Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

209 citation(s) found for "Nakamura, M".

Real-world impact of matched targeted therapy on survival in advanced biliary tract cancer: An international collaborative study.
Zheng-Lin, Binbin , Hoyek, Celine , Roberts, Lewis R. , Morizane, Chigusa, Bando, Hideaki, Ahn, Daniel H. , Roberts, Lewis R , Kosiorek, Heidi , Abidoye, Oluseyi , Eslinger, Cody , Sonbol, Mohamad Bassam , Wu, Christina , Tran, Nguyen H. , Babiker, Hani M. , Yoshino, Takayuki , Ikeda, Masafumi , Morizane, Chigusa , Bando, Hideaki , Nakamura, Yoshiaki , Fujisawa, Takao , Borad, Mitesh J. , Shibuki, Taro , Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 27, 2025 | Volume: 43 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 536-536

10.1200/jco.2025.43.4_suppl.536 Get It

536 Background: The prognosis of advanced BTC remains poor. Although targeted agents have expanded late-line options, many patients (pts) become ineligible for these therapies after progressing on first-line treatment. Herein, we examined the real-world impact of targeted therapy on survival in advanced BTC. Methods: In this international collaborative study between the Mayo Clinic (US) and the National Cancer Center East (Japan), we included pts with advanced BTC with comprehensive tumor molecular profiling who had received at least 30 days of systemic therapy. Pts were categorized into 3 groups: 1) non-actionable, 2) pts with alterations who received matched targeted therapy at any point during their treatment (matched group), and 3) those with mutations who did not receive matched therapy (unmatched group). OS was calculated from the start date of first-line therapy until death and compared among three subgroups using Cox regression models. Results: Of 932 pts, 366 (39.3%) had an actionable alteration, and 135 of these received matched therapy. 566 (61.7%) did not have an actionable alteration (Table). The most common alterations were somatic BRCA1/2 (N=106, 11.4%), HER2 amplification (N=65, 7%), FGFR2 fusion (N=61, 6.5%), KRAS G12C/D (N=46, 4.9%), and IDH1 (N=38, 4.1%). 78.7% of FGFR2 fusions were found in Caucasian pts, whereas BRCA1/2 (97.5%), HER2 (78.5%), and KRAS G12C/D (67.4%) alterations were more prevalent in Asian pts. The median OS was significantly longer in the matched group (21.4 months; 95% CI 18.4-27.9) compared to the unmatched group (14.6 months; 95% CI 12.8-17.6) and the non-actionable group (17.2 months; 95% CI 15.5-19.0). The 36-month OS rate was 33% in the matched group vs. 7% in the unmatched group (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, prior surgical resection, primary tumor location, and country of origin, matched targeted therapy remained a strong independent predictor for improved OS (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.48-0.79). Conclusions: These real-world findings suggest that matched targeted therapies significantly improve survival in advanced BTC, underscoring the need to incorporate them earlier in the treatment course and address barriers to treatment access. The regional prevalence of actionable alterations should also be considered when developing new targeted therapies. Patient baseline characteristics stratified by actionable alterations and targeted therapy. Non-actionable(N=566) Unmatched group(N=231) Matched group(N=135) Site, n (%) Japan 409 (72%) 166 (72%) 50 (37%) US 157 (28%) 65 (28%) 85 (63%) Age at Dx > 65, n (%) 324 (57%) 122 (53%) 54 (40%) Female, n (%) 235 (42%) 92 (40%) 77 (57%) Primary tumor location (category), n (%) Intrahepatic 217 (43%) 115 (55%) 99 (76%) Extrahepatic 150 (30%) 39 (19%) 17 (13%) Gallbladder 142 (28%) 54 (26%) 14 (11%) Prior surgical resection, n (%) 220 (42%) 74 (34%) 48 (37%)
Aberrant accumulation of phosphorylated BRCA1 in brainstem-type and cortical-type Lewy bodies in Lewy body disease
Nakamura, Masataka , Murakami, Aya , Dickson, Dennis W. , Yakushiji, Yusuke , Dickson, Dennis W

Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology | January 14, 2025 | Volume: 84 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 276-285

