Citations

Wenckebach phenomenon is a well-known electrophysiological character of the atrioventricular node (AVN). AVN-pacing during permanent pacemaker implantation is rare. We herein report the first case of Wenckebach phenomenon in a heart failure patient with chronic atrial fibrillation for more than 30 years during the His-bundle pacing (HBP) procedure. The patient’s symptoms improved significantly. AVN-pacing is available, and HBP is helpful for cardiac remodeling and clinical outcomes.

Background: Various analgesic modalities have been used to improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy of the fascia iliaca block (FIB) with that of other analgesic modalities after hip arthroscopy in terms of postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase up to April 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain and analgesic consumption in patients after hip arthroscopy with FIB versus other pain control modalities. The search phrase used was “hip arthroscopy fascia iliaca randomized.” Patients were evaluated based on postoperative pain scores and total postoperative analgesic consumption. Results: Five studies (3 level 1, 2 level 2) were identified that met inclusion criteria, including 157 patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with FIB (mean age, 38.3 years; 44.6% men) and 159 patients among the following comparison groups: lumbar plexus block (LPB), intra-articular ropivacaine (IAR), local anesthetic infiltration (LAI), saline placebo, and a no-block control group (overall mean age, 36.2 years; 36.5% men). No significant differences in pain scores were reported in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) between the FIB and LPB (3.4 vs 2.9; P = .054), IAR (7.7 vs 7.9; P = .72), control group (no FIB: 4.1 vs 3.8; P = .76); or saline placebo (difference, –0.2 [95% CI, –1.1 to 0.7]). One study reported significantly higher pain scores at 1 hour postoperation in the FIB group compared with the LAI group (5.5 vs 3.4; P = .02). Another study reported significantly greater total analgesic consumption (in morphine equivalent dosing) in the PACU among the FIB group compared with the LPB group (20.8 vs 17.0; P = .02). No significant differences were observed in total PACU analgesic consumption between FIB and other analgesic modalities. Conclusion: In patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, the FIB does not appear to demonstrate superiority to other forms of analgesics in the immediate postoperative period. Therefore, it is not recommended as a routine form of pain control for these procedures.

Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3)/Cyclin-dependent kinases are multifunctional proteins that play an important implicative role in cancer initiations, progression, drug resistance, and metastasis, and has been extensively explored in cancer therapy. However, the genetic alterations of STAT3/CDK2/4/6 and its role in predicting immune infiltration and immunotherapeutic response are yet to be well exploited. In this study, we use in silico methods to analyze differential expression, prognostic value, genetic and epigenetic alterations, association with tumor-infiltrating immune cells, and cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF) infiltrations of STAT3/CDK2/4/6 in multiple cancer types. Our results revealed that the expression of STAT3/CDK2/4/6 was altered in various cancers and is associated with poor overall and disease-free survival of the cohorts. Moreover, genetic alterations in STAT3/CDK2/4/6 co-occurred with a number of other genetic alterations and are associated with poorer prognoses of the cohorts. The protein-protein interaction (PPI) network analysis suggests CDK2/4/6/STAT3 may directly interact with factors that promote tumorigenesis and immune response. We found that STAT3/CDK2/4/6 expressions were associated with infiltrations of CAF and the various immune cells in multiple cancers and it’s associated with poor response to immunotherapy. Collectively, our study suggested that STAT3/CDK2/4/6 are important onco-immune signatures that play central roles in tumor immune invasion, poor prognoses and, immune therapy response. Findings from the present study may therefore be clinically useful in prognosis assessment and follow-up management of immunotherapy.

