Citations

Abstract Transition services—programs that support adolescents and young adults (AYAs) as they move from a child‐centered to a more autonomous, adult‐orientated healthcare system—have been associated with improved short‐ and long‐term healthcare outcomes. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of evidence exploring transition services within the neurogastroenterology and motility (NGM) field. The overall aim of this article, endorsed by the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society and European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, is to promote a discussion about the role of transition services for patients with NGM disorders. The AYAs addressed herein are those who have: (a) a ROME positive disorder of gut–brain interaction (DGBI), (b) a primary or secondary motility disorder (including those with motility disorders that have been surgically managed), or (c) an artificial feeding requirement (parenteral or enteral tube feeding) to manage malnutrition secondary to categories (a) or (b). The issues explored in this position paper include the specific physical and psychological healthcare needs of patients with NGM disorders; key healthcare professionals who should form part of a secondary care NGM transition service; the triadic relationship between healthcare professionals, caregivers, and patients; approaches to selecting patients who may benefit most from transition care; methods to assess transition readiness; and strategies with which to facilitate transfer of care between healthcare professionals. Key areas for future research are also addressed, including the construction of NGM‐specific transition readiness questionnaires, tools to assess post‐transfer healthcare outcomes, and educational programs to train healthcare professionals about transition care in NGM.

AbstractFenfluramine (FFA), an antiseizure medication (ASM) with serotonergic and sigma‐1 receptor activity, is used to manage patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs). It is approved in the US for treating seizures associated with Dravet syndrome (DS) and Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) in patients ≥2 years old and as add‐on therapy for seizures associated with DS and LGS in the EU, UK, and Japan in similarly aged patients. Consensus guidelines for treatment of DS have recommended FFA to be an early‐line ASM, and it has also shown efficacy in managing seizures associated with LGS. DS and LGS are DEEs associated with a range of seizure types, developmental impairments, and multiple comorbidities. Here we provide case vignettes describing 4 patients (3 DS and 1 LGS) aged 4–29 years old in whom up to 14 ASMs had previously failed, to illustrate real‐world practice issues encountered by neurologists. This review provides guidance on the use of FFA in the context of ASM polytherapy and drug–drug interactions (DDIs), behavioral issues, dose titration, and adverse events. Along with data from the clinical trial program, these case vignettes emphasize the low risk of DDIs, a generally well‐tolerated safety profile, and other seizure and nonseizure benefits (eg, improved cognition and sleep) associated with the use of FFA in DS or LGS.Plain Language SummaryFenfluramine is used to treat seizures in individuals with Dravet syndrome and Lennox–Gastaut syndrome, but there are a range of issues that clinicians may face when treating patients. This review highlights four patients from the authors’ everyday clinical work and offers guidance and practical considerations by neurologists with expertise in managing these complex conditions related to drug interactions, dosing, and side effects associated with fenfluramine.

TPS4196 Background: Advanced BTC patients have poor prognosis. Up to 40% of BTCs have KRAS mutations and are associated with worse overall survival (OS). With a median OS of 7.7 months in KRAS wild-type compared to 1.7 months in KRAS mutated disease, these alterations are independent poor prognostic factors in BTC. Gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) with or without immunotherapy are often used as 1st-line therapies. However, there is a lack of data on best 2nd-line regimens. mFOLFOX6 (5-fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin [LV], oxaliplatin) or liposomal irinotecan+5-FU+LV are options when no biomarkers are found (e.g., MSI-H, BRAFV600E, FGFR-fusions, IDH1-mutation, HER2-overexpression). Prior studies do not demonstrate benefit with MEK inhibitors (MEKi), but none of the studies had biomarker selection. Pre-clinical studies in BTC cell lines suggest synergy between MEKi and 5-FU. Thymidylate synthase (TS )levels induced by 5-FU are downregulated by addition of binimetinib. Early clinical studies show safety and tolerance of this combination. In this study, we will evaluate if the combination of mFOLFOX6+binimetinib improves OS for patients with BTC and MAPK mutations compared to mFOLFOX6 alone in 2nd-line therapy. Methods: EAY191-A6 is a treatment study arm of the NCI ComboMATCH master registration trial EAY191. The A6 trial has a randomized phase II design, enrolling a maximum of 66 patients. Patients with any MAPK pathway mutations except those with available therapies will be eligible. Patient must first enroll to the EAY191 master trial. Local molecular results may be used for enrollment. Submission of tissue at baseline is mandatory. Eligible patients will be randomized 1:1 to mFOLFOX6 vs mFOLFOX6 + binimetinib (45 mg oral twice a day every 14 days). Stratification factors include location and stage of disease. Primary efficacy analysis will compare OS in the intent-to-treat population. If the observed hazard ratio (HR) of experimental arm vs standard of care is < 0.545 (corresponding to an observed increase in OS by 5 months or longer), experimental treatment will be considered superior. An interim futility analysis at 50% of expected events will be conducted. If the observed HR is ≥ 1, experimental treatment will not be considered superior, and accrual maybe suspended. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate and toxicity of treatments. Exploratory objectives include prognostic modeling, correlations of genomic alterations with response or resistance and use of machine learning for outcome prediction. This study is active and open to accrual. Clinical trial information: NCT05564403 .

