Citations

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progresses aggressively and resists existing therapies. Although poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) benefit a subset of patients with mCRPC and BRCA1/2 deficiencies, therapeutic options remain limited for those without such mutations. Here, we uncover a critical role for the ATM-TRMT10A-BRCA1 signaling axis in regulating homologous recombination (HR) repair and PARPi sensitivity. We demonstrate that ATM phosphorylates TRMT10A at serine-28 after DNA damage, promoting BRCA1 recruitment and efficient HR repair. TRMT10A deletion disrupts HR repair, sensitizing cells to PARPis. Moreover, TRMT10A is up-regulated in mCRPC through stabilization by USP10. Targeting USP10 with spautin-1 induces TRMT10A degradation and enhances tumor sensitivity to PARPis in cell-derived xenografts and patient-derived xenograft models. These findings identify TRMT10A as a therapeutic vulnerability in mCRPC and demonstrate that combined inhibition of PARP and USP10 offers a promising synthetic lethal strategy for a broader group of patients lacking classical BRCA mutations.

Background Intracranial occlusions in embolic stroke of undetermined source are histopathologically similar to cardiac sources of embolism. Whether patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source and intracranial occlusion benefit from anticoagulation is unknown. Methods A multicenter retrospective cohort of adults with cryptogenic stroke was queried for patients with proximal or medium/distal vessel occlusion. The primary outcome was recurrent ischemic stroke, which was assessed in unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models and repeated following 1:1 propensity score matching and biweight kernel density matching. Results Of the 2328 patients who were followed over a median of 1.31 years (interquartile range, 0.34–2.85), 999 (42.6%) had an intracranial occlusion. When compared with patients without an intracranial occlusion, those with an occlusion had fewer atherosclerotic vascular risk factors, more severe symptoms, and less severe cerebral microvascular disease. The rate of recurrent stroke was similar between patients with versus without an intracranial occlusion (6.8%/year [95% CI, 5.7–8.2] versus 7.0%/year [95% CI 6.0–8.1]; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.09 [95% CI, 0.77–1.55]). There was no association between occlusion and recurrent stroke in the adjusted propensity score matching (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.64–1.59]) or kernel density models (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62–1.45]). There was no interaction between occlusion and treatment with anticoagulation, sex, age, or high‐risk sources of embolism for the primary outcome in the unmatched and matched analyses. Conclusions Intracranial occlusion in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source is not associated with a greater risk of recurrence when compared with patients without an intracranial occlusion. There was no difference in rate of recurrent stroke with anticoagulation when stratified by presence or absence of occlusion.

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Steroid supplementation remains controversial in septic shock, partly due to the heterogeneity of the populations studied. Cirrhotic patients with sepsis frequently develop relative adrenal insufficiency, showing poor response to vasopressors and poor prognosis. Early administration of low‐dose hydrocortisone might facilitate shock reversal and reduce mortality in this population. Methods Double‐blind, randomised, placebo‐controlled multicentre trial, enrolling adult cirrhotic patients with septic shock. Patients were assigned to receive i.v. hydrocortisone (100 mg followed by a continuous infusion of 200 mg/24 h) or placebo, for at least 3 days, followed by a tapering period of 3–7 days, depending on the time of shock resolution. Primary endpoint was 28‐day all‐cause mortality. Results After enrolment of 83 patients the trial was stopped early due to slow inclusions. Most patients required low‐to‐moderate doses of vasopressors. There was no difference in 28‐day mortality (35% vs. 39.5%; p = 0.84) between hydrocortisone and placebo groups. Shock resolution (85% vs. 72.1%; p = 0.25) and days to shock resolution [3 days (2.2–4; IQR) vs. 4 (2–7.5; IQR)] were also similar between groups. More patients receiving placebo died of refractory shock (47.6% vs. 8.7%). No significant differences between treatment arms were observed in shock relapse, new shock episodes or bacterial or fungal superinfections during hospital stay. Hypo‐ and hyperglycaemias were more frequent in the hydrocortisone arm. Severity of ACLF at inclusion and inadequacy of empirical antibiotic therapy (HR = 6.40; 95% CI: 3.21–12.79) independently predicted 28‐day mortality. Conclusions Supplemental hydrocortisone did not improve short‐term survival in cirrhotic patients with septic shock requiring low‐to‐moderate doses of vasopressors. Trial Registration S‐number University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium: S55168; EUDRACT: 2010–024273‐38; Clinicaltrials.gov id: NCT02602210

