Citations

Introduction: Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) such as decitabine or azacitidine are established standard of care for the treatment of MDS and CMML. The oral bioavailability of these agents has been limited due to rapid degradation by cytidine deaminase (CDA) in the gut and liver, hence requiring intravenous infusion or subcutaneous injections daily for 5-7 days every month (m). This parenteral administration requirement adds significant burden to older cancer patients due to daily time commitment and travel to treatment centers. It also increases exposure to and infection risk with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oral decitabine 35 mg/cedazuridine 100 mg (ASTX727) is an oral fixed dose combination drug of decitabine and the CDA inhibitor cedazuridine that have shown 99% (90% CI 93% to 106%) equivalent exposure to standard dose IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 in a randomized cross-over study (Garcia-Manero et al, ASH 2019). Here, we present the clinical efficacy and safety results of oral decitabine/cedazuridine from 133 patient study in MDS and CMML (ASTX727-02 ASCERTAIN study). Methods: We used a randomized cross over design where patients were randomized in the first 2 cycles 1:1 to either Sequence A: decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg in Cycle 1 followed by IV decitabine at 20 mg/m2 in Cycle 2, or Sequence B: IV decitabine in Cycle 1 followed by oral decitabine/cedazuridine in Cycle 2 to do an intra-patient comparison of decitabine PK (primary PK endpoint: decitabine AUC equivalence over 5 days of dosing). Cycles were repeated every 28 days. All patients received oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all subsequent cycles from Cycle 3 onwards until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were eligible as per the FDA-approved label of IV decitabine (MDS patients by FAB classification including CMML, or MDS IPSS Intermediate-1, 2 or high-risk patients). Clinical endpoints were best response as assessed by an independent expert panel according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 response criteria, transfusion independence for at least 8 or 16 consecutive weeks, overall survival, and safety. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 4.03. Results: 138 subjects were randomized, of whom 133 were treated on study. The median age was 71.0 years (range 44-88), 65% were male, 88% MDS and 12% CMML, 43% were either red blood cells (RBCs) or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 25% had poor-risk cytogenetics, and 42% had baseline bone marrow blasts >5%. At the data cutoff for the response analysis, the median duration of follow up was 12.6 m (range 9.3 to 20.5 m) with median number of treatment cycles of 8 (range 1 to 18). Of the 133 treated patients the best response was complete response (CR) in 28 patients (21%; 95% CI 15-29%), marrow (m)CR with hematological improvement (HI) in 20 patients (15%), mCR without HI in 23 patients (17.3%), and HI in 10 patients (7.5%) for an overall objective response (CR+mCR+HI) in 81 patients (61%; 95% CI 52-69%). Median duration of CR was 7.5 m (range 1.6 to 17.5 m), and median time to CR was 4.3 m (range 2.1 to 15.2 m). Of the 133 treated patients 27 (20%) went on to receive allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. Of the 57 patients who were either RBCs or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 30 (53%) became transfusion independent for both RBCs and platelets for at least 8 consecutive weeks, and 19 (33%) were both RBCs and platelets transfusion independent for at least 16 consecutive weeks. Median survival has not been reached. Most common Treatment-Emergent AEs of Grade ≥3 regardless of causality were neutropenia in 51.5%, thrombocytopenia in 50%, anemia in 40%, febrile neutropenia in 26%, leukopenia in 21%, pneumonia in 12%, and sepsis in 7% of patients treated with oral decitabine/cedazuridine (excluding the IV decitabine cycle). Summary/Conclusions: Efficacy and safety from oral decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg daily for 5 days every 28 days are consistent with clinical data from standard IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 daily for 5 days. Oral decitabine/cedazuridine is the only oral HMA with systemic exposure equivalent to its injectable drug. Further investigation of oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all-oral combination studies is warranted and underway. Disclosures Savona: BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ryvu: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Patents & Royalties; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Griffiths:Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc: Honoraria; Persimmune: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex Pharmceuticals: Research Funding. Zeidan:CCITLA: Other; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria. Patel:DAVA Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; France Foundation: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy. Keating:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Taiho: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Fazal:Jansen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopham: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Glaxosmith Kline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Odenike:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals, NS Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Oncology, Oncotherapy, Agios, CTI/Baxalta, Aprea: Other: Institutional research funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Institutional research funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Impact Biomedicines: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; BioAscend: Honoraria; Delta Fly: Honoraria; Ascentage: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; Aptitute Health: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Oxford Biomedical: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive biotechnologies: Honoraria. DeZern:MEI: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Amphivena: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Trovagene: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Jasper Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Helsinn: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy. Busque:Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Wells:Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Leber:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda/Palladin: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Treadwell: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Keer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Garcia-Manero:Acceleron Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amphivena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Helsinn Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo determine how self-reported level of exposure to patients with novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) affected the perceived safety, training and well-being of residents and fellows.MethodsWe administered an anonymous, voluntary, web-based survey to a convenience sample of trainees worldwide. The survey was distributed by email and social media posts from April 20th to May 11th, 2020. Respondents were asked to estimate the number of patients with COVID-19 they cared for in March and April 2020 (0, 1–30, 31–60, >60). Survey questions addressed (1) safety and access to personal protective equipment (PPE), (2) training and professional development and (3) well-being and burnout.ResultsSurveys were completed by 1420 trainees (73% residents, 27% fellows), most commonly from the USA (n=670), China (n=150), Saudi Arabia (n=76) and Taiwan (n=75). Trainees who cared for a greater number of patients with COVID-19 were more likely to report limited access to PPE and COVID-19 testing and more likely to test positive for COVID-19. Compared with trainees who did not take care of patients with COVID-19 , those who took care of 1–30 patients (adjusted OR [AOR] 1.80, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.51), 31–60 patients (AOR 3.30, 95% CI 1.86 to 5.88) and >60 patients (AOR 4.03, 95% CI 2.12 to 7.63) were increasingly more likely to report burnout. Trainees were very concerned about the negative effects on training opportunities and professional development irrespective of the number of patients with COVID-19 they cared for.ConclusionExposure to patients with COVID-19 is significantly associated with higher burnout rates in physician trainees.

