Citations

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine independent risk factors for vertebral compression fracture (VCF) following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in metastatic spine disease. METHODS Patients treated with SBRT for spinal metastasis at a single tertiary care center between 2008 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients with CT scans obtained within 1 year of SBRT completion were included. Variables collected included demographics, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), primary tumor pathology, Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini (WBB) classification, chemoradiation treatment details, and bone quality as assessed by Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT. HUs were measured for the medullary bone of the metastatic level, the tumor, and the vertebral bodies cephalad and caudal to the metastasis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of post-SBRT pathological fracture. RESULTS A total of 292 patients (mean age 66 years) with 392 unique lesions were included. The most common pathologies were prostate (n = 193), kidney/renal cell (n = 46), and lung (n = 33). The most common tumor levels were thoracic (n = 206 lesions) and lumbar (n = 128 lesions). SBRT was generally delivered in 1–3 fractions with doses ranging from 16 to 24 Gy in 1 fraction and 24–36 Gy in 3 fractions. Of the 392 lesions, 73 suffered VCF: 21 (29%) with < 25% height loss, 15 (21%) with 25%–40% height loss, and 37 (51%) with > 40% height loss. On univariate analysis, patients with VCF had lower average HUs (156 ± 52 vs 202 ± 89, p < 0.001), more WBB sectors involved (3 ± 2 vs 3 ± 1, p < 0.001), higher SINSs (8 ± 3 vs 6 ± 2, p < 0.001), were more commonly female (33% vs 22%, p = 0.05), and more commonly had nonprostate pathology (67% vs 47%, p = 0.003). VCF rates were similar between moderate (< 20 Gy in 1 fraction, < 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) and high-dose (> 20 Gy in 1 fraction, > 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) radiation schema (15% VCF vs 16% no VCF, respectively; p = 0.99). On multivariable logistic regression, independently significant predictors of VCF were HUs ≤ 229 (OR 6, p < 0.001), affected levels ≥ 3 WBB segments (OR 3, p < 0.001), and an SINS ≥ 8 (OR 2, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Low pre-radiation HUs, involvement of more WBB sectors, and a higher SINS were independent predictors of VCF following SBRT for metastatic spine disease.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), bispecific antibodies that engage T cells (BsAbs), and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells are widely used standard-of-care therapies that have revolutionized the treatment of lymphoid and plasma cell malignancies. With recent regulatory approvals, these therapies are poised to also revolutionize the treatment of common solid tumors and become a part of the everyday lexicon, the ABCs, of the practicing oncologist. Drawing from experience in hematology, we review the early, late, and rare toxicities of ADCs, BsAbs, and CAR T cells and provide general principles for their management.

Abstract Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a disease with guarded prognosis with a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 3.1% in patients with metastatic disease. The need for innovative treatments for this lethal disease is paramount. TTFields is a novel treatment modality that employs low intensity, alternating, and intermediate frequency electrical fields that abrogates cancer cell proliferation through different mechanisms. These include inhibition of mitosis, disruption of cancer cell membranes, metabolomic dysregulation of cancer cells, and immunogenic activation of the tumor microenvironment (TME). TTFields are approved in glioblastoma multiforme, non-small cell lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma. The PANOVA trial demonstrated promising efficacy for TTFields plus chemotherapy in patients with PDA. A trial of GCN in patients with PDA demonstrated exceptional efficacy in patients with metastatic disease. Here in, we present our ongoing clinical trial investigating the safety and efficacy of TTFields plus GCN in patients with PDA (NCT04605913). Methods: This a phase I/II trial with an initial safety run-in phase followed by the phase II portion. The primary objective of the trial is to determine the safety (CTCAE v 5.0) of GCN plus TTFields. Secondary objectives include determining the 6-month progression free survival (PFS) rate, overall response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1), 12-month survival rate, OS, and QOL (EORTC QLQ-C30, version 3.0.2.3). Inclusion criteria include PDA with liver metastasis (patients can have additional sites of metastasis), ECOG 0-1, measurable disease, and ability to operate the Novo TTF-100L (P)/Novo TTF-200T system. Treatment consisted of TTFields (150 kHz 18 hours/day) and GCN (G: 1000 mg/m2, C 30 mg/m2, and N: 150 mg/m2 every 2 weeks, 28 days cycle), followed by a maintenance phase after 6 months (G: 1000 mg/m2 every 2 weeks) plus TTFields until progression. Six patients were to be enrolled in the phase I portion and if ≤1/6 patients experienced a dose limiting toxicity (DLT, treatment emergent adverse event, or skin toxicity of Gr4), the plan would be to move to a phase II trial enrolling 34 more patients. If 2/6 patients experienced a DLT, 6 patients would be enrolled in dose level -1 (GCN plus TTFields for 9 hours/day followed by the maintenance treatment) and if tolerated the phase II portion would start with dose level -1 regimen. The phase I portion was completed without any DLTs and the trial is currently enrolling to the phase II portion. The total number of patients (40) was powered to the 6-months PFS rate and ORR (estimated using the lower bound of exact one-sided 90% confidence intervals). The goal is to "reject" a 6-month PFS rate of 66% and an ORR of 71% (based on previous GCN trial). Time-to-event endpoints will be assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Citation Format: Hani M. Babiker, Jason Starr, Jeremy Jones, Conor O’Donnell, Robert Jones, Jacqueline Boni, Lashundra Stewart, Josh Cameron, Oudom Kour, Kabir Mody, Robert R. McWilliams, Daniel H. Ahn, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Mitesh J. Borad, Umair Majeed. A phase I/II pilot trial, single arm, open label, of gemcitabine, cisplatin, protein-bound paclitaxel (GCN) combined with Tumor Treatment Fields (TTFields) in patient with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_2):Abstract nr CT190.

