Citations

PURPOSE To reduce costs in genomic studies of time-to-event phenotypes like survival, researchers often sequence a subset of samples from a larger cohort. This process usually involves two phases: first, collecting inexpensive variables from all samples, and second, selecting a subset for expensive measurements, for example, sequencing-based biomarkers. Common two-phase designs include nested case-control and case-cohort designs. Additional designs include sampling subjects based on follow-up time, like extreme case-control designs. Recently an optimal two-phase design using a maximum likelihood-based method was proposed, which could accommodate arbitrary sample selection in the second phase. However, direct comparisons of this optimal design with others in terms of power and computational cost is lacking. METHODS This study performs a direct evaluation of typical two-phase designs, including Tao's optimal design, on type I error, power, effect size estimation, and computational time, using both simulated and real data sets. RESULTS Results show that the optimal design had the highest power and accurate effect size estimation under the Cox regression model. Surprisingly, logistic regression achieved similar power with much lower computational cost than a more sophisticated method. The study further applied these methods to the MP2PRT study, reporting hazard ratios of cancer subtypes on relapse risk. CONCLUSION Recommendations for selecting two-phase designs and analysis methods are regarding power, bias of estimated effect size, and computational time.

ABSTRACTIntroductionLung transplantation has been evolving since its inception in 1963. Over recent years, literature has suggested a shift in the perioperative strategy of mechanical support toward extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as the preferred modality of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in lung transplantation. The Survey of ECLS Application in Lung transplantation (SEAL) was designed to elucidate the current practice patterns of perioperative ECLS within the United States.MethodsIn this cross‐sectional study, a physician from 62 adult lung transplantation centers across the United States of America (USA) was surveyed on their institutional practices regarding the perioperative management of lung transplantation patients, with a focus on mechanical support.ResultsThe survey completion rate was 74% (46/62 eligible institutions). Most transplant centers utilize venoarterial (VA) ECMO (78%, 36/46) and/or venovenous (VV) ECMO (93%, 29/43) as a bridge to lung transplantation. When ECLS is used intraoperatively, 61% of (28/46) responding programs use VA ECMO as their preferred support. All programs use transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) intraoperatively, 85% (33/39) cannulate for ECMO centrally, and 74% (29/39) use a combination of inhaled and intravenous anesthesia while using ECMO intraoperatively. Most programs do not use antifibrinolytic during VA ECMO (62%, 28/45). Anticoagulation management and VA ECMO flows throughout the procedure showed considerable variation.ConclusionData from SEAL illustrates that though there are some practice commonalities within the United States, there is also quite a bit of variability in practice. Multiple dominant practices within the USA are consistent with a recently published International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation consensus.

Importance The emergency department (ED) offers an opportunity to initiate palliative care for older adults with serious, life-limiting illness. Objective To assess the effect of a multicomponent intervention to initiate palliative care in the ED on hospital admission, subsequent health care use, and survival in older adults with serious, life-limiting illness. Design, Setting, and Participants Cluster randomized, stepped-wedge, clinical trial including patients aged 66 years or older who visited 1 of 29 EDs across the US between May 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022, had 12 months of prior Medicare enrollment, and a Gagne comorbidity score greater than 6, representing a risk of short-term mortality greater than 30%. Nursing home patients were excluded. Intervention A multicomponent intervention (the Primary Palliative Care for Emergency Medicine intervention) included (1) evidence-based multidisciplinary education; (2) simulation-based workshops on serious illness communication; (3) clinical decision support; and (4) audit and feedback for ED clinical staff. Main Outcome and Measures The primary outcome was hospital admission. The secondary outcomes included subsequent health care use and survival at 6 months. Results There were 98 922 initial ED visits during the study period (median age, 77 years [IQR, 71-84 years]; 50% were female; 13% were Black and 78% were White; and the median Gagne comorbidity score was 8 [IQR, 7-10]). The rate of hospital admission was 64.4% during the preintervention period vs 61.3% during the postintervention period (absolute difference, −3.1% [95% CI, −3.7% to −2.5%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.03 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.14]). There was no difference in the secondary outcomes before vs after the intervention. The rate of admission to an intensive care unit was 7.8% during the preintervention period vs 