10.1093/jnen/nlaf004 | PMID 39907307 Get It

Abstract BRCA1 plays important roles in several biological events during the DNA damage response (DDR). We aimed to determine whether cytoplasmic accumulation of BRCA1 or its phosphorylated form, pBRCA1, is specific to cytoplasmic inclusions in tauopathies, or if it also occurs in α-synuclein-positive inclusions in Lewy body disease (LBD). Using brain tissue from pure LBD, LBD with Alzheimer disease (AD) co-pathology (LBD-AD), and control cases, the immunohistochemical distributions of BRCA1, pBRCA1, its binding partner BARD1, and 53BP1 were examined. The results showed that pBRCA1 (Ser1423) and BARD1 accumulated in brainstem-type Lewy bodies (LBs), whereas only pBRCA1 (Ser1423) was present in cortical-type LBs. There was no significant difference in the frequency of pBRCA1 (Ser1423)-positive LBs between the pure LBD and LBD-AD cases. pBRCA1 (Ser1423) was minimally detected in neuronal nuclei in controls and was absent in neuronal nuclei in LBD cases. In control and LBD cases, 53BP1-immunoreactive deposits were present in the neuronal nuclei. Thus, DDR dysfunction due to cytoplasmic sequestration of pBRCA1 (Ser1423) may play a role in LBD pathogenesis. Additionally, the selective accumulation of BARD1 in brainstem-type LBs, but not cortical-type LBs, points to distinct mechanisms in the formation of these inclusion types, offering further insights into LBD pathology.
MOUNTAINEER-03 phase III study design: first-line mFOLFOX6 + tucatinib + trastuzumab for HER2+ metastatic colorectal cancer
Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios , Cercek, Andrea , Heinemann, Volker , Raghav, Kanwal Pratap Singh, Yoshino, Takayuki, Ramos, Jorge , Guan, Xuesong, André, Thierry , Bekaii-Saab, Tanios S , Strickler, John H. , Nakamura, Yoshiaki, Siena, Salvatore , Tabernero, Josep , Cutsem, Eric Van , Yoshino, Takayuki , André, Thierry

Future Oncology | December 26, 2024 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 303-311

10.1080/14796694.2024.2441101 | PMID 39723627 Get It

Cevostamab in Patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Updated Results from an Ongoing Phase I Study Demonstrate Clinically Meaningful Activity and Manageable Safety and Inform the Doses and Regimen for Combination Stud
Krishnan, Amrita , Laubach, Jacob P. , Trudel, Suzanne , Forsberg, Peter A. , Kaedbey, Rayan , Spencer, Andrew , Mateos, María‐Victoria , Wong, Chihunt, Tyagi, Tulika, Nakamura, Rin, Choeurng, Voleak, Richter, Joshua , Thomas, Sheeba K. , Cohen, Adam D. , Costa, Luciano J. , Bahlis, Nizar Jacques , Fonseca, Rafaël , Rodríguez‐Otero, Paula , Cooper, James, Lesokhin, Alexander M.

Blood | December 6, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 1021-1021