Abstract Purpose: We aimed to assess the concordance of colorectal cancer–associated methylated DNA markers (MDM) in primary and metastatic colorectal cancer for feasibility in detection of distantly recurrent/metastatic colorectal cancer in plasma. Experimental Design: A panel of previously discovered colorectal cancer–associated MDMs was selected. MDMs from primary and paired metastatic colorectal cancer tissue were assayed with quantitative methylation-specific PCR. Plasma MDMs were measured blindly by target enrichment long-probe quantitative-amplified signal assays. Random forest modeling was used to derive a prediction algorithm of MDMs in archival plasma samples from primary colorectal cancer cases. This algorithm was validated in prospectively collected plasma samples from recurrent colorectal cancer cases. The accuracy of the algorithm was summarized as sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). Results: Of the 14 selected MDMs, the concordance between primary and metastatic tissue was considered moderate or higher for 12 MDMs (86%). At a preset specificity of 95% (91%–98%), a panel of 13 MDMs, in plasma from 97 colorectal cancer cases and 200 controls, detected stage IV colorectal cancer with 100% (80%–100%) sensitivity and all stages of colorectal cancer with an AUC of 0.91 (0.87–0.95), significantly higher than carcinoembryonic antigen [AUC, 0.72 (0.65–0.79)]. This panel, in plasma from 40 cases and 60 healthy controls, detected recurrent/metastatic colorectal cancer with 90% (76%–97%) sensitivity, 90% (79%–96%) specificity, and an AUC of 0.96 (0.92–1.00). The panel was positive in 0.30 (0.19–0.43) of 60 patients with no evidence of disease in post-operative patients with colorectal cancer. Conclusions: Plasma assay of novel colorectal cancer–associated MDMs can reliably detect both primary colorectal cancer and distantly recurrent colorectal cancer with promising accuracy.