6.7% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.15]). The rate of at least 1 revisit to the ED was 34.2% during the preintervention period vs 32.2% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.09]). The rate of hospice use was 17.7% during the preintervention period vs 17.2% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.16]). The rate of home health use was 42.0% during the preintervention period vs 38.1% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.10]). The rate of at least 1 hospital readmission was 41.0% during the preintervention period vs 36.6% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.10]). The rate of death was 28.1% during the preintervention period vs 28.7% during the postintervention period (adjusted OR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.98 to 1.18]). Conclusions and Relevance This multicomponent intervention to initiate palliative care in the ED did not have an effect on hospital admission, subsequent health care use, or short-term mortality in older adults with serious, life-limiting illness. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03424109

Background: Splenic marginal zone lymphoma (SMZL) is a rare indolent disease with a median overall survival (OS) of more than 10 years, although a proportion of patients may develop aggressive histology transformation. In a previous report from this large, international dataset, the 10-year cumulative incidence of transformation was 17% (95% 13-21) and in another study of 186 patients, the 10-year cumulative incidence was 14%Click or tap here to enter text.. In this report, we focus on risk factors for transformation as well as clinical characteristics and outcomes of transformed SMZL (tSMZL). Patients and methods: Adults diagnosed with SMZL in 2000-2018 were identified through regional or nationwide population-based registries or from hospital registries. Only patients likely to have SMZL as defined by Matutes et al. were included. Those with discordant lymphoma and/or transformation at diagnosis were excluded. Medical records were reviewed by local clinicians with experience in hematology/oncology, and detailed information on clinical characteristics, treatment lines, and outcomes was collected. Only histologically confirmed high-grade transformations (HT) were included. OS was defined as the time from transformation to death or censoring at last follow-up. Additional analyses stratified by treatment exposure prior to HT and treatment of HT were conducted. Multivariable Cox analyses were performed to determine clinicopathological features associated with transformation and OS. Results: Out of 940 patients with SMZL, 111 developed HT during a median follow-up of 9.1 years. The median time from diagnosis to HT was 3.4 years with an interquartile range of 1.6-7.4 years. Median age at HT was 71 years. Patients with HT shared similar baseline characteristics to those without in terms of age at diagnosis (66.4 vs 67.6), f:m ratio (1.5 vs 1.1) and ECOG ³2 (7.2% vs 7.4%). The 5-yr OS from the time of HT was 42% (CI 95%, 32-54). Of the 111 patients with tSMZL, a complete treatment history from SMZL diagnosis until HT was available for 88 included in the following analyses. By the time of HT, 46 had not received any prior systemic therapy (37 only splenectomy, 9 no therapy), 6 patients had received rituximab alone or combined with splenectomy, and 36 patients had received chemotherapy alone or as part of combined modality treatment. In a uni- and multivariable models for HT, we assessed age, treatment at diagnosis, sex, extra-hilar lymphadenopathy, and extranodal involvement. In both the uni- and multivariable model, age >70 (HR 1.9, 95% CI: 1.1-3.4), immediate treatment including splenectomy (HR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.05-3.6), and extra-hilar lymphadenopathy (HR 1.9, 95% CI: 1.1-3.3) were associated with higher HT hazard, while extranodal involvement (HR 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.84) was associated with a lower HT hazard. At the time of first-line treatment, multivariable analysis revealed similar results and with no association between risk of transformation and treatment strategy (i.e splenectomy alone, rituximab monotherapy or chemotherapy with /without rituximab or splenectomy, and other). At the time of HT, patients who had been previously treated with chemotherapy had an inferior 5-year OS of 24% (95%CI: 13-44%) versus 54% (95%CI: 41-71%) for those who had not received chemotherapy prior to HT. In contrast, there was no difference in the survival of patients that transformed less than or more than 24 months from diagnosis with 5-year OS after HT of 35% (95%CI 20-60%) and 45% (95%CI, 33-61%) respectively. In a multivariable Cox regression analyses of age at time of HT, sex, time since last treatment <24 months, chemo-exposure in previous treatment lines and anthracycline-containing therapy (+/-R) at the time of HT, only prior chemo-exposure was borderline associated with poorer OS (HR 1.8, 95%CI: 0.9-3.5). Conclusion: Patients with SMZL face a notable risk of developing tSMZL over time. Patients in need of immediate treatment at first SMZL diagnosis, age >70 and extrahilar lymphadenopathy had a higher risk of tSMZL and outcomes at the time of HT were poor if patients had been exposed to prior chemotherapy after adjustment for age, sex, and time since last treatment.