10.1182/blood-2024-199542 Get It

Background: Fc receptor-homolog 5 (FcRH5) is a type I membrane protein that is expressed exclusively in the B-cell lineage, and at a higher level on multiple myeloma (MM) cells than on normal B cells. Cevostamab is a FcRH5xCD3 bispecific antibody that facilitates T cell-mediated killing of MM cells. In an ongoing Phase I dose-escalation and dose-expansion study (GO39775; NCT03275103), cevostamab monotherapy demonstrated target dose (TD)-dependent activity and manageable safety in patients (pts) with heavily pretreated RRMM (Trudel et al. ASH 2021). We report updated efficacy and safety data from pts who received cevostamab once every 3 weeks (Q3W) at the 160mg TD level. Methods: Eligible pts were those with RRMM for which no established therapy was available or appropriate. Cevostamab was initiated with Cycle (C) 1 single-step (SS) dosing, double-step (DS) dosing (Trudel et al. ASH 2021), or triple-step (TS) dosing (step doses on D1, D2 [or D3 or D4 depending on the emergence and resolution of cytokine release syndrome [CRS] with the previous administration], and D8, TD on D9 [or D10 or D11]). Cevostamab was then continued at the TD on D1 of each subsequent 21-day cycle. Cevostamab was continued for 17 cycles, unless disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred. Results: As of February 23, 2024, 167 pts (median age: 66 years, range: 40-90; ECOG PS: 0, 35% or 1, 65%; median time from first MM therapy: 6.3 years, range: 0.3-21.8) had received cevostamab at the 160mg TD level (SS: n=10; DS: n=97; TS: n=60); 28% of pts had extramedullary disease and 38% of pts with a conclusive assay result (38/100) had high-risk cytogenetics (t(4;14), t(14;16), or del(17p)). The median number of prior lines of therapy was 6 (range: 2-18). Almost all pts (95.8%) were triple-class refractory and 73.7% were penta-drug refractory; 85.0% were refractory to their last prior therapy. A majority (57%) of pts had received ≥1 prior B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted therapy. Twenty four percent of pts had received ≥1 prior bispecific antibody. Median observation time was 11.3 months (range: 0.5-42.8). The overall response rate (ORR) in all pts who received cevostamab at the 160mg TD level was 43.1% (72/167 pts); 6.6% achieved a stringent complete response (CR), 6.6% a CR, 12.6% a very good partial response (VGPR), and 17.4% a partial response (PR). The VGPR or better rate was 25.7%. Median time to first response (PR or better) was 1.4 months (range: 0.6-4.6) and to best response was 2.4 months (range: 0.7-13.4). Median duration of response was 10.4 months (95% CI: 6.8, 10.5). ORR was 30.2% (29/96) in pts with ≥1 prior BCMA-targeted therapy and 60.6% (43/71) in those without. ORR was 30.0% (12/40) in pts with ≥1 prior bispecific antibody, 33.3% (20/60) with ≥1 prior chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell, and 41.2% (14/34) with ≥1 prior antibody-drug conjugate. Common (≥20%) adverse events (AEs) included CRS (74.3%; Grade [Gr] 1: 52.7%; Gr 2: 19.8%; Gr 3: 1.2%; Gr 4: 0.6%), neutropenia (31.1%; Gr 1-2: 3.0%; Gr 3: 12.0%; Gr 4: 16.2%), cough (30.5%; Gr 1-2: 29.9%; Gr 3: 0.6%), nausea (28.1%; Gr 1-2: 27.5%; Gr 3: 0.6%), diarrhea (24.0%; all Gr 1-2), anemia (23.4%; Gr 1-2: 5.4%; Gr 3: 17.4%; Gr 4: 0.6%), and fatigue (21.0%; Gr 1-2: 19.8%; Gr 3: 1.2%). Possible immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) occurred in 13.2% of pts (Gr 1: 6.0%; Gr 2: 5.4%; Gr 3: 1.8%). Infections occurred in 53.9% of pts, with serious events and Gr ≥3 events in 22.2% and 19.2%, respectively. Treatment-related AEs leading to cevostamab discontinuation occurred in 11 pts (6.6%) and treatment-related Gr 5 (fatal) AEs in 3 pts (1.8%; hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, n=2; disseminated intravascular coagulation and pseudomonal sepsis, n=1). In the 0.3/1.2/3.6/160mg TS cohort, CRS occurred in 19/30 pts (63.3%) and was all Gr 1 (46.7%) or Gr 2 (16.7%). Pts with CRS were managed with tocilizumab (47.4%), steroids (21.1%), or both agents (10.5%). No pts discontinued cevostamab due to CRS and all events were resolved at cut-off. Conclusions: Cevostamab demonstrates clinically meaningful activity and manageable safety at the 160mg TD level in pts with heavily pretreated RRMM. C1 TS dosing provides effective CRS mitigation. Cevostamab combination studies may use the 0.3/1.2/3.6mg TS regimen and the Q3W 160mg TD (or similar TD exposure).
The Composite Health Risk Assessment Model (CHARM) Predicts Risks of Toxicities, Functional and Cognitive Decline Among Survivors of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (allo-HCT): A Prospective BMT-CTN Study 1704
Saber, Wael , Logan, Brent R., Geller, Nancy L. , Bellach, Anna , Kou, Jianqun, McCarty, John M. , Runaas, Lyndsey, Johnston, Laura, Nakamura, Ryotaro , Mishra, Asmita , Uberti, Joseph P., Morris, Lawrence E. , Nadiminti, Kalyan , Olin, Rebecca L. , Sobecks, Ronald , Wall, Sarah , Mattila, Deborah, Protz, Bailey, Horowitz, M., Sorror, Mohamed L. , Wood, William A. , Knight, Thomas G. , Walston, Jeremy D , Dahi, Parastoo B , Saultz, Jennifer N , McCurdy, Shannon , Imus, Philip H , Hogan, William J. , Bhatt, Vijaya Raj , Maakaron, Joseph E. , Devine, Steven M. , Horowitz, Mary M. , Artz, Andrew