AbstractBackgroundSeveral chemotherapy agents are associated with the development of non‐ischemic cardiomyopathy (NIC). When chemotherapy‐induced cardiomyopathy (CHIC) is associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or lower, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is often utilized to improve cardiac function and relieve symptoms.ObjectiveTo determine the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of CRT in patients with CHIC.MethodsThe study included 29 patients with CHIC (CHIC group) and 58 patients with other types of NIC (control group) who underwent CRT implantation between 2004 and 2017. The primary endpoints were changes in LVEF, left ventricular end‐systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter (LVEDD) at 6–18 months after CRT. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), systolic strain rate (SRS), early diastolic strain rate (SRE), and overall survival.ResultsOut of 29 patients with CHIC, 62.1% received chemotherapy for lymphoma, 13.7% for breast cancer, and 24.1% for sarcoma. The agent implicated in 93.1% of the patients was an anthracycline. Half of the patients had LBBB. The mean baseline LVEF was 28% ± 8%. The mean baseline QRS duration was 146 ± 26 ms. Twenty‐eight patients had post‐CRT follow‐up data. CRT was associated with improvement in echocardiographic outcomes in the CHIC group and the control group. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (log‐rank p = .148).ConclusionCRT improves left ventricular function and reverses remodeling in patients with CHIC.

Background CD47 is an innate immune checkpoint that binds signal regulatory protein alpha (SIRPα) and delivers a "do not eat" signal to suppress macrophage phagocytosis. Overexpression of CD47 can allow tumor cells to escape immune surveillance. TTI-621 (SIRPαFc) is a fusion protein consisting of the CD47 binding domain of human SIRPα linked to the Fc region of human IgG1, designed to enhance phagocytosis and antitumor activity by blocking the CD47-SIRPα interaction between malignant cells and macrophages, and engaging Fcγ receptors. Here we report updates from the first-in-human study of TTI-621 (NCT02663518) in hematologic malignancies. Methods Study Part 1 tested increasing weekly intravenous doses of TTI-621 based on 3+3 escalation. The maximum tolerated dose was initially determined to be 0.2 mg/kg based on dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of thrombocytopenia [Grade (Gr) 4 of any duration]. Expanded testing followed in patients (pts) with hematologic malignancies, including leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. In Part 2, most pts received 0.2 mg/kg. However, based on investigator discretion, a subset of pts received escalating doses up to 0.5 mg/kg. In Part 3, pts with T-cell lymphomas received stepwise dose escalations from 0.2 to 0.5 mg/kg over the first 5−8 weeks. In over 200 pts tested in Parts 1−3, thrombocytopenia did not increase with dose, typically recovered within 2−4 days, and was not associated with clinical sequelae. Part 4 was then undertaken to optimize TTI-621 dosing and is currently escalating doses in a 3+3 manner through pre-planned dose levels (0.5, 0.7, 1, and 1.4 mg/kg) in pts with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). The DLT criteria was modified to require Gr 4 thrombocytopenia lasting >72 hours. Safety monitoring includes weekly clinical laboratories and assessments of adverse events (AEs) per CTCAE v 4.03. Blood samples are obtained for pharmacokinetics (PK) and for pharmacodynamic (PD) assessments of receptor occupancy (RO) on normal peripheral T cells. Disease assessments are performed per Olsen's criteria. Results In Parts 1−3 (n=214), the most common related AEs were infusion-related reaction (IRR, 43%; 3% Gr ≥3), thrombocytopenia (30%; 22% Gr ≥3), chills (21%; 0% Gr ≥3), and fatigue (15%; 1% Gr ≥3). Objective responses to single agent TTI-621 were achieved in 14/71 (20%) NHL pts including CTCL (n=42, 1 CR, 7 PRs), PTCL (n=22, 2 CRs, 2 PRs) and DLBCL (n=7, 1 CR, 1 PR). In Part 4, as of July 10, 2020, 15 pts (9M/6F, median age 67 years) have enrolled into 4 dose cohorts (0.5−1.4 mg/kg). CTCL subtypes include mycosis fungoides (MF, n=10) and Sézary syndrome (n=5) with advanced (≥IIB) disease in 9 (60%) pts who received a median of 3 (range 1−12) prior systemic therapies. Related AEs have occurred in 11 (73%) pts including IRR (n=10) and thrombocytopenia (n=3); Gr ≥3 AEs have occurred in 4 (27%) pts including thrombocytopenia (n=3), IRRs (n=2), and exfoliative dermatitis (n=1). Thrombocytopenia generally occurred on dosing days, recovered in 2-4 days, and has not worsened with increasing doses. IRRs typically occurred during initial infusions. The Gr 3 IRR events occurred in 2 pts in the 1 and 1.4 mg/kg cohorts; low Gr IRRs have occurred across doses in 8 pts. IRRs typically resolved without recurrence and low Gr events often resolved allowing for completion of infusions. For initial infusions, the Gr 3 IRRs prompted increasing infusion times from 1 hour up to 4 hours and discretional use of steroid pre-medication. The exfoliative dermatitis occurred Day 80 and led to treatment discontinuation in 1 pt with MF whose underlying disease confounded the etiology. PK results reveal dose dependent increases in exposure; PD studies indicate ~60% RO at end of infusion up to 1 mg/kg. Antitumor activity to date includes 1 PR and 1 skin CR in 6 evaluable pts in the 1 mg/kg cohort; 2 responding pts bridged to allogeneic transplantation. The mean % change in mSWAT scores were -0.4%, -27%, and -37% for 0.5, 0.7 and 1 mg/kg cohorts, respectively. 