Abstract Background Few antiviral therapies have been studied in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and kidney impairment. Herein, the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir, its metabolites, and sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin excipient were evaluated in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Methods In REDPINE, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, participants aged ≥12 years hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia with acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or kidney failure were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1; 100 mg daily up to day 5) or placebo (enrollment from March 2021 to March 2022). The primary efficacy end point was the composite of the all-cause mortality rate or invasive mechanical ventilation rate through day 29. Safety was evaluated through day 60. Results Although enrollment concluded early, 243 participants were enrolled and treated (remdesivir, n = 163; placebo, n = 80). At baseline, 90 participants (37.0%) had acute kidney injury (remdesivir, n = 60; placebo, n = 30), 64 (26.3%) had chronic kidney disease (remdesivir, n = 44; placebo, n = 20), and 89 (36.6%) had kidney failure (remdesivir, n = 59; placebo, n = 30); and 31 (12.8%) were vaccinated against COVID-19. Composite all-cause mortality or invasive mechanical ventilation rates through day 29 were 29.4% and 32.5% in the remdesivir and placebo group, respectively (P = .61). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 80.4% for remdesivir versus 77.5% for placebo, and serious adverse events in 50.3% versus 50.0%, respectively. Pharmacokinetic plasma exposure to remdesivir was not affected by kidney function. Conclusions Although the study was underpowered, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between treatment groups. REDPINE demonstrated that remdesivir is safe in patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Clinical Trials Registration EudraCT 2020-005416-22; Clinical Trials.gov NCT04745351.

AbstractBackground[177Lu]Lu–PSMA‐617 (177Lu‐PSMA‐617) plus protocol‐permitted standard of care (SOC) prolonged overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression‐free survival (rPFS) versus SOC in patients with prostate‐specific membrane antigen (PSMA)–positive metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the phase 3 VISION study, in addition to beneficial effects on symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) and health‐related quality of life (HRQOL).MethodsPost hoc analyses used the full analysis set from the VISION study (N = 831) overall and by randomized treatment arm (177Lu‐PSMA‐617 plus SOC, n = 551; SOC, n = 280). Correlations were determined between OS and rPFS and between rPFS or OS and time to SSE or to worsening HRQOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate [FACT‐P] and 5‐level EQ‐5D [EQ‐5D‐5L]). Correlation analyses used an iterative multiple imputation copula‐based approach (correlation coefficients [rho] of <0.3 were defined as weak, ≥0.3 and <0.5 as mild, ≥0.5 and <0.7 as moderate, and ≥0.7 as strong).ResultsIn the overall population, rPFS correlated strongly with OS (rho, ≥0.7). Correlations between rPFS or OS and time to SSE without death were weak or mild. Time to worsening in the FACT‐P total score and emotional and physical well‐being domains correlated mildly or moderately with rPFS and moderately with OS. Correlation coefficients for time‐to‐worsening EQ‐5D‐5L scores were mild to moderate for both rPFS and OS. Correlation coefficients were similar between treatment arms.ConclusionsIn this analysis of the VISION study, rPFS correlated strongly with OS but not with time to SSE or worsening HRQOL. These findings require further investigation.