Objective Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is well-established for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) from large vessel occlusion (LVO), with growing data supporting the expansion to distal and medium vessel occlusions (DMVO). Despite successful recanalization in DMVO, certain patients still experience poor long-term clinical outcomes, prompting our study to comprehensively explore pre-MT factors influencing outcome despite excellent recanalization (final modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [mTICI] score ≥2c). Methods We retrospectively examined data from patients who consecutively underwent MT for a primary middle cerebral artery (MCA) DMVO across 37 centers in North America, Asia, and Europe. We identified baseline clinical and imaging factors associated with poor clinical outcome (defined as a modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 3–6) at 3 months, despite excellent recanalization using a multivariable model. Results Between September 2017 and July 2021, 623 patients achieved mTICI > 2b and they were included in our study. Among them, 198 (32%) experienced a poor clinical outcome (mRS 3–6). Predictors of poor clinical outcome included higher age (OR 1.05 [1.03–1.07], p < 0.001), higher NIHSS at admission (OR 1.12 [1.08–1.15], p < 0.001), higher baseline mRS (OR 1.77 [0.96–3.26], p = 0.067), and diabetes (OR 1.59 [1.01–2.48], p = 0.044). Higher ASPECTS was associated with a decreased risk of poor clinical outcome (OR 0.82 [0.71–0.94], p = 0.006). Conclusion Older age, diabetes, higher baseline mRS, and NIHSS were associated with poor clinical outcome in MCA DMVO despite excellent recanalization. Conversely, a higher ASPECTS decreased the probability of such an outcome.

OBJECTIVE Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is well established for large-vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes, but its safety in distal and medium-vessel occlusions (DMVOs) requires further investigation. This study analyzed the relationship between procedural approaches, petechial hemorrhage (PetH), and clinical outcomes in DMVO thrombectomy, with particular attention to technical considerations and the complex interplay between tissue injury and hemorrhagic complications. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on DMVO stroke patients treated with MT at 37 stroke centers worldwide from 2016 to 2024. Patients were categorized based on follow-up imaging into those with or without PetH. Four logistic regression models analyzed the association of PetH with favorable functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score ≤ 2) at 90 days, early neurological improvement (≥ 4-point National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score decrease at 24 hours), all-cause mortality, and independent determinants of PetH. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs), 95% confidence intervals, and p values were reported. RESULTS Of 1428 patients, 439 (30.7%) developed PetH. Factors independently associated with PetH were multiple thrombectomy passes (aOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.21–2.06; p = 0.001), IV thrombolysis (aOR 1.31, 95% CI 1.01–1.69; p = 0.04), and the combined use of a stent retriever with aspiration as the first-line method compared with aspiration alone (aOR 1.66, 95% CI 1.15–2.38; p = 0.007). Conversely, general anesthesia (aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40–0.77; p < 0.001), higher Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Scores (aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69–0.83; p < 0.001), and successful recanalization (aOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39–0.80; p = 0.002) were significantly associated with a lower odds of PetH. PetH was associated with a decreased odds of favorable functional outcomes (aOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36–0.73; p < 0.001), reduced early neurological improvement (aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44–0.79; p < 0.001), and increased all-cause mortality (aOR 1.84, 95% CI 1.23–2.76; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS PetH is a frequent sequela following MT in DMVO strokes and is associated with poorer outcomes, likely reflecting underlying ischemic injury rather than direct causation. Procedural factors influence PetH risk, suggesting medical treatment as first-line therapy for DMVOs, with MT reserved for refractory cases using less aggressive approaches.

BACKGROUND: Small, randomized trials of patients with cervical artery dissection showed conflicting results regarding optimal stroke prevention strategies. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with cervical artery dissection treated with antiplatelets versus anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a multicenter observational retrospective international study (16 countries, 63 sites) that included patients with cervical artery dissection without major trauma. The exposure was antithrombotic treatment type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets), and outcomes were subsequent ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage (intracranial or extracranial hemorrhage). We used adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting to determine associations between anticoagulation and study outcomes within 30 and 180 days. The main analysis used an as-treated crossover approach and only included outcomes occurring with the above treatments. RESULTS: The study included 3636 patients (402 [11.1%] received exclusively anticoagulation and 2453 [67.5%] received exclusively antiplatelets). By day 180, there were 162 new ischemic strokes (4.4%) and 28 major hemorrhages (0.8%); 87.0% of ischemic strokes occurred by day 30. In adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting, compared with antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of subsequent ischemic stroke by day 30 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.45–1.12]; P =0.145) and by day 180 (adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.28–2.24]; P =0.670). Anticoagulation therapy was not associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage by day 30 (adjusted HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.35–5.45]; P =0.637) but was by day 180 (adjusted HR, 5.56 [95% CI, 1.53–20.13]; P =0.009). In interaction analyses, patients with occlusive dissection had significantly lower ischemic stroke risk with anticoagulation (adjusted HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18–0.88]; P interaction =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not rule out the benefit of anticoagulation in reducing ischemic stroke risk, particularly in patients with occlusive dissection. If anticoagulation is chosen, it seems reasonable to switch to antiplatelet therapy before 180 days to lower the risk of major bleeding. Large prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