Abstract Aims To develop a deep learning model that: (i) utilizes transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) clips to detect left ventricular (LV) enlargement without being provided information regarding a patient’s sex and body size; and (ii) can be accurately applied to clips acquired using either standard comprehensive TTE or handheld cardiac ultrasound (HCU). Methods and results Using retrospective TTE data (training: 8722 patients; internal validation: 468 patients), we developed a deep learning model that estimates a patient’s end-diastolic LV volume (indexed to body surface area and normalized across the sexes), and then thresholds this estimate to perform the following classifications: (1) normally sized LV vs. ≥ mild LV enlargement; (2) normal/mildly enlarged LV vs. ≥ moderate LV enlargement. For retrospective datasets, the model showed strong performance in TTE across three geographically distinct locations (Minnesota and Wisconsin: 1082 patients, AUC = 0.925 and 0.953 for classifications 1 and 2, respectively; Arizona: 1475 patients, AUC = 0.935 and 0.969; and Florida: 1481 patients, AUC = 0.934 and 0.970). Additionally, performance was strong for both TTE and HCU clips collected from a prospective cohort of 410 patients who underwent HCU immediately following TTE (TTE: AUC = 0.925 and 0.971; HCU: AUC = 0.874 and 0.902, for classifications 1 and 2, respectively). Conclusion An automated deep learning model applied to TTE or HCU images accurately categorizes LV volumes. These results lay a foundation for future work aimed at optimizing clinical outcomes for heart failure patients by enabling early detection of LV enlargement across various point-of-care settings.

Purpose: To identify reasons for variable intraocular pressure (IOP) responses to latanoprost and timolol in healthy volunteers and to generate the control group as part of Eye Dynamics and Engineering Network. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, crossover study (NCT01677507), both eyes of 106 healthy subjects (212 eyes) were treated with latanoprost or timolol for 7 days, with a 6-week washout between treatments. Ocular biometrics, tonometry, and aqueous humor dynamics (AHD) were assessed at baseline and day 8 of each treatment. Subjects were divided into responders and nonresponders using cutoffs of >15% or >10% IOP reduction. Treatment effects and correlations were analyzed with paired t-tests. Results: More subjects responded to latanoprost (54%) than timolol (27%) at >15% cutoff ( p < 0.01). Responders had higher mean baseline IOP than nonresponders for both drugs at both cutoffs ( p < 0.01). Among timolol nonresponders ( n = 56), 39% responded to latanoprost in both eyes, 20% in one eye, and 41% in neither. Among latanoprost nonresponders ( n = 31), 13% responded to timolol in both eyes, 13% in one eye, and 74% in neither. Latanoprost increased uveoscleral outflow, while timolol reduced aqueous flow and outflow facility. Low baseline uveoscleral outflow was associated with latanoprost response. Conclusions: Higher baseline IOP predicted better responses to both drugs. Higher baseline uveoscleral outflow predicted nonresponse to latanoprost. No AHD differences were linked to the timolol response. Timolol nonresponders were often responsive to latanoprost, but not vice versa.