Blood | December 5, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 685-685

10.1182/blood-2024-194414 Get It

Introduction: The BMT CTN 1704 study developed and validated the CHARM that stratified risk for non-relapse mortality and overall mortality among older adults, performing better than the HCT-CI alone (Artz A et al, Blood. 2023;142:109) and equally to two machine learning models. CHARM assigns a total score for 7 health variables: increasing age, higher HCT-CI scores, lower albumin, higher C-reactive protein, higher percent of weight loss over the preceding year, lower patient-reported performance status scores, and lower cognitive score per Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). A CHARM calculator is available at:https://cibmtr.org/CIBMTR/OffNav/DevSandbox/CHARM-Risk-NRM-Calculator No multi-institutional prospective data exist on functional trajectories and morbidity after HCT in older patients. We now report on the association of CHARM to trajectories of secondary morbidity outcomes among allo-HCT survivors of this large, prospective study. Patients and Methods: Allo-HCT candidates, aged ≥60 years (yrs), were enrolled (n=1226) from 49 centers in the US between 2019 - 2021. The primary analysis includes 1105 patients proceeding to allo-HCT on study and secondary endpoints were assessed at day (D) 100, 180 and 365 except MoCA and organ toxicity were restricted to D100 and frailty had inadequate data for D100. A sequential multiple imputation strategy was implemented to impute endpoints for survivors at each time point with missing data. Analyses on multiply imputed datasets were conducted and the results combined using Rubin's rule. Associations between CHARM scores and secondary outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable Cox, Fine-Gray, Generalized Estimating Equations, and logistic regression model for survival, competing risks, continuous, and binary outcomes, respectively, with latter two focused on surviving patients. Models were adjusted for other variables including conditioning intensity, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis regimen, disease-risk index, donor-recipient gender match, ethnicity, baseline value of the dependent variable, and visit timepoints. Results: Higher CHARM scores were associated with development of serious organ toxicities by D100 (OR: 2.05, [1.52-2.78], p&lt;0.0001) and ≥2 worsening score on the MoCA (odds ratio (OR) 1.55 [1.16-2.1], p=0.003). Among survivors at all timepoints, higher CHARM scores were associated with greater disability by instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) (Slope -0.640 [-0.433-0.846], p&lt;0.001) and worsening Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Reporting System (PROMIS) physical function (Slope -0.981 [-0.057 - -1.904], p=0.037), depression (Slope 0.763 [0.042-1.484], p=0.038) and in a lesser magnitude anxiety (Slope 0.659, p=0.076). Among survivors at D180 and D365, higher CHARM scores were associated with worse frailty (Slope 0.193 [0.081-0.305], p&lt;0.001). CHARM scores were not associated with development of acute GVHD grades 2-4 or 3-4 but were associated with post-GVHD increased mortality (HR: 1.61, [1.25-2.08], p=0.0002). Higher CHARM scores are associated with a lower incidence of chronic GVHD (HR: 0.83, p=0.026), likely due to the effect of CHARM on the competing risk of death leaving fewer patients at risk for chronic GVHD. Conclusions: The novel primary CHARM, originally developed to predict risks of NRM, also predicts worse frailty, disability, cognitive decline, and serious organ toxicities; outcomes that are critically important to older recipients of allo-HCT. CHARM therefore informs risks of transplant morbidity, separate from risks of developing acute GVHD. Results further support adopting CHARM in practice to counsel patients, expedite HCT referrals for lower risk CHARM, and design trials for high CHARM score patients.
Serial Clinical and Biomarker Monitoring during Treatment Can Stratify Patients with Low Risk Gvhd
Spyrou, Nikolaos , Weber, Daniela , Vášová, Ingrid, Ayuk, Francis, Choe, Hannah , DeFilipp, Zachariah , Etra, Aaron , Sandhu, Karamjeet , Olson, Timothy S. , Schechter‐Finkelstein, Tal, Chanswangphuwana, Chantiya , Baez, Janna , Eng, Gilbert, Beheshti, Rahnuma, Kowalyk, Steven, Morales, George , Louloudis, Ioannis, Young, Rachel , Holler, Ernst , Nakamura, Ryotaro , Ferrara, James L.M. , Katsivelos, Nikolaos , Hogan, William J. , Qayed, Muna , Kraus, Sabrina , Hexner, Elizabeth O. , Aguayo‐Hiraldo, Paibel , Reshef, Ran , Ullrich, Evelyn , Kitko, Carrie L. , Merli, Pietro , Akahoshi, Yu , Levine, John E.