1.4 mg/kg cohort results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions In Parts 1−3, TTI-621 doses of 0.05 to 0.5 mg/kg were well-tolerated and demonstrated single agent activity in multiple hematologic malignancies. Preliminary data from Part 4 dose optimization indicate that weekly infusions of TTI-621 up to 1.4 mg/kg are well-tolerated without dose limiting or cumulative thrombocytopenia. Antitumor activity was seen at 1 mg/kg; dose escalation is continuing at 2 mg/kg. Disclosures Horwitz: Janssen: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; ASTEX: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Vividion Therapeutics: Consultancy; Infinity/Verastem: Research Funding; Aileron: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADCT Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affirmed: Consultancy; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Corvus: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakka Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Forty Seven: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Consultancy. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy. Sawas:Flatiron Health: Current Employment; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Affimed: Research Funding; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Feldman:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding. Sokol:EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa/Kirin Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kymera Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mei:Sanofi: Consultancy; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Flinn:Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vincera Pharma: Consultancy; Agios: Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; Great Point Partners: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Research Funding; Curio Science: Consultancy; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Other; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals ≠: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Villa:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AZ: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nano String: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz Canada: Consultancy, Honoraria; Immunovaccine: Consultancy, Honoraria; Purdue Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria. Percival:Pfizer: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Nohla Therapeutics: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Oscotec: Research Funding; Cardiff Oncology: Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Research Funding. Jagadeesh:Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Debiopharm Group: Research Funding. Savage:Merck, BMS, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Servier: Consultancy; Roche (institutional): Research Funding; Merck, BMS, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, AstraZeneca, AbbVie: Honoraria; BeiGene: Other: Steering Committee. Akilov:Mallinckrodt: Consultancy; Medivir: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Soligenix: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Actelion: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Diefenbach:Trillium: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kim:Kyowa-Kirin Pharma: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medivir: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Horizon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; miRagen: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Galderma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eisai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Elorac: Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc: Research Funding; Neumedicine: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Solingenix: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding. Lin:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Catalano:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Petrova:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Uger:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Molloy:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Large:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Shou:Trillium Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Background Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) has a median age at diagnosis of 67 years. The only curative therapy remains