-risk ambulatory cancer patients. (Funded by Janssen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02555878) Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Khorana: Parexel: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Sanofi: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; TriSalus: Other: Personal fees; Halozyme: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Seattle Genetics: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; AngioDynamics: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; LEO Pharma: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Medscape/WebMD: Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel; Pharmacyclics: Other: Personal fees; PharmaCyte: Other: Personal fees; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees and non-financial support for travel. Soff:Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Kakkar:Bayer AG: Consultancy, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo Europe: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi S.A.: Consultancy; Verseon: Consultancy. Vadhan-Raj:AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Other: received funding from Amag to support clinical trial; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riess:Janssen Scientific Affairs: Other: Travel reimbursement; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wun:Eli Lilly, Inc.: Research Funding; Emmaus, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Streiff:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Other: outcome adjudication committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy, Research Funding. Garcia:Shingoi: Consultancy; Portola: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Retham Technologies LLC: Consultancy; Genzyme Corporation: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy. Liebman:Janssen (Johnson & Johnson): Other: steering committee of the CASSINI trial during the conduct of the study. Belani:Janssen: Consultancy. O'Reilly:3DMed, Agios, AlignMed, Amgen, Antengene, Aptus, ASLAN, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bioline, BMS, Boston Scientific, Bridgebio, CARsgen, Celgene, CASI, Cipla, CytomX, Daiichi, Debio, Delcath, Eisai, Exelixis, Genoscience, Gilead, Halozyme: Consultancy; Hengrui, Incyte, Inovio, Ipsen, Jazz, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, LAM, Lilly, Loxo, Merck, Mina, NewLink Genetics, Novella, Onxeo, PCI Biotech, Pfizer, PharmaCyte, Pharmacyclics, Pieris, QED, RedHill, Sanofi, Servier, Silenseed, Sillajen, Sobi, Targovax: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Acta Biologica, Agios, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, BMS, CASI, Celgene, Exelixis, Genentech, Halozyme, Incyte, Lilly, MabVax, Novartis, OncoQuest, Polaris Puma, QED, and Roche: Research Funding; Tekmira, twoXAR, Vicus, Yakult, and Yiviva: Consultancy. Patel:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Yimer:Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Puma Biotechnology: Equity Ownership. Wildgoose:Janssen Scientific Affairs: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Burton:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Vijapurkar:Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Kaul:Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. Eikelboom:AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, sanofi-aventis, and Eli Lilly: Honoraria, Research Funding; Heart and Stroke Foundation: Other: Personnel award. Bauer:Janssen: Consultancy. Kuderer:Celldex: Consultancy; Mylan: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Myriad Genetics: Consultancy; Halozyme: Consultancy; Coherus Biosciences: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Lyman:Halozyme; G1 Therapeutics; Coherus Biosciences: Consultancy; Generex Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Other: Research support.