Blood | December 5, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 380-380

10.1182/blood-2024-204010 Get It

Background: The majority of patients respond to steroid treatment for graft-vs-host disease (GVHD), but the typically high doses and prolonged courses can cause substantial morbidity. GVHD can be classified at onset into two groups with significant differences in treatment response and non-relapse mortality (NRM) by clinical criteria (Minnesota risk) but the more favorable standard risk group still experiences high rates of treatment failure and NRM [MacMillan, BBMT 2015]. We previously validated a serum biomarker-based (ST2+REG3α) risk stratification system, MAGIC algorithm probabilities (MAPs), that can stratify patients both at initiation and during treatment into risk groups for treatment response and NRM [Hartwell, JCI Insight 2017, Srinagesh, Blood Adv 2019]. GVHD that is Minnesota standard risk and has a low MAP (i.e., Ann Arbor 1) at start of treatment represents a low risk group with &gt;80% response rate to steroids and ~10% NRM [Etra, Blood 2023]. We hypothesized that serial monitoring of GVHD symptom severity and MAPs twice (days (d) 7 and 14) in patients with clinical and biomarker defined low risk GVHD could further stratify patients into clinically meaningful groups. Methods: We retrospectively determined MAPs at d7 and 14 in 450 patients with low risk GVHD who participated in a prospective, multi-center, observational trial and were treated with systemic steroids between 2015-2023. MAPs &lt;0.291 at days 7 and 14 were defined as low risk based on a previously validated threshold [Major-Monfried Blood 2018]. Clinical responses were scored as complete (CR), partial (PR), or non-response (NR) by standard criteria. Initiation of second line therapy was considered NR. Patients were categorized into three groups (A-C) based on clinical responses and MAPs at days d7 and 14. A: CR/PR by d14 and low MAP at both d7+14; B: stable or worse GVHD (NR) by d14 with low MAP at both d7 and 14; C: any response with a high MAP at d7 or 14. The endpoints were clinical response at day 28 (overall response rate, ORR=CR or PR), regardless of earlier response status, and 6-month NRM. Results: The median age of the study population was 54 years (range: 0-79); 19% of patients received PT-Cy for GVHD prophylaxis. Target organ involvement was skin ± upper GI (66%), lower GI (23%), isolated UGI (11%), and skin+liver (1%), and GVHD severity was grade I (35%), II (61%), and III (4%) at start of treatment. Patients in group A (n=310, 69%), clinical responders with low MAPs through day 14, had excellent d28 ORR (93%) and very low NRM (4%). GVHD in this group was considered ultra-low risk (ULR) and subset analyses revealed highly consistent d28 ORR and NRM, regardless of target organ severity, age (&lt;18, 18-59, &gt;60), HCT-CI score, conditioning intensity, and GVHD prophylaxis. Group B patients comprised clinical non-responders with low MAPs through day 14 (n=112, 25%); half of them responded by d28 and their NRM was low (8%), albeit double that of group A (p=0.079). Group C was small (n=28, 6%) and included both clinical responders (n=20, 4%) and clinical non-responders (n=8, 2%) who had at least one high MAP through day 14. Their d28 ORR was 54% but NRM increased four-fold (32%) and was significantly worse than patients who maintained low MAPs regardless of clinical response (p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: Serial monitoring by clinical response and biomarkers during the first two weeks of treatment identifies a small number of high risk patients whose GVHD is initially low risk (group C). This group experiences high NRM regardless of clinical response to steroid treatment and may benefit from treatment escalation. Patients with low risk GVHD who do not have an early clinical response to steroids but maintain low MAPs, (group B) have reasonably good long-term outcomes with standard treatment. Finally, serial monitoring identifies a very large subset of patients with ULR GVHD (group A) who respond exceptionally well to standard treatment and experience very low rates of 6-month NRM regardless of pre-transplant characteristics and GVHD prophylaxis. Such patients may benefit from treatment de-escalation strategies such as shorter courses of lower dose steroids, a strategy we are currently testing in a clinical trial (NCT05090384).
Refinement of Day 28 Treatment Response Criteria for Acute GVHD: A Collaboration Study of the JSTCT and MAGIC
Akahoshi, Yu , Inamoto, Yoshihiro , Spyrou, Nikolaos , Ayuk, Francis , Choe, Hannah , Doki, Noriko, Eto, Tetsuya, Etra, Aaron , Holler, Ernst , Vášová, Ingrid, Ishimaru, Fumihiko , Fukuda, Takahiro, Nakamura, Ryotaro , Atsuta, Yoshiko, Ferrara, James L.M. , Kanda, Yoshinobu , Akahoshi, Yu , Nakasone, Hideki , Doki, Noriko , Eto, Tetsuya , Hexner, Elizabeth O. , Hiramoto, Nobuhiro , Hogan, William J. , Kataoka, Keisuke , Tanaka, Masatsugu , Tanaka, Takashi , Uchida, Naoyuki , Chen, Yibin , Kanda, Junya , Atsuta, Yoshiko , Levine, John E. , Teshima, Takanori