an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), yet it is complicated by non-relapse mortality (NRM) and ongoing morbidity including graft versus host disease (GVHD) that may impact survival, particularly in older patients. We examined the outcomes and predictors of success in a large cohort of patients aged 60 years and older receiving a HCT for AML in first complete remission (CR1). Methods HCT recipients 60 years or older with AML in CR1 reported to the CIBMTR were included. Cox models were used to compare rates of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, acute GHVD, chronic GVHD in 3 separate age groups: 60-64 years vs. 65-70 years vs. 70+ years (Figure 1A). Results 1,327 patients undergoing HCT from 2007-2017 were included. The three age cohorts (60-64; 65-69; 70+) were comparable in demographic and disease characteristics, except the older cohort had more males, more de novo AML, and a higher incidence of measurable residual disease (MRD) pre-HCT. Fewer had sibling donors and more were performed in recent years. With median follow-up of nearly 3 years, patients aged 60-64 had significantly better OS, DFS and lower NRM than those aged 65-69 and 70+. Those aged 65-69 and 70+ had similar outcomes (Figure 1). Three-year OS for the 3 cohorts was 49.4%, 42.3%, and 44.7% respectively (p=0.026). NRM was higher with increasing age, cord blood as graft source and HCT-CI score of ≥ 3. Conditioning intensity was not a significant predictor of outcomes with HR for OS for 60-69 cohort of 0.46 for RIC and 0.49 for MAC (p=0.38). There was no difference in the relapse rate, incidence of G3/4 acute GVHD, or incidence of moderate-severe chronic GVHD across the age cohorts. Poor risk cytogenetics, presence of MRD prior to HCT, cord blood as graft source, and transplant prior to 2016 were significant predictors of poor OS. Discussion In this large retrospective series of HCT for AML in CR1, age had a small effect OS and NRM after accounting for other predictors. High-risk features such as poor cytogenetics and presence of MRD prior to HCT were significantly associated with relapse and accounted for most of the adverse impact on OS and DFS. Age did not influence the incidence of either acute or chronic GVHD; graft type and associated GVHD prophylaxis were most important. These data suggest that age alone is not a barrier to successful HCT for AML in CR1 and should not exclude patients from HCT. Efforts should focus on minimizing residual disease and better donor selection. Table Disclosures Kebriaei: Ziopharm: Other: Research Support; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board; Jazz: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Research Support; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board. Weisdorf:FATE Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding.

Introduction: Standard of care for patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (RR) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is salvage therapy (tx) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, most pts with high-risk RR HL will relapse after HCT. The AETHERA study demonstrated that post-HCT consolidation with brentuximab vedotin (BV) in high-risk HL pts improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo, particularly in pts with 2+ risk factors (Moskowitz, 2018). Pts with prior BV exposure were excluded from AETHERA, and BV is increasingly used prior to HCT in HL. PD1 blockade is effective in pts with RR HL and PD1 monotherapy as post-HCT consolidation in HL resulted in promising 18 mo PFS (Armand, 2019). Combined BV and nivolumab (Nivo) is a safe and effective salvage tx in HL, therefore we conducted a multicenter phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BV-Nivo post-HCT consolidation in high risk RR HL. Methods: After HCT, adult pts with high-risk HL defined as having ≥ 1 of the following modified AETHERA risk factors were eligible: primary refractory HL, relapse < 1 year of completing initial tx, extranodal disease (dz) at relapse, B symptoms (sx) at relapse, requiring > 1 salvage tx, not in CR at HCT. Prior BV or PD1 blockade were allowed if pts were not refractory. Pts underwent HCT according to institutional standards at the 5 centers. Starting between day 30-75 after HCT, pts received 1.8 mg/kg of BV and 3mg/kg nivo q21 days for a planned 8 cycles. If 1 drug was discontinued due to toxicity, the other could be continued. Investigators assessed response and progressive disease (PD) according to the 2014 Lugano classification. The primary endpoint was 18 mo PFS from study tx initiation. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), safety, and the response rate in pts not in complete response (CR) at baseline. Results: 59 pts were enrolled and treated with at least one dose of study tx. Baseline characteristics are listed in Table 1. 