AbstractBackgroundBetter access to direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) therapy has broadened the utilization of hepatitis C virus (HCV) nucleic acid testing (NAT) positive organs with excellent outcomes. However, DAA therapy has been associated with hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation.AimTo determine the risk of HBV transmission or reactivation with utilization of HBV core antibody positive (HBcAb+) and HCV NAT positive (HCV+) organs, which presumably required DAA therapy.MethodsThe number of HBcAb+ donors with delineated HCV NAT status was obtained from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database. The number of unexpected HBV infections from transplanted organs adjudicated as “proven” or “probable” transmission was obtained from the OPTN Ad Hoc Disease Transmission Advisory Committee database. A chart review of the donors of “proven” or “probable” cases was conducted.ResultsFrom January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021, 7735 organs were procured from 3767 HBcAb+ donors and transplanted into 7469 recipients; 545 (14.5%) donors were also HCV+. HBV transmission or reactivation occurred in seven recipients. The rate is not significantly different between recipients of HCV+ (0.18%, 2/1115) and the HCV NAT negative (HCV‐) organs (0.08%, 5/6354) (p = 0.28) or between recipients of HCV+ and HCV‐ livers as well as non‐liver organs. HBV transmission or reactivation occurred within a median of 319 (range, 41–1117) days post‐transplant in the setting of missing, inadequate, or truncated prophylaxis.ConclusionHBV reactivation associated with DAA therapy for HBcAb+ HCV+ organs is less frequent than reported in the non‐transplant population, possibly due to the common use of HBV prophylaxis in the at‐risk transplant population. image

TPS8125 Background: Sarcomatoid mesothelioma is the most aggressive form of pleural mesothelioma and is associated with the worst prognosis of the histologic variants of this disease. In the Checkmate 743 clinical trial the patients with sarcomatoid mesothelioma who received ipilimumab and nivolumab had survival outcomes that were similar to those of patients with epithelioid mesothelioma. In comparison, the patients with sarcomatoid mesothelioma who received chemotherapy had the worst outcomes in this trial, highlighting the known limited efficacy of chemotherapy against this histologic variant. Checkmate 743 demonstrated that ipilimumab and nivolumab is a new standard of care for non-epithelioid mesothelioma. Surgery typically has not been offered to this group of patients given their historically poor outcomes. With the significant survival gains seen patients with sarcomatoid mesothelioma treated with immunotherapy, we hypothesized that surgery may extend the benefits seen with immunotherapy. Methods: Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A082101 is a prospective, phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial for patients with sarcomatoid mesothelioma. The co-primary objectives are to determine the percentage of patients with potentially resectable sarcomatoid mesothelioma able to proceed with surgery after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab, and the progression-free survival (PFS) at 12 months (12-month PFS) after the initiation of ipilimumab and nivolumab. For sample size determination, we assumed that if the true rate of surgery is 75% or greater, it would indicate that neoadjuvant immunotherapy is feasible to be given prior to surgery. On the other hand, if the true rate of surgery is 50% or less it would indicate that neoadjuvant immunotherapy is not worthy of further investigation. Twenty-six (26) eligible patients will be needed to receive neoadjuvant immunotherapy. If 16 or fewer of the 26 eligible patients proceed to surgery, it will be concluded that the experimental therapy is not worthy of further investigation. Otherwise, it will be concluded that the experimental therapy is worthy of further investigation. Safety monitoring will be done through a 6-week run-in for the first 10 patients to assess for pre-operative and post-operative toxicities and complications. Sequential boundaries will be used to monitor severe toxicity and complication rates. Accrual will be halted if excessive numbers of severe toxicity and complications in pre-operative and post-operative phases are seen. The accrual and safety data will be summarized in reports for semiannual reviews by Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Tumor and blood-based biomarkers will be included as exploratory biomarkers. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT05647265 .