Blood | December 5, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 384-384

10.1182/blood-2024-203344 Get It

Background Endpoints for GVHD treatment trials use early response (i.e, day (D)28 of treatment) as a surrogate for long term survival. Overall response (OR) that combines complete (CR) and partial responses (PR) at day (D) 28 is the conventional endpoint for primary acute GVHD trials because of similar survival outcomes between CR and PR. D28 OR ignores symptom severity at baseline and D28, however, and the PR category encompasses a wide range of responses from minimal improvement to near complete resolution of symptoms. D28 OR is the only endpoint currently approved by the FDA for efficacy, but it has not been re-evaluated as an endpoint for primary treatment (1L) in fifteen years and little is known regarding the prognostic value of D28 OR as an endpoint for second line treatment (2L) of GVHD. We hypothesized that refinement of the current D28 OR criteria, particularly through recategorization of PR in the GI tract, the main driver of nonrelapse mortality (NRM), would more accurately reflect disease control and better predict survival outcomes than current D28 response. Methods The Japanese Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (JSTCT) collaborated with the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) to develop and validate D28 refined response (RR) criteria for 1L and 2L treatment (tx) in patients with Grades II-IV acute GVHD. To maximize the correlation between treatment success (i.e, response) with long term survival, our primary measured metric was the negative predictive value (NPV). We first randomly divided the 1L tx cohort of JSTCT into the training (n=2341) and validation sets (n=1156). In the training set we used a classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm to generate RR criteria that predicted 6-month (mo) NRM based on symptoms both at tx onset and D28. We then compared the two D28 response endpoints (RR vs OR) as surrogates for 6-mo NRM in two validation sets of both 1L tx (JSTCT: n=1156; MAGIC: n=1141) and 2L tx (JSTCT: n=510; MAGIC: n=196). Results The CART algorithm defined a RR as GVHD Grades 0/I at D28 without additional tx; all other D28 grades were considered refined nonresponses. As expected, RR successfully stratified the risk of 6-mo NRM in both 1L tx validation sets (JSTCT: 8% vs 38%, p&lt;0.01; MAGIC: 9% vs 37%, p&lt;0.01). We defined a discordant nonresponse as a nonresponse by RR criteria but a response by OR criteria, which accounted for the majority (~75%) of differences between RR and OR. 6-mo NRM in discordant nonresponders was four fold higher than in responders (JSTCT: 35%; MAGIC: 30%). The large majority (&gt;80%) of discordant nonresponders had persistent GI GVHD at D28. Because the proportion of discordant nonresponders was small (&lt;7% of the total population) in the 1L setting, the improvements of an already high NPV were small (JSTCT: 93% vs 91%; MAGIC: 91% vs 90%). In the 2L tx validation sets, RR also stratified the risk of 6-mo NRM (JSTCT: 26% vs 56%, p&lt;0.01; MAGIC: 13% vs 55%, p&lt;0.01). At the time of 2L tx, the discordant nonresponders are more common and half of the discordant nonresponders experienced 6-mo NRM (JSTCT: 45%; MAGIC: 59%); as a result, RR achieved much higher NPVs than OR (JSTCT: 75% vs 66%; MAGIC: 87% vs 76%). Deaths in responders from acute GVHD (vs. other causes such as infection) were more frequent in OR than RR in both 2L tx validation sets (JSTCT: 41% vs 20%; MAGIC: 41% vs 13%) and 1L tx validation sets (JSTCT: 25% vs 18%; MAGIC: 32% vs 29%). D28 RR is superior to OR because it more accurately reflects control of serious GVHD in four independent validation cohorts, particularly in patients with GI disease. Conclusion We conclude that RR is a more accurate endpoint than OR in patients with grade II-IV GVHD primarily because it classifies persistent GI GVHD at D28 as a non-response instead of a response, which correlates with 6-mo NRM and achieves a higher NPV. This validated RR metric can serve as a better endpoint than OR in assessing treatment efficacy in both primary treatment trials that enrich for high risk GVHD, e.g. GI involvement, and second line treatment trials.
Risankizumab for Ulcerative Colitis
Louis, Edouard, Panaccione, Remo, Biedermann, Luc , Colombel, Jean–Frédéric, D’Haens, Geert , Hisamatsu, Tadakazu , Siegmund, Britta , Boland, Brigid S. , Melmed, Gil , Armuzzi, Alessandro , Levine, Phillip, Kalabic, Jasmina , Cheng, Ling, Shu, Lei , Duan, W. Rachel, Pivorunas, Valerie , González, Yuri Sánchez , D’Cunha, Ronilda , Neimark, Ezequiel, Wallace, Kori, Ferrante, Marc , Group, INSPIRE and COMMAND Study, Balderramo, Domingo , Goncalves, Silvina A., Lasa, Juan, Novillo, Abel, Ruffinengo, Orlando, Heeren, Sonja, Reinisch, Walter , Baert, Filip , Colard, A, Ferrante, Marc, Franchimont, Denis , Rahier, Jean‐François , Francesconi, Carlos Fernando de Magalhães , Stanchev, Desislav , Atkinson, Kenneth, Beaton, Melanie, Greenbloom, Susan, Lachance, Jean-Rene, Lim, Allen, Samson, Jean-Michel, Shulman, Scott, Siffledeen, Jesse, Alfaro, Ignacio , Valenzuela, Carlos , Walsen, Gustavo, An, Ping , Cao, Qian , Chen, Yan , Gao, Xiang , Hou, Xiaohua , Hu, Naizhong, Liu, Mei , Lungen, LU, Ran, Zhihua, Tang, Tongyu , Yang, Shaoqi , Zhan, Qiang , Zhang, Guoxin , Zhang, Xiaolan , Zhong, Jie , Zou, Xiaoping, Álvarez, Eligio, Ricaurte, Juan, Borzan, Vladimir , Puljiz, Željko , Svoboda, Pavel , Ulbrych, Jan, Vaňásek, Tomáš , Ali, Ezzat, Salem, Osama , Sawah, Hisham, Altwegg, Romain , Flamant, Mathurin, Hébuterne, Xavier , Deppe, Herbert, Klaus, Jochen , Kucharzik, Torsten , Mertens, Jessica, Mroß, Michael, Reindl, Wolfgang , Schiefke, Ingolf, Schreiber, Stefan, Sturm, Andreas , Bamias, Georgios, Manolakopoulos, Spilios , Mantzaris, Gerassimos J. , Tzouvala, Maria , Viazis, N. , Avni‐Biron, Irit , Goldin, Eran , Katz, Lior H. , Lahat-Zok, Adi, Segal, Arik, Colecchia, Antonio , Cosintino, R. , Geccherle, Andrea, Monteleone, Giovanni , Privitera, Antonino Carlo , Vangeli, Marcello, Abe, Yasuhiko , Aoyama, Nobuo , Endo, Yutaka , Esaki, Motohiro, Fujii, Toshimitsu , Fukuda, Katsuyuki , Hirai, Fumihito , Hisanaga, Yasuhiro, Horiki, Noriyuki , Iguchi, Mikitaka , Ishiguro, Yoh , Ito, Hiroaki , Kamikozuru, Koji , Kato, Jun , Kawanishi, Teruki, Kobayashi, Taku , Kuge, Hiroyuki , Masuda, Tomoyuki, Matsuoka, Katsuyoshi , Matsushima, Kayoko , Matsushima, Masashi, Motoya, Satoshi , Nakai, Katsuhiko, Nakajima, Koichi, Nakamura, Masanao, Nishida, Atsushi , Nishikawa, Takahiro , Nishimata, Nobuaki, Ochiai, Toshiaki, Ohmiya, Naoki , Ohnishi, Yoshifumi , Oka, Shiro , Ozeki, Keiji , Saito, Daisuke, Saruta, Masayuki, Sasaki, Makoto, Shimizu, Masahito , Sujino, Tomohisa , Takatori, Hajime , Takatsu, Noritaka , Tokito, Satoki, Endo, Toshiyuki, Toyokawa, Tatsuya , Uenoyama, Yoshito , Yamamoto, Takatsugu, Yasuda, Hiroshi , Yokoyama, Kaoru , Jonaitis, Laimas, Kazėnaitė, Edita, Te, Lourdes Lol-be Pinzon, Lutgens, Maurice, Brooker, James, Griffiths, Ben, Inns, Stephen , Schultz, Michael, Eszyk, Jerzy, Kleczkowski, D, Kopoń, Adam, Petryka, Robert, Romańczyk, Tomasz , Rydzewska-Wyszkowska, Grażyna , Sikorski, Piotr, Talarek, Michał, Ministro, Paula , Tavares, Helena, Diculescu, Mihai-Mircea, Goldiș, Adrian , Agafina, Alina, Edin, Anton, Gerasimova, Evgenia, Gettueva, Maryana, Кашников, В. Н. , Pirmagomedov, Albert , Rafalskiy, Vladimir , Шарапова, К. М., Varganova, Daria L , Grgov, Saša, Svorcan, Petar , Tarabar, Dino, Ling, Khoon Lin , Baláž, Jozef, Ďurina, J, Greguš, Miloš, Laclav, Martin , Deetlefs, Eduan, Peter, Jonny , Rajabally, Muhammad, Rosa, Jennifer, Zyl, JI van, Wright, John , Jang, Byung Ik , Kang, Sang-Bum, Kim, Duk-Hwan , Kim, Tae Oh , Kim, Young-Ho , Song, Geun Am , Laria, Luisa Castro, Piudo, Ana Echarri, Ramirez, Vincent Hernandez, Martín‐Arranz, María Dolores , Trastoy, Pilar Varela, Mendoza, M Vera, Lördal, Mikael, Chang, Chung-Hsin, Kuo, Chia-Jung , Lin, Ching‐Pin , Tu, Chia–Hung, Erzın, Yusuf , Soykan, İrfan , Kravchenko, Tetiana , Tsarynna, Nataliia, Vyshyvanyuk, Vira , Cummings, Fraser , Kapur, Kapil , Kaser, Arthur , Kent, Alexandra , Parkes, Gareth, Patel, Kamal , Steel, Alan , Aberra, Faten , Aguilar, Humberto , Al‐Bawardy, Badr , Barnes, Matthew D., Beck, Kendall , Berkelhammer, Charles , Bullock, Jeff, Chiplunker, Adeeti , Dalal, Robin, Dalal, Sushila , Delgado, Belkis, DiGiovanna, Michael P., Duvall, George, Freedland, Curtis, Friedenberg, Keith, Gaidos, Jill , Ginsburg, Philip, Hassanein, Tarek , Higgins, Peter , Hou, Jason K. , Huilgol, Vivek, Inamdar, Nikhil, Kapur, Saurabh, Kerman, David H., Levine, Henry, Lodhia, Nilesh, Mayoral, Jaime L., McNeil, Donald, Mushahwar, Andria M., Ojeas, Harry, Patel, Bhaktasharan, Phillips, Raymond E. , Pouzar, Joe, Sarles, H, Schock, Joel, Sedghi, Shahriar , Shah, Nirav V. , Stokesberry, David, Su, Le‐Chu, Verma, Dharmendra, Weber, John T. , Younes, Ziad , Zisman, Timothy L. , Melmed, Gil Y , Kobayashi, Taku , Siegmund, Britta , Schreiber, Stefan , Bossuyt, Peter , Parkes, Gareth, Peyrin‐Biroulet, Laurent , Wu, Kaichun , Chen, Su , Atreya, Raja Narayana , Loftus, Edward V. , Group, INSPIRE and COMMAND Study, Reinisch, Walter , Dewit, Olivier , Franchimont, Denis , Kaiser, Roberto Luiz , Parra, Rogério Serafim , Sassaki, Lígia Yukie , Пенчев, Пламен , Bessissow, Talat , Lachance, Jean-René, Panaccione, Remo , Walsen, Gustavo, Chen, Youxiang , Li, Yan , Liu, Fei , Wang, Xin , Zhan, Qiang, Zhang, Hu , Zhang, Jie , Ricaurte, Juan, Krznarić, Željko , Bortlík, Martin , Svoboda, Pavel, Kjeldsen, Jens , Munck, Lars Kristian , Poulsen, Anja, Waked, Imam A. , Fumery, Mathurin , Laharie, David , Roblin, Xavier , Tréton, Xavier , Deppe, Herbert, Hasselblatt, Peter , Kandulski, Arne , Krause, Thomas , Naumann, Axel, Schreiber, Stefan , Schubert, Stefan, Κoutroubakis, Ioannis E. , Ardizzone, Sandro , Cicala, Michele , Gasbarrini, Antonio , Giannini, Edoardo Giovanni , Gionchetti, Paolo , Luzza, Francesco , Saibeni, Simone , Abe, Yasuhiko, Asonuma, Kunio , Hisanaga, Yasuhiro, Ishigami, Keisuke, Kakuta, Yoichi , Maemoto, Atsuo , Nakajima, Koichi, Nishida, Atsushi, Sasaki, Makoto, Sugimoto, Ken , Suzuki, Takayoshi , Takedatsu, Hidetoshi , Takeuchi, Ken, Tanaka, Hiroki , Tokito, Satoki, Yamamoto, Takayuki , Derovs, Aleksejs , Puķītis, Aldis , Jonaitis, Laimas Virginijus , Gearry, Richard B. , Griffiths, Ben, Kierkuś, Jarosław , Reguła, Jarosław , Cerqueira, Rute Maria , Goncalves, Tiago, Lopes, Susana , Portela, Francisco , Seicean, Andrada , Gerasimova, Evgenia, Sharapova, Ksenia, Smolyarchuk, Е. А. , Jovanović, Igor , Balaz, Jozef, Drobne, David , Wright, John, Cheon, Jae Hee , Kim, Jee Hyun , Lee, Jong Hun , Lee, Kang‐Moon , Park, Dong Il , Argüelles‐Arias, Federico , Piudo, Ana Echarri, García‐López, Santiago , Ramirez, V Hernández, Misselwitz, Benjamin , Chou, Jen‐Wei , Tu, Chia‐Hung , Alkım, Hüseyin , Kravchenko, Tetiana, Ahmad, Tariq, Parkes, Gareth, Speight, Richard, Ananthakrishnan, Ashwin N. , Barnes, Matthew, Bullock, Jeff, DiGiovanna, Michael, Hong, John D. , Huilgol, V.R., Phillips, Raymond, Siddiqui, Junaid, Swaminath, Arun C. , Weber, John, Matsuoka, K