Introduction: GOLCA is a potential first-in-class CELMoDTM agent for the treatment of lymphoma, purposefully designed to target the proteins Ikaros/Aiolos to produce dual immunomodulatory and anti-tumor activity, with preferential distribution to lymphoid organs. Pharmacodynamic data in pts with R/R FL show that, combined with RTX, the immunomodulatory effects of GOLCA are significantly increased (Chavez et al, EHA 2024, #1132). GOLCA as monotherapy (mono) and + RTX has been shown to be well-tolerated and effective in pts with R/R DLBCL (Chavez et al, ASH 2023, #4496) and R/R FL (Chavez et al, EHA 2024, #1132). Here, we report 30 mo follow up of pts with R/R FL who received GOLCA mono, and updated safety/efficacy of GOLCA + RTX from the ongoing Phase 1/2 CC-99282-NHL-001 study (NCT03930953). Methods: Pts with R/R FL with ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy (L) received GOLCA mono at different dosing schedules during part A (dose exploration) and GOLCA ± RTX at 0.2 mg or 0.4 mg days (d) 1-14 every 28 d (q28d) in part B (dose expansion). Total treatment duration with GOLCA was up to 2 years or until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity, whichever occurred first. The efficacy-evaluable population consisted of pts completing ≥ 1 cycle of GOLCA and having baseline tumor assessment and ≥ 1 post-baseline tumor assessment or clinical progression or disease-related death. Results: As of May 31, 2024, 63 pts with R/R FL have enrolled: GOLCA mono (n = 19) at various dosing schedules and GOLCA + RTX at 0.2 mg (n = 22) or 0.4 mg (n = 22) on d1-14 q28d schedule. The median time from diagnosis to first dose of GOLCA was 68 mo (range, 23-136) and 59 mo (range, 15-309) in GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, respectively. The median number of prior therapies received was 4 (range, 2-11), and 3 (range, 1-12) in GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, respectively. In the GOLCA mono and + RTX cohorts, 9/19 (47%) and 13/43 (30%) pts had received prior lenalidomide (len)-based therapy, with 5/9 and 7/13 having len-refractory disease, respectively. In the GOLCA + RTX cohort, 10/43 (23%) had prior CAR T cell therapy and 6/43 (14%) had prior anti-CD20xCD3 bispecific antibody with or without CAR T cell therapy. In the GOLCA + RTX-treated safety population (n = 43), the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar across 0.2 and 0.4 mg dose levels (DL). The most frequent grade (G) 3+ TEAEs were neutropenia (44%) and anemia (12%). The incidence of febrile neutropenia was 7%. Serious adverse events occurred in 30% of pts, with febrile neutropenia and pneumonia being the most common, in 2 pts (5%) each, as well as pulmonary embolism in 1 pt. Neutropenia led to GOLCA dose interruption in 4 pts (9%) and dose reduction in 1 pt (2%). No pts discontinued treatment because of GOLCA-related TEAEs. Non-hematological TEAEs (e.g., GI toxicity, rash, fatigue) were all low-grade (except 1 pt with G3 fatigue). There were no new safety signals identified for GOLCA mono (part A) at the 30-mo follow up period. In the efficacy-evaluable population, at a median follow up of 6 mo (range 3-18), the ORR and CRR in the GOLCA + RTX cohort (n = 29) were 57% and 29% at 0.2 mg dose (n = 14) and 93% and 67% at 0.4 mg dose (n = 15), respectively. The median time to response was 2 mo (first response assessment). At the 0.4 mg DL of GOLCA + RTX, consistent responses were seen in pts at 2L/3L and 4L+, including in those with prior exposure to len-based therapies and/or T-cell-redirecting therapy. At the 0.4 mg DL, 12/14 (86%) pts remained in response at the time of data cut-off. In pts receiving GOLCA mono across different dose schedules in part A (n = 12), ORR and CRR were 67% and 42%, respectively. Responses were durable, with median DOR of 22 mo (range, 2-51) at a median follow up of 30 mo. 33% of pts (4/12) have completed 2 yrs of protocol defined GOLCA treatment and remain in response at the 1 yr post-treatment follow-up period, without requiring any intervening treatment. Conclusions: GOLCA 0.4 mg + RTX was well tolerated and highly active in heavily pre-treated pts with R/R FL, including those with prior exposure to len-based therapies and/or T-cell-redirecting therapies. Treatment with fixed-duration GOLCA mono led to durable responses including a subset of pts remaining treatment free, without progression at extended follow up. These data further support development of GOLCA + RTX as a fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free, outpatient treatment option in pts with R/R FL, and also pts with newly diagnosed advanced stage FL (NCT06425302).