PurposeTo develop a convolutional neural network (CNN) that can directly estimate material density distribution from multi‐energy computed tomography (CT) images without performing conventional material decomposition.MethodsThe proposed CNN (denoted as Incept‐net) followed the general framework of encoder–decoder network, with an assumption that local image information was sufficient for modeling the nonlinear physical process of multi‐energy CT. Incept‐net was implemented with a customized loss function, including an in‐house‐designed image‐gradient‐correlation (IGC) regularizer to improve edge preservation. The network consisted of two types of customized multibranch modules exploiting multiscale feature representation to improve the robustness over local image noise and artifacts. Inserts with various densities of different materials [hydroxyapatite (HA), iodine, a blood–iodine mixture, and fat] were scanned using a research photon‐counting detector (PCD) CT with two energy thresholds and multiple radiation dose levels. The network was trained using phantom image patches only, and tested with different‐configurations of full field‐of‐view phantom and in vivo porcine images. Furthermore, the nominal mass densities of insert materials were used as the labels in CNN training, which potentially provided an implicit mass conservation constraint. The Incept‐net performance was evaluated in terms of image noise, detail preservation, and quantitative accuracy. Its performance was also compared to common material decomposition algorithms including least‐square‐based material decomposition (LS‐MD), total‐variation regularized material decomposition (TV‐MD), and U‐net‐based method.ResultsIncept‐net improved accuracy of the predicted mass density of basis materials compared with the U‐net, TV‐MD, and LS‐MD: the mean absolute error (MAE) of iodine was 0.66, 1.0, 1.33, and 1.57 mgI/cc for Incept‐net, U‐net, TV‐MD, and LS‐MD, respectively, across all iodine‐present inserts (2.0–24.0 mgI/cc). With the LS‐MD as the baseline, Incept‐net and U‐net achieved comparable noise reduction (both around 95%), both higher than TV‐MD (85%). The proposed IGC regularizer effectively helped both Incept‐net and U‐net to reduce image artifact. Incept‐net closely conserved the total mass densities (i.e., mass conservation constraint) in porcine images, which heuristically validated the quantitative accuracy of its outputs in anatomical background. In general, Incept‐net performance was less dependent on radiation dose levels than the two conventional methods; with approximately 40% less parameters, the Incept‐net achieved relatively improved performance than the comparator U‐net, indicating that performance gain by Incept‐net was not achieved by simply increasing network learning capacity.ConclusionIncept‐net demonstrated superior qualitative image appearance, quantitative accuracy, and lower noise than the conventional methods and less sensitive to dose change. Incept‐net generalized and performed well with unseen image structures and different material mass densities. This study provided preliminary evidence that the proposed CNN may be used to improve the material decomposition quality in multi‐energy CT.

The current standard treatment for patients with early-stage colon cancer consists of surgical resection, followed by adjuvant therapy in a select group of patients deemed at risk of cancer recurrence. The decision to administer adjuvant therapy, intended to eradicate the clinically inapparent minimal residual disease (MRD) to achieve a cure, is guided by clinicopathologic characteristics of the tumor. However, the risk stratification based on clinicopathologic characteristics is imprecise and results in under or overtreatment in a substantial number of patients. Emerging research indicates that the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), a fraction of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in the bloodstream that originates from the neoplastic cells and carry tumor-specific genomic alterations, is a promising surrogate marker of MRD. Several recent studies suggest that ctDNA-guided risk stratification for adjuvant therapy outperforms existing clinicopathologic prognostic indicators. Preliminary data also indicate that, aside from being a prognostic indicator, ctDNA can inform on the efficacy of adjuvant therapy, which is the underlying scientific rationale for several ongoing clinical trials evaluating ctDNA-guided therapy escalation or de-escalation. Furthermore, serial monitoring of ctDNA after completion of definitive therapy can potentially detect cancer recurrence much earlier than conventional surveillance methods that may provide a critical window of opportunity for additional curative-intent therapeutic interventions. This article presents a critical overview of published studies that evaluated the clinical utility of ctDNA in the management of patients with early-stage colon cancer, and discusses the potential of ctDNA to transform the adjuvant therapy strategies.

Background: Myocardial bridging (MB) is commonly treated in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). However, whether and how MB should be treated in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) who underwent septal myectomy remain unclear. Methods: A total of 823 adults with HOCM who underwent septal myectomy at the Fuwai Hospital from 2011 to 2017 were retrospectively studied. Results: Overall, 31 events occurred: 24 patients died and 7 had nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI). The 3-year cumulative event-free survival of all-cause death (97.9% vs 100% vs 100% vs 98.4%, p=0.89) and cardiovascular death (98.3% vs 100% vs 100% vs 98.4%, p=0.63) were similar among the four groups (non-MB, CABG, unroofing, untreated, respectively). The 3-year cumulative event-free survival of nonfatal MI (100% vs 97.5% vs 98.0% vs 89.9%, p<0.001) and combined endpoints (97.9% vs 97.5% vs 98.0% vs 88.4%, p=0.02) were significantly lowest in untreated MB. Cox regression analysis indicated that untreated MB was a significant independent predictor of combined endpoints (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.60–10.32, p<0.001). Moreover, 49 patients underwent coronary artery computed tomography after surgery. The patency rate of the saphenous vein graft (SVG) was significantly higher than that of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) (13.3% vs 84.2%, p<0.001). No MB was detected in the unroofing group. Conclusions: Surgical MB treatment could be beneficial and performed safely during septal myectomy. Myocardial unroofing is the recommended treatment for MB, and unroofing when technically possible may be preferable for long-term outcomes.

AbstractBackgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disease associated with worse structural and functional impairment of the heart in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM).HypothesisThe presence and severity of OSA can decrease the right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) in patients with HOCM.MethodsIn total, 151 consecutive patients with a confirmed diagnosis of HOCM at Fuwai Hospital between September 2017 and September 2018 were included. Polysomnography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging were performed in all patients.ResultsOverall, 84 (55.6%) patients were diagnosed with OSA. The RVEF significantly decreased with the severity of OSA (none, mild, moderate‐severe: 46.1 ± 8.2 vs 42.9 ± 7.5 vs 41.4 ± 7.4, P = .009). The apnea‐hypopnea index (AHI) was significantly high in patients with RVEF<40% among the different OSA groups (mild, moderate:7.7 ± 2.4 vs 9.6 ± 2.9, P = .03; 24.4 ± 9.0 vs 36.3 ± 18.0, P = .01). In the multiple linear regression model, the right ventricular end‐systolic volume (β = −0.28, P < .001), AHI (β = −0.09, P = .02), and oxygen desaturation index (β = −0.11, P = .04) were independently associated with a decrease in RVEF (adjusted R2 = 0.347, P < .001). Furthermore, the prevalence of RVEF<40% was high in patients with OSA. Compared with RVEF>40%, RVEF<40% was associated with more symptoms, mainly chest pain, chest distress, NYHA class III or IV, pulmonary hypertension, and moderate or severe mitral regurgitation.ConclusionIn patients with HOCM, the presence and severity of OSA is independently associated with a lower RVEF. In addition, compared with patients with RVEF>40%, those with RVEF<40% had more symptoms, including chest pain, chest distress, and NYHA class III or IV.

Abstract Nivolumab, an anti–programmed death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody, showed promising activity in relapsed or refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) in a phase 1 study. We conducted a phase 2 trial to further evaluate its efficacy and safety in patients with R/R FL and to explore biomarkers of response. Patients with R/R FL and at least 2 prior lines of therapy, each containing a CD20 antibody or an alkylating agent, were treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by an independent radiologic review committee. Biomarker analyses included gene expression profiling and multiplex immunofluorescence studies of pretreatment tumor samples. A total of 92 patients were treated. After a minimum follow-up of 12 months, ORR was 4% (4 of 92 patients). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-3.6 months). Median duration of response was 11 months (95% CI, 8-14 months). Exploratory analyses suggested that responders had significantly higher proportion of CD3+ T cells in the tumor microenvironment than nonresponders, but no significant differences in PD-1 or programmed death-ligand 1 expression were observed. High expression of a set of tumor-associated macrophage genes was associated with reduced PFS (hazard ratio, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.76-6.11; P = .001). The safety profile was consistent with previous reports of nivolumab. In conclusion, nivolumab monotherapy was associated with very limited activity in patients with R/R FL. Better understanding of the immune biology of this disease may facilitate the development of effective checkpoint-based strategies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02038946.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic currently gripping the globe is impacting the entire health care system with rapidly escalating morbidities and mortality. Although the infectious risk to the pediatric population appears low, the effects on children with congenital heart disease (CHD) remain poorly understood. The closure of congenital heart surgery programs worldwide to address the growing number of infected individuals could have an unintended impact on future health for COVID-19-negative patients with CHD. Pediatric and congenital heart surgeons, given their small numbers and close relationships, are uniquely positioned to collectively assess the impact of the pandemic on surgical practice and care of children with CHD. We present the results of an international survey sent to pediatric and congenital heart surgeons characterizing the early impact of COVID-19 on the care of patients with CHD.