18 (31%) pts were primary refractory, 35 (59%) had early relapse, 23 (39%) had extranodal dz and 14 (24%) had B sx at relapse, 15 (25%) received > 1 salvage tx before HCT, and 48 (81%) were in CR at HCT. 21 (36%) had 1 modified AETHERA risk factor, 23 (40%) had 2 and 14 (24%) had 3+ risk factors. The median follow-up time from study tx initiation was 15.7 months (range, 2.8-35.5). Patients initiated BV-nivo a median 54 days from HCT (range, 34-75) and received a median of 8 cycles (range, 1-8). 29 (49%) pts completed all 8 cycles of BV and nivo and 45 (76%) patients completed 8 cycles of one drug. 14 (24%) pts discontinued both BV and nivo early, including 6 for adverse events (AE), 6 pt withdrawals, 1 pt lost to follow-up, and 1 pt death from PJP pneumonia unrelated to study tx. BV was discontinued in 8 (14%) pts - due to grade (gr) 3 peripheral neuropathy (PN) in 2 pts, gr 2 PN in 2 pts, carpal tunnel syndrome in 1 pt, gastrointestinal AEs in 2 pts, and infusion related reaction in 1 pt. Nivo was discontinued in 7 (12%) pts - due to pneumonitis in 2 pts, and colitis, elevated bilirubin, abnormal transaminases, pneumonia with elevated creatinine, and hypotension with fever in 1 pt each. BV was dose reduced to 1.2mg/kg in 11 (19%) pts, 9 pts for PN, and 1 each for neutropenia and arthralgia. The most common AEs related to BV-Nivo consolidation were PN (51%, 3% gr 3), neutropenia (42%, 31% gr 3-4), fatigue (37%), diarrhea (29%, 3% gr 3), nausea (25%, 2% gr 3), arthralgia (24%), AST elevation (24%, 2% gr 3). The most frequent gr 3-4 AEs were neutropenia (31%), pneumonitis (7%), and ALT elevation (5%). Immune-related (ir) AEs requiring systemic corticosteroids occurred in 18 (31%) patients. Most common Gr 2 or higher irAEs included: pneumonitis (12%), AST or ALT elevation (8%), hypothyroidism (5%), and rash (3%). 6 pts were not in CR at baseline after HCT (all PR). 5 pts converted to CR with study tx and 1 pt remained in PR without PD. There were only 2 PFS events, 1 pt with relapse at 15 months and PJP-related death after prophylaxis was self-discontinued. The estimated 18 mo PFS and OS in all patients were 95% and 98%, respectively. The estimated 18 mo PFS in pts with 2+ and 3+ risk factors were 92% and 89%, respectively. Conclusions: Post-HCT consolidation with BV-Nivo in pts with high-risk RR HL is a promising approach, with only 1 relapse observed in our cohort with short follow-up thus far. Post-HCT BV-Nivo was tolerable, though IrAEs were observed more frequently than in the pre-HCT setting and PN and neutropenia were common. Disclosures Herrera: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Nieto:Affimed: Consultancy, Other: Grant Support; Secura Bio: Other: Grant Support; Novartis: Other: Grant Support; Astra Zeneca: Other: Grant Support. Holmberg:Sanofi: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Millenium-Takeda: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; UpToDate: Patents & Royalties: Royalties; Janssen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Mei:Sanofi: Consultancy; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Autolus Therapeutics: Current Employment. Rosen:Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; NeoGenomics: Consultancy; Aileron Therapeutics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pebromene: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; paradigm Medical Communications: Speakers Bureau. Kwak:CJ Healthcare: Consultancy; Xeme Biopharma/Theratest: Other: equity; Sellas Life Sciences Grp: Consultancy; Enzychem Life Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Antigenics: Other: equity; InnoLifes, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pepromene Bio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion Healthcare: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion, Inc.: Consultancy. Feldman:Portola: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Trillium: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Viracta: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Nivolumab is not FDA-approved for use as consolidation after autologous stem cell transplantation

Background: Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), women are less likely to receive catheter ablation and may have more complications and less durable results. Most information about sex-specific differences after ablation comes from observational data. We prespecified an examination of outcomes by sex in the 2204-patient CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation). Methods: CABANA randomized patients with AF age ≥65 years or <65 years with ≥1 risk factor for stroke to a strategy of catheter ablation with pulmonary vein isolation versus drug therapy with rate/rhythm control agents. The primary composite outcome was death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest, and key secondary outcomes included AF recurrence. Results: CABANA randomized 819 (37%) women (ablation 413, drug 406) and 1385 men (ablation 695, drug 690). Compared with men, women were older (median age, 69 years versus 67 years for men), were more symptomatic (48% Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF Severity Class 3 or 4 versus 39% for men), had more symptomatic heart failure (42% with New York Heart Association