e20551 Background: Lung cancer is leading cause of cancer related mortality globally, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprising approximately 80% of all cases. The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1), specifically Durvalumab, and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, such as Tremelimumab has demonstrated clinical efficacy in both adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. However, a comprehensive systematic review of the available data is currently lacking. This study aims to assess the therapeutic efficacy of Durvalumab combined with Tremelimumab in NSCLC focusing on key end points including progression-free survival, overall survival, overall response rate, and safety, with particular attention to any adverse events and mortality. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant studies published until March 2024 across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases. Outcomes were pooled using the random effects DerSimonian-Laird model and reported as hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 1600 patients with NSCLC were included in the analysis, with 825 patients receiving Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab, and 775 patient receiving Standard chemotherapy across four studies. For Efficacy, following parameters were statistically significant: Progression Free Survival HR 0.75, 95%CI: 0.59, 0.92; Overall Survival HR 0.8, 95%CI: 0.58, 0.99; Overall Response Rate HR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.47, 0.88, Mean Duration of Response was 12.23 month. Safety outcomes revealed that Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab versus Standard chemotherapy were comparable in mean percentage in terms of following parameters: Any Adverse Event (85.1% vs 92.8%), Any Serious Adverse Event (28.9% vs 17.75%), any mortality (6.35% vs 3.4%), Adverse Event leading to discontinuation (11.6% vs 10.13%), Any treatment related adverse event (69.96% vs 85.6%) and Any Treatment Related Death (0.9% vs 0.3%). Conclusions: Efficacy outcomes in patients treated with Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements while the safety profile was comparable to that of Standard chemotherapy. Given the increasing use of this combination therapy as adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment for NSCLC, further clinical trials are warranted to confirm and validate these findings.

e20593 Background: Tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, is emerging as a promising immunotherapy agent and has demonstrated clinical benefit and acceptable tolerability in recent lung cancer trials. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of Tislelizumab, as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy (Group 1), as a superior treatment alternative for lung cancer compared to standard chemotherapy (Group 2) in improving patient outcomes. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted through MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to December 2024 to identify Randomized Control Trials (RCTs). Hazards ratio (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) were generated, by employing a Random-effects model with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4, with statistical significance set at p<0.05. Our outcomes of interest were Progression Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), Objective Response Rate (ORR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Duration of response (DOR), and treatment-related adverse Events. Results: A total of 6 RCTs involving 2107 patients were included for analysis. Pooled analysis demonstrated that Group 1 significantly improved PFS, OS, and DOR with HRs of 1.85 (95% CI: 1.71-1.99; p <0.00001, I² = 0%), 2.01 (95% CI: 1.75-2.29; p <0.00001, I² = 0%) and 2.14 (95% CI: 1.52-3.03; p <0.0001, I² = 39%), respectively. Group 1 has better DCR and ORR compared to Group 2 with RRs of 1.52 (95% CI: 1.12-2.07; p= 0.007, I² = 97%) and 1.50 (95% CI: 1.20-1.86; p= 0.0003, I² = 83%), respectively. The high heterogeneity observed in the pooled analysis of DCR (I² = 97%) and ORR (I² = 83%) likely reflects variability in study populations, treatment protocols, and response assessment criteria across the included RCTs. Subgroup or sensitivity analyses could help identify contributing factors. Despite the heterogeneity, the pooled effect sizes indicate a statistically significant improvement in DCR and ORR with Tislelizumab, with caution warranted when generalizing these findings. Group 1 significantly reduced all-cause mortality compared to Group 2 (RR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.83–0.95; p = 0.0003), with no heterogeneity (I² = 0%). No significant differences were found in adverse events, except for ALT elevations. (RR = 1.36; 95% CI: 1.14–1.61; p = 0.0006, I² = 25%). Conclusions: Tislelizumab, with or without chemotherapy, demonstrates greater PFS and OS benefits compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with lung cancer. There was a significantly reduced all-cause mortality in the intervention group; however, the observed increase in the risk of ALT elevation underscores the need for vigilant liver function monitoring. When combined with chemotherapy, Tislelizumab presents a promising treatment option for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether antiplatelets or anticoagulants are more effective in preventing early recurrent stroke in patients with cervical artery dissection. Following the publication of the observational Antithrombotic for STOP-CAD (Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection) study, which has more than doubled available data, we performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing antiplatelets versus anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection. METHODS: The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023468063). We searched 5 databases using a combination of keywords that encompass different antiplatelets and anticoagulants, as well as cervical artery dissection. We included relevant randomized trials and included observational studies of dissection unrelated to major trauma. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed meta-analyses for efficacy (ischemic stroke) and safety (major hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and death) outcomes using relative risks. RESULTS: We identified 11 studies (2 randomized trials and 9 observational studies) that met the inclusion criteria. These included 5039 patients (30% [1512] treated with anticoagulation and 70% [3527]) treated with antiplatelets]. In meta-analysis, anticoagulation was associated with a lower ischemic stroke risk (relative risk, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.94]; P =0.02; I 2 =0%) but higher major bleeding risk (relative risk, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.07 to 4.72]; P =0.03, I 2 =0%). The risks of death and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were similar between the 2 treatments. Effect sizes were larger in randomized trials. There are insufficient data on the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy or direct oral anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with cervical artery dissection, anticoagulation was superior to antiplatelet therapy in reducing ischemic stroke but carried a higher major bleeding risk. This argues for an individualized therapeutic approach incorporating the net clinical benefit of ischemic stroke reduction and bleeding risks. Large randomized clinical trials are required to clarify optimal antithrombotic strategies for management of cervical artery dissection.