Citations

Abstract Anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCLs) are CD30+ T-cell lymphomas that share pathologic features but differ in presentation, outcome, and genetics. Current classification incorporates clinical presentation and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) status but inadequately addresses molecular heterogeneity and therapeutic vulnerabilities. We studied 689 patients with ALCL in the LLMPP (Lymphoma/Leukemia Molecular Profiling Project) and performed expert consensus review, genetic subtyping (ALK, DUSP22, TP63, and triple negative), and immunohistochemistry for phosphorylated STAT3Tyr705. RNA sequencing with unsupervised gene expression profiling in 393 patients identified 2 main molecular types of ALCL that could be predicted with 91% accuracy based on the presence (type I) or absence (type II) of phosphorylated STAT3Y705 expression. Type I ALCLs included ALK+ ALCL and a subset of triple-negative ALCLs (TN-I); type II ALCLs included tumors with DUSP22 and/or TP63 rearrangements and the remaining triple-negative ALCLs (TN-II). Type I ALCLs were enriched for JAK-STAT3, whereas type II ALCLs were enriched for non–tyrosine kinase pathways, particularly epigenetic regulators such as EZH2. Immunohistochemistry showed overexpression of EZH2 and its trimethylated substrate H3K27. Prognosis in systemic ALCL was favorable for DUSP22-rearranged ALCL (5-year overall survival, 95%) and ALK+ ALCL (88%), intermediate for triple-negative ALCL (TN-I, 52% and TN-II, 37%), and poor for TP63-rearranged ALCL (0%). We introduce an integrated molecular classification that preserves currently diagnosed ALCL entities but identifies 4 molecularly distinct ALK− ALCL subtypes (DUSP22-rearranged, TP63-rearranged, TN-I, and TN-II). This classification can be easily implemented on paraffin tissue in routine practice or clinical trials, and stratifies ALCL into diagnostically, prognostically, biologically, and potentially therapeutically relevant subtypes.

Abstract Social Determinants of Health (SDoH), such as education level, housing status, lived environment, and socioeconomic status, can create obstacles to accessing healthcare services, particularly for minoritized people and individuals with chronic health conditions. While previous research shows that addressing SDoH can lead to positive health outcomes, no studies have investigated the role of SDoH in genetic counseling. This mixed‐methods study aimed to clarify if genetic counselors (GCs) are aware of SDoH, and if knowing a patient's specific SDoH would prompt GCs to change their approach to that patient's care. An online survey was sent to GCs, consisting of scenario‐based questions to explore whether knowledge of a patient's SDoH information prompts changes in approaches to care. Nearly 45% of respondents reported only somewhat to no familiarity with SDoH. However, respondents with moderate to extreme familiarity with SDoH were 1.58 times more likely to modify patient care to address SDoH than those with little to no familiarity ( p = 0.003). However, nearly half of the respondents reported that their electronic medical record (EMR) system does not display SDoH information. Qualitative analysis demonstrated that GCs would use SDoH information to make specific changes in counseling content, identify resources, provide referrals to services such as local resources or social work, and offer alternative service delivery methods. These preliminary findings suggest that GCs can leverage SDoH data to help patients overcome obstacles stemming from SDoH and highlight areas for improvement within healthcare systems and education. Healthcare institutions should consider effective workflows to accurately capture and display SDoH within the EMR and increase efforts surrounding SDoH education. An earlier introduction to SDoH through GC training programs could promote higher familiarity with SDoH. Together, increased SDoH awareness and easier access to information about patient‐specific barriers may lead to an increase in GC‐initiated interventions to address disparities stemming from SDoH.

Abstract Background Children’s Oncology Group ACNS0333 treated atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (ATRT) with surgery, chemotherapy (induction and consolidation) and radiation therapy (RT). M0 had focal RT and M+ had physician-selected focal RT or craniospinal (CSI). Methods Forty patients (29 M0, 11 M+) received RT. Pre-RT chemotherapy response was complete, partial, or stable disease. RT timing (age/stage-based) was pre-consolidation (RT-first) or post-consolidation (consolidation-first). Event-free survival (RT-EFS), overall survival (RT-OS), and cumulative incidence of local relapse (CILR) or distant relapse (RT-CIDR) were calculated. Analyses included log-rank tests and relative hazard rates with 95% confidence intervals to estimate proportional hazards regression. Results Four-year RT-EFS was 56.8% and 4-year RT-OS was 58.8% focal RT: 34 patients, CSI: 6 patients). A trend for superior RT-EFS for M+ compared to M0 (P = .0625, RHR 0.26; 95% CI 0.06-1.18) was shown. RT-EFS was improved for consolidation-first compared to RT-first timing (P = .037, RHR 0.43; 95% CI 0.13-1.37). Pre-RT chemotherapy response was associated with improved RT-EFS (P = .031) and RT-OS (P = .0069). Four-year RT-CILR was 7.84%; no differences in RT-CILR were shown for higher primary RT dose (≥5400 cGy, P = .38) or gross total resection (P = .80). 4-year RT-CIDR was 27.8% for M0 and 9.1% for M+ patients (P = .22). M+ had CSI (n = 6) or focal RT (n = 5). Fatal necrosis potentially-attributable to RT occurred in 3 RT-first patients (occuring either 1.6, 4.6, or 16.2 months post-treatment). Conclusions RT with intensive systemic therapy showed promising survival outcomes and effective primary disease control in ATRT. Sequencing RT prior to myeloblative chemotherapy, rather than post-consolidation, may be associated with increased risk of fatal radionecrosis.

Abstract Objective VEXAS syndrome is a severe systemic haemato-inflammatory disease with heterogeneous clinical presentations. Most patients experience recurrent inflammatory flares despite anti-inflammatory therapy. The lack of accepted definitions of flare in these patients is preventing development of disease activity tools that are essential for conducting clinical trials. We aimed to develop a consensus definition of a VEXAS flare for use in clinical trials. Methods A nine-member international expert advisory committee established a consensus definition of VEXAS flare using modified Delphi methodology. Clinical inflammatory manifestations of VEXAS syndrome were identified through a systematic literature review. Committee members developed a conceptual framework for flare definition, proposed revisions and voted on changes until consensus (≥75% concurrence) was reached. Results Consensus defined VEXAS flare as active inflammatory manifestation(s) of VEXAS syndrome requiring escalation in glucocorticoid therapy. Three flare categories were established: (i) recurrence of a prior documented VEXAS manifestation; (ii) development of a new VEXAS-defining inflammatory manifestation; or (iii) emergence of a new inflammatory manifestation not meeting criteria for A or B. The panel endorsed an independent adjudication committee to assess Category C flares in clinical trials. Conclusions This study proposes a standardized definition of VEXAS flare, providing uniform criteria for identifying VEXAS disease activity. Future research will evaluate its performance in clinical trials.