Class ≥II versus 32% for men), and more often had a paroxysmal AF pattern at enrollment (50% versus 39% for men) ( P <0.0001 for all). Women were less likely to have ancillary (nonpulmonary vein) ablation procedures performed during the index procedure (55.7% versus 62.2% in men, P =0.043), and complications from treatment were infrequent in both sexes. For the primary outcome, the hazard ratio for those who underwent ablation versus drug therapy was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.62–1.65) in women and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.51–1.05) in men (interaction P value=0.299). The risk of recurrent AF was significantly reduced in patients undergoing ablation compared with those receiving drug therapy regardless of sex, but the effect was greater in men (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51–0.82] for women versus hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.40–0.58] for men; interaction P value=0.060). Conclusions: Clinically relevant treatment-related strategy differences in the primary and secondary clinical outcomes of CABANA were not seen between men and women, and there were no sex differences in adverse events. The CABANA trial results support catheter ablation as an effective treatment strategy for both women and men. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT00911508.

AbstractBackgroundThe subcutaneous implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (S‐ICD) has a larger generator and its implantation involves more dissection and tunneling compared to traditional transvenous defibrillator system. Liposomal bupivacaine, an extended‐release bupivacaine with 72 h of duration has been used for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing S‐ICD implantation. Our aim was to compare postoperative pain and opioid prescription patterns among patients undergoing S‐ICD implantation who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent subcutaneous ICD implantation from January 1, 2013 to March 30, 2018 at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Patients were categorized into those who received liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not. Data on inpatient pain score, outpatient opioid prescription rates at discharge, and doses based on oral morphine equivalents (OME) were collected.ResultsA total of 104 patients underwent S‐ICD implantation. Intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine was used in 69% of patients. Patients who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine had similar mean inpatient pain scores (2.9 vs. 2.9, p = .786). There was also no difference in the rate of inpatient opioid administration (79.2% vs. 87.5%, p = .4139), outpatient opioid prescription (23.6% vs. 12.5%, p = .29), or mean OME (41.7‐mg vs. 16.6‐mg, p = .188) when comparing patients those who received intraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine and those who did not.ConclusionIntraprocedural liposomal bupivacaine administration was not associated with any significant impact on postoperative pain scores, inpatient opioid administration, and outpatient opioid prescription rates or OME amounts at discharge.

ABSTRACT Introduction The emergence of more complex Prolonged Field Care in austere settings and the need to assist inexperienced providers’ ability to treat patients create an urgent need for effective tools to support care. We report on a project to develop a phone-/tablet-based decision support system for prehospital tactical combat casualty care that collects physiologic and other clinical data and uses machine learning to detect and differentiate shock manifestation. Materials and Methods Software interface development methods included literature review, rapid prototyping, and subject matter expert design requirements reviews. Machine learning algorithm methods included development of a model trained on publicly available Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care data, then on de-identified data from Mayo Clinic Intensive Care Unit. Results The project team interviewed 17 Army, Air Force, and Navy medical subject matter experts during design requirements review sessions. They had an average of 17 years of service in military medicine and an average of 4 deployments apiece and all had performed tactical combat casualty care on live patients during deployment. Comments provided requirements for shock identification and management in prehospital settings, including support for indication of shock probability and shock differentiation. The machine learning algorithm based on logistic regression performed best among other algorithms we tested and was able to predict shock onset 90 minutes before it occurred with better than 75% accuracy in the test dataset. Conclusions We expect the Trauma Triage, Treatment, and Training Decision Support system will augment a medic’s ability to make informed decisions based on salient patient data and to diagnose multiple types of shock through remotely trained, field deployed ML models.