Introduction E1910 randomized pts with ALL aged 30-70 years who were measurable residual disease negative (MRD-) by multi-color flow cytometry (FC) after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (chemo) with or without blinatumomab (blina). The addition of blina resulted in improved overall survival (OS) (Litzow, NEJM 2024) and led to a new standard of care. Older ALL pts have inferior outcomes when compared to younger pts in part due to increased treatment toxicity. In E1910, exposure to dexamethasone and pegasparagase was reduced for older pts (age >55 years). We present results of subgroup analyses describing outcomes of older pts enrolled in E1910. Methods Details of the E1910 protocol remission induction (step 1), high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase intensification (step 2), blina randomization (step 3), and maintenance (step 4) or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) were previously presented (Litzow, NEJM 2024). MRD status was determined after step 2 centrally with 6-color FC with MRD- defined as <0.01% in the bone marrow (BM). Following approval of blina in the US for MRD positive (MRD+) disease in 2018, MRD+ pts were assigned to the blina arm and no longer randomized. The primary objective was to compare the OS and relapse free survival (RFS) among older pts aged >55 years (pre-specified stratification factor) who received chemo + blina to that of pts who received chemo alone (step 3 treatment). Estimates of OS and RFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS and RFS between treatment arms was conducted using the two-sided stratified log-rank test and Cox model with CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intended to receive HCT or not as stratification factors. Stratified Multivariate Cox models of OS and RFS were used to further evaluate the effect of step 3 treatment, adjusted by gender, white blood cell count (WBC), platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, BM blasts, performance status and combined molecular risk category. Results Among the 488 enrolled pts, 211 were ≥55 years old with median age of 61 (range 55-70). Among older pts, 49.3% were female and 83.4% were white, 17 (8.1%) pts had WBC >30.000/uL at the time of diagnosis. 156 (73.9%) pts had CD10+ early B-ALL and 46 (21.8%) had CD10- B-ALL immunophenotype. The most common genetic subgroups were low hypodiploid (n=58, 27.5%), BCR::ABL1-like (n=34, 16.1%) and KMT2A rearranged (n=26, 12.3%). 8.1% of pts had low, 9.0% intermediate, 63.5% high combined molecular risk disease and in 19.4% of pts risk could not be assigned. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different in chemo + blina and chemo only pts. The median follow-up for this analysis from step 1 registration was 54.6 months. Complete response with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery after induction was observed in 174 (82.5%) pts (167 CR, 7 CRi). 93 (44%) pts were MRD-. 32 (15.1%) pts received HCT on study and 24 (11.4%) pts received it off study. Among MRD- pts (n=93), 46 were randomized to and 45 received blina: 6 (13.3%) pts had 1, 14 (31.1%) had 2, 2 (4.4%) had 3 and 23 (51.1%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 71% and 67% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.37-1.50; multivariate model: HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.25-1.27). 3-year RFS were 69% and 59% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.39-1.45; multivariate model: HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.32-1.42). Among MRD+ pts (n=25), 14 were randomized to and 11 received blina: 7 (63.6%) pts had 2, and 4 (36.4%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 66% and 44% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.12-3.64). 3-year RFS were 64% and 31% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.15-2.74). Frequency of treatment-related toxicities among older pts during different study phases and treatment assignments will be presented. Conclusion Despite evidence of improved outcomes in the whole study cohort, the addition of blina to consolidation chemo for older pts with ALL was not associated with statistically significant improvement of OS or RFS in this exploratory analysis not powered to detect the difference in subgroups. This is possibly due to sample size but may be due to biologic differences in the older adult population. Further studies are needed to definitively determine tolerance and benefit of blina addition to consolidation for older pts with ALL.