TPS8123 Background: A minority of patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may be cured by chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Adjuvant checkpoint inhibition through PD-L1 blockade after CRT improved survival compared to placebo in the PACIFIC trial (median progression-free survival (mPFS) 16.9 vs 5.6 months (mo), median overall survival (mOS) 47.5 vs 29.1 mo), but overall survival at 5 years remains below 50% (Spigel D, et al J Clin Oncol 2022, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9015199/ . Only patients completing CRT without progression and with good performance status were eligible for this approach. Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibition would allow more patients the opportunity to benefit from immunotherapy and may attenuate tumor-related immunosuppression via depletion of regulatory T cells and clonal expansion of effector T cells, thereby improving tumor immunogenicity. Neoadjuvant atezolizumab had favorable outcomes compared to historic PACIFIC data in the phase II single arm trial, AFT-16 (mPFS 30 mo and mOS not reached). Whether combination immunotherapy therapy before CRT will improve outcomes in this setting is the question posed in the AFT-57 trial. Methods: This phase II randomized Alliance Foundation Trials study (AFT-57) will evaluate safety and efficacy of atezolizumab with or without the anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody, tiragolumab, before and after definitive CRT with concurrent atezolizumab. The primary endpoint is PFS in the two experimental arms with a goal to select the most promising regimen for further study. AFT-57 will randomly assign 158 patients with stage III NSCLC (AJCC v8), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, no active autoimmune disease and no underlying organ dysfunction to 2 cycles of neoadjuvant atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously [IV] every 21 days) with or without tiragolumab (600 mg IV). Non-progressing patients will receive carboplatin and paclitaxel weekly with atezolizumab 1200 mg IV every 21 days concurrent with 60 Gray involved field thoracic radiation in 30 daily fractions (Monday - Friday) followed by atezolizumab with or without tiragolumab on the same schedule as the neoadjuvant doses, with a plan to complete one year of therapy. A pilot cohort of 20 patients for whom tiragolumab will be combined with atezolizumab during chemoradiotherapy is planned toward the end of accrual. Correlative science includes tissue and blood-based immune-related biomarkers at baseline and during therapy. This trial utilizes the Alliance Participant Engagement Portal, a patient-facing site designed to provide information and resources to Alliance clinical trial participants. The trial was activated on 12/7/23 with the first patient screened 1/19/24. Clinical trial information: NCT05798663 .

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Management of disseminated metastatic CRC involves various active drugs, either in combination or as single agents. The choice of therapy is based on consideration of the goals of therapy, the type and timing of prior therapy, the mutational profile of the tumor, and the differing toxicity profiles of the constituent drugs. This manuscript summarizes the data supporting the systemic therapy options recommended for metastatic CRC in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

Importance Neurological manifestations during acute SARS-CoV-2–related multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) are common in hospitalized patients younger than 18 years and may increase risk of new neurocognitive or functional morbidity. Objective To assess the association of severe neurological manifestations during a SARS-CoV-2–related hospital admission with new neurocognitive or functional morbidities at discharge. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study from 46 centers in 10 countries included patients younger than 18 years who were hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 or MIS-C between January 2, 2020, and July 31, 2021. Exposure Severe neurological manifestations, which included acute encephalopathy, seizures or status epilepticus, meningitis or encephalitis, sympathetic storming or dysautonomia, cardiac arrest, coma, delirium, and stroke. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was new neurocognitive (based on the Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category scale) and/or functional (based on the Functional Status Scale) morbidity at hospital discharge. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the association of severe neurological manifestations with new morbidity in each SARS-CoV-2–related condition. Results Overall, 3568 patients younger than 18 years (median age, 8 years [IQR, 1-14 years]; 54.3% male) were included in this study. Most (2980 [83.5%]) had acute SARS-CoV-2; the remainder (588 [16.5%]) had MIS-C. Among the patients with acute SARS-CoV-2, 536 (18.0%) had a severe neurological manifestation during hospitalization, as did 146 patients with MIS-C (24.8%). Among survivors with acute SARS-CoV-2, those with severe neurological manifestations were more likely to have new neurocognitive or functional morbidity at hospital discharge compared with those without severe neurological manifestations (27.7% [n = 142] vs 14.6% [n = 356]; P &amp;lt; .001). For survivors with MIS-C, 28.0% (n = 39) with severe neurological manifestations had new neurocognitive and/or functional morbidity at hospital discharge compared with 15.5% (n = 68) of those without severe neurological manifestations ( P = .002). When adjusting for risk factors in those with severe neurological manifestations, both patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 (odds ratio, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.27-2.70]; P = .001) and those with MIS-C (odds ratio, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.22-3.89]; P = .009) had higher odds of having new neurocognitive and/or functional morbidity at hospital discharge. Conclusions and Relevance The results of this study suggest that children and adolescents with acute SARS-CoV-2 or MIS-C and severe neurological manifestations may be at high risk for long-term impairment and may benefit from screening and early intervention to assist recovery.