Citations

Abstract Blood-based multicancer early detection (MCED) tests represent a new approach for cancer detection. To gain insights into the utility of various approaches of evaluating a cancer signal detected (CSD) test result, we evaluated diagnostic journeys of a subset of 6,662 participants in PATHFINDER who had a CSD on both an initial and refined version of an MCED test that also provided a prediction of cancer signal origin (CSO). We sought to determine whether CSO prediction–guided diagnostic evaluations led to diagnostic resolution; whether participants with known risk factors for cancer beyond age alone and a negative initial diagnostic evaluation had a cancer diagnosis during study follow-up; the utility of whole-body imaging in reaching diagnostic resolution; and differences in the diagnostic journeys needed to reach diagnostic resolution for both true- and false-positive results. Of the 39 participants in this analysis, 82% (32/39) achieved diagnostic resolution after the initial evaluation, including 78% (25/32) who reached resolution specifically with a CSO prediction–directed workup. Eighteen percent (7/39) required additional evaluation for persistent clinical suspicion of cancer, all of whom achieved resolution (3 with and 4 without cancer). Whole-body imaging contributed to diagnostic resolution in only 49% of CSD cases. Approximately 90% of true- and false-positive cases had imaging tests; more true positives versus false positives (81.0% vs. 38.9%) had nonsurgical and/or surgical procedures. In conclusion, CSO prediction–directed evaluations enabled diagnostic resolution for most participants, although some with negative initial evaluations but persistent suspicion of cancer required additional testing. Prevention Relevance: MCED testing has the potential to increase detection of cancer at earlier stages. As MCED testing is a new technology, there are few data on the diagnostic journeys patients undergo following testing. We observed that for most patients, CSO prediction–directed workups were efficient, leading to diagnostic resolution after initial evaluation.

ABSTRACTAlthough recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell (CAR‐T) therapy in relapsed large B‐cell lymphoma (LBCL) with MYC rearrangement (R‐MYC), the data comparing CAR‐T to autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (auto‐HCT) in such patients who achieve a complete or partial response (CR/PR) after salvage therapies are limited. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with R‐MYC LBCL (including double and triple hit lymphomas) who underwent CAR‐T or auto‐HCT after achieving a CR/PR with salvage therapies using the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research registry. Among the 252 patients (auto‐HCT = 98, CAR‐T = 154), relative to auto‐HCT, CAR‐T was associated with significantly lower overall survival (OS) (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.09, 95% CI 1.38–3.15, p < 0.001) on multivariate analysis. There were no differences in progression‐free survival (PFS) (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.81–1.8 p = 0.36), risk of relapse (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.71–1.69 p = 0.68), nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (HR 1.74, 95% CI 0.64–4.7 p = 0.28) while the post‐relapse survival was longer in auto‐HCT relative to CAR‐T (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.21–3.06 p = 0.01). On propensity score matched analysis accounting for differences in characteristics across the two cohorts, we detected no significant differences in OS (HR 1.72, 95% CI 0.92–3.21 p = 0.09), PFS (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.64–1.68 p = 0.88), NRM (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.35–4.2 p = 0.76), relapse (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.54–1.6 p = 0.8) and post‐relapse survival (HR 2.25, 95% CI 0.98–5.17, p = 0.06). These data, although retrospective, support consideration for auto‐HCT in patients with R‐MYC LBCL who achieve a CR/PR after salvage therapies, particularly in regions with no or limited access to CAR‐T.

ImportanceDirect immunofluorescence (DIF) testing has been an important ancillary tool for the diagnosis of various inflammatory mucocutaneous conditions for more than 50 years. Current DIF test panels are based on historical clinical descriptions; few studies have rigorously addressed preanalytical, analytical, and/or postanalytical aspects, and even fewer have been replicated or validated. Recent unresolved key issues include whether DIF testing and test panels should be triaged or truncated based on clinical indication or histopathologic findings.ObjectiveTo assess levels of consensus regarding practical aspects of DIF testing among immunodermatology testing specialists in the US.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsUsing modified Delphi methods with a priori characterized criteria, a survey containing 54 statements pertaining to DIF testing was created and distributed to assess consensus. Statements not initially reaching consensus were discussed in 2 live virtual sessions, which were supplemented by relevant literature review and free-text survey comments. These statements were then reassessed in a second survey. Immunodermatology testing specialists in US academic institution–based and independent laboratories were invited based on serving as immunodermatology laboratory medical directors, authoring pertinent literature, or delivering relevant talks at major conferences or by referral. The first survey was conducted from January to February 2024, and the second survey was conducted from March to April 2024.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary measured outcome was degree of consensus for various DIF testing practice, including DIF testing triage by histopathology/dermatopathology findings and DIF testing panel tailored truncations by clinical indication.ResultsA total of 23 respondents to the survey invitation had a mean (SD) of 18.5 (11.1) years and median (range) of 20.0 (1.5-46.0) years in immunodermatology laboratory practice. Consensus was achieved for 46 of 54 statements (85.2%) in the initial survey and for an additional 4 statements in the second survey (50 of 54 [92.6%]). Strong consensus was found against tailored truncation of DIF panel based on the clinical indication in the first survey round. The general acceptability of triaging specimens for DIF testing based on histopathology findings remained without consensus after both surveys.Conclusions and RelevanceOverall, participating US specialists in immunodermatology laboratory testing agreed on many practical aspects of DIF testing, including matters not queried previously. The findings also revealed areas of continued controversy and identified issues for prioritized future study.