Introduction: Based on a donor versus no-donor analysis, UKALLXII/E2993 showed a survival benefit for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) in first complete remission (CR1) compared to consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy alone. The follow-up phase 3 E1910 trial (NCT02003222) randomized BCR::ABL1-negative B-lineage ALL patients (pts) aged 30-70 years in measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative CR1 after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (CC) +/- blinatumomab (blin) and demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) with blin (Litzow, NEJM 2024). The current exploratory subgroup analysis evaluates outcomes of MRD-negative pts randomized on E1910 who underwent alloHCT on trial. Methods: Among pts enrolled on E1910, pts in MRD-negative CR1 by 6-color flow cytometry after intensification who were randomized to CC +/- blin and subsequently underwent alloHCT were identified. We compared baseline characteristics, MRD status post induction, relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method and the two-sided log-rank test and Cox model. A multivariable analysis was performed with alloHCT included as a time-varying covariate as well as a landmark analysis comparing the outcome of pts with unfavorable risk on the CC + blin arm who underwent alloHCT versus those who did not. Results: Of 224 MRD-negative randomized pts, 44 underwent alloHCT on trial: 22 in each arm. The median time from randomization to transplant was 3.2 months (mos). The median follow-up from initial registration was 57.8 mos. Baseline demographics including age (median 55 years), gender (53% male), race (89% white) and ethnicity (89% non-Hispanic/Latino) were equally distributed. Compared to CC + blin, the median peripheral blood white cell (WBC) count and blast percentage at diagnosis were higher in the CC arm at 6,640 vs 3,740/uL and 55 vs 9%, respectively, while median marrow blast percentage and overall unfavorable risk as defined in E1910 (55% vs 64%) were similar. Of the 44 MRD-negative pts who proceeded to alloHCT on study, 77% in the CC arm and 64% in the CC+ blin arm were MRD-negative after induction. Myeloablative conditioning was given to the majority of pts (68% CC arm and 73% CC+blin arm) and the most common graft versus host disease prophylaxis was tacrolimus-based on both arms. Among the 44 pts who underwent alloHCT, the observed hazard ratio (HR) comparing relative risk of death between pts randomized to CC+blin or CC only was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.12-2.11) with a 3-year OS rate of 82% versus 71% and the HR comparing relative risk of relapse/death was 0.52 (CI: 0.15-1.79) with a 3-year RFS rate of 82% versus 67%. For patients with unfavorable risk, 3-year OS and 3-year RFS in each treatment arm were both 71% versus 65%. Among 50 pts with unfavorable risk in MRD-negative CR after intensification who were randomized to CC + blin, a landmark analysis performed at 5 mos post randomization showed 3-year OS and RFS rates of 71% versus 90% and 71% versus 86% between the 14 pts who underwent alloHCT and those who did not, respectively. Receipt of alloHCT was a time-varying covariate in a multivariable analysis with gender, WBC count, platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, bone marrow blasts, performance status, and combined molecular risk category. Age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and intention to receive alloHCT were used as stratification factors. In the entire cohort of MRD-negative pts who were randomized, there was a significant association between improved OS and the receipt of CC+blin vs CC alone (HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.26 - 0.82; p=0.009), better performance status of 0-1 vs ≥2 and favorable vs unfavorable risk ALL. In contrast, the receipt of alloHCT had no significant effect on OS (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.49 - 2.01). Conclusions: Within the constraints of small numbers, this exploratory subgroup analysis demonstrates that in pts with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1-negative B-ALL treated on E1910 who achieved MRD-negativity after intensification, alloHCT outcomes did not appear to be different with or without blin in consolidation. In a multivariate analysis of all MRD-negative pts, receipt of blin but not alloHCT was associated with improved OS. Further investigation is warranted to characterize the relative benefit of blinatumomab in pts receiving alloHCT in frontline consolidation.