INTRODUCTION: The recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of resmetirom for treating metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis in patients necessitates patient selection for significant fibrosis or higher (≥F2). No existing vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) algorithm targets ≥F2. METHODS: The mAchine Learning ADvanceD fibrosis and rIsk metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis Novel predictor (ALADDIN) study addressed this gap by introducing a machine-learning-based web calculator that estimates the likelihood of significant fibrosis using routine laboratory parameters with and without VCTE. Our study included a training set of 827 patients, a testing set of 504 patients with biopsy-confirmed metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease from 6 centers, and an external validation set of 1,299 patients from 9 centers. Five algorithms were compared using area under the curve (AUC) in the test set: ElasticNet, random forest, gradient boosting machines, XGBoost, and neural networks. The top 3 (random forest, gradient boosting machines, and XGBoost) formed an ensemble model. RESULTS: In the external validation set, the ALADDIN-F2-VCTE model, using routine laboratory parameters with VCTE (AUC 0.791, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.764–0.819), outperformed VCTE alone (0.745, 95% CI 0.717–0.772, P < 0.0001), FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (0.710, 0.679–0.748, P < 0.0001), and Agile-3 model (0.740, 0.710–0.770, P < 0.0001) regarding the AUC, decision curve analysis, and calibration. The ALADDIN-F2-Lab model, using routine laboratory parameters without VCTE, achieved an AUC of 0.706 (95% CI: 0.668–0.749) and outperformed Fibrosis-4, steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator, and LiverRisk scores. DISCUSSION: Along with the steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator model developed to target significant fibrosis or higher, ALADDIN-F2-VCTE (https://aihepatology.shinyapps.io/ALADDIN1) uniquely supports a refined noninvasive approach to patient selection for resmetirom without the need for liver biopsy. In addition, ALADDIN-F2-Lab (https://aihepatology.shinyapps.io/ALADDIN2) offers an effective alternative when VCTE is unavailable.

Abstract Background Rho(D) immune globulin (RhIg) is used to reduce RhD alloimmunization in pregnancy. This study describes potential causes for RhD alloimmunization after the development and implementation of RhIg. Study Design and Methods This retrospective descriptive study investigated RhD‐negative patients born in 1965–2005 with anti‐D newly identified during 2018–2022. Transfusion, pregnancy, intravenous drug abuse, and transplantation were considered potential alloimmunization sources. Results There were 1200 study patients (852 females; 348 males) at 30 institutions in 5 countries (USA, Canada, UK, New Zealand, Brazil). Most patients had a single potential source of alloimmunization identified (857/1200, 71%), most commonly pregnancy among females (537/852, 63%) and transfusion among males (180/348, 52%). When multiple potential sources were included, males were more likely than females to have a history of transfusion (235/348 [68%] vs. 149/852 [17%], p < .0001) and confirmed or suspected intravenous drug abuse (100/348 [29%] vs. 138/852 [16%], p < .0001). Among females with a history of pregnancy, 119/718 (17%) had healthcare access issues, 120/718 (17%) had pregnancy in a country where they may not have received RhIg, and 21/718 (3%) refused RhIg. Among patients with a history of transfusion, males were more likely than females to have received RhD‐positive red blood cells or whole blood (143/235 [61%] vs. 30/149 [20%], p < .0001) and/or platelets (84/235 [36%] vs. 19/149 [13%], p < .0001). Discussion Pregnancy was the most frequently identified potential source of RhD alloimmunization among females. Transfusion was most frequent in males. Intravenous drug abuse as a common potential source among patients with RhD alloimmunization merits further study.

Background Sinonasal mucosal melanoma has poor survival despite multimodality treatment. While the impact of immunotherapy (IT) on metastatic cutaneous melanoma is well-defined, there are relatively little data on sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Objective We sought to define immunotherapy outcomes in patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Methods A retrospective cohort study evaluated patients treated with IT during their overall treatment strategy for SNMM. Patient demographics, treatment, and survival outcomes were recorded. Results 52 patients had IT treatment for SNMM from 2000 to 2022, with an average age of 69.1 ± 11.9 years. The most common treatment was surgery with radiation and IT ( n = 26, 50%). Most regimens consisted of a combination of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab ( n = 17, 32.7%) or pembrolizumab ( n = 14, 26.9%). 44.2% of patients experienced reported complications. Overall survival at 1-, 2-, and 5 years was 86.9%, 74.1%, and 39.1%, respectively. Conclusion Approximately half of patients will have a local response following immunotherapy, but it is rare to have improvement at metastatic locations. Further research within our group will assess optimal timing and markers that are predictive of response.

AbstractObjectiveNeck metastases are a poor prognostic factor in olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB). Pathologic dural invasion (pathDI) may increase the risk of neck metastases due to invasion of dural lymphatics. We aim to evaluate the prognostic value of pathDI in predicting rates of neck metastases and recurrence using a large, multicenter database of ONB patients.Data sourcesRetrospective review of a prospective, multicenter database of electronic health records of all patients who presented with ONB between 2005 and 2021 at nine tertiary academic care centers within North America.Review methodsClinicopathologic features including modified Kadish staging systems, margin status, treatment modalities, Hyams grading, follow‐up time, and survival.ResultsOf 258 ONB patients, 189 patients met the inclusion criteria. The 10‐year neck recurrence‐free survival (neck‐RFS) rates were 85.7% (75.6‒97.3) and 61.8% (47.9‒79.8) for patients without and with pathDI, respectively (p = 0.018). Time‐to‐event multivariable regression analysis found pathDI to have an odds ratios of 9.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2–80.4, p = 0.04) for neck‐RFS and 9.5 for RFS at any site (95% CI 1.1–83.3, p = 0.04).ConclusionIn multivariable analysis, the presence of pathDI appears to be the strongest predictor of neck recurrence and recurrence at any site. Future studies exploring the benefit of elective neck dissection or radiation for patients with pathDI may impact disease management.