JAMA | July 22, 2024 | Volume: 332 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 881

10.1001/jama.2024.12414 | PMID 39037800 Get It

Importance The clinical effects of risankizumab (a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the p19 subunit of IL-23) for the treatment of ulcerative colitis are unknown. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab when administered as an induction and a maintenance therapy for patients with ulcerative colitis. Design, Setting, and Participants Two phase 3 randomized clinical trials were conducted. The induction trial was conducted at 261 clinical centers (in 41 countries) and enrolled 977 patients from November 5, 2020, to August 4, 2022 (final follow-up on May 16, 2023). The maintenance trial was conducted at 238 clinical centers (in 37 countries) and enrolled 754 patients from August 28, 2018, to March 30, 2022 (final follow-up on April 11, 2023). Eligible patients had moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis; a history of intolerance or inadequate response to 1 or more conventional therapies, advanced therapies, or both types of therapies; and no prior exposure to risankizumab. Interventions For the induction trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 1200 mg of risankizumab or placebo administered intravenously at weeks 0, 4, and 8. For the maintenance trial, patients with a clinical response (determined using the adapted Mayo score) after intravenous treatment with risankizumab were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous treatment with 180 mg or 360 mg of risankizumab or placebo (no longer receiving risankizumab) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was clinical remission (stool frequency score ≤1 and not greater than baseline, rectal bleeding score of 0, and endoscopic subscore ≤1 without friability) at week 12 for the induction trial and at week 52 for the maintenance trial. Results Among the 975 patients analyzed in the induction trial (aged 42.1 [SD, 13.8] years; 586/973 [60.1%] were male; and 677 [69.6%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 12 were 132/650 (20.3%) for 1200 mg of risankizumab and 20/325 (6.2%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference, 14.0% [95% CI, 10.0%-18.0%], P &amp;lt; .001). Among the 548 patients analyzed in the maintenance trial (aged 40.9 [SD, 14.0] years; 313 [57.1%] were male; and 407 [74.3%] were White), the clinical remission rates at week 52 were 72/179 (40.2%) for 180 mg of risankizumab, 70/186 (37.6%) for 360 mg of risankizumab, and 46/183 (25.1%) for placebo (adjusted between-group difference for 180 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 16.3% [97.5% CI, 6.1%-26.6%], P &amp;lt; .001; adjusted between-group difference for 360 mg of risankizumab vs placebo, 14.2% [97.5% CI, 4.0%-24.5%], P = .002). No new safety risks were detected in the treatment groups. Conclusion and Relevance Compared with placebo, risankizumab improved clinical remission rates in an induction trial and in a maintenance trial for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Further study is needed to identify benefits beyond the 52-week follow-up. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03398148 and NCT03398135
Upper motor neuron‐predominant motor neuron disease presenting as atypical parkinsonism: A clinicopathological study
Murakami, Aya , Koga, Shunsuke , White, Adrianna, Bieniek, Kevin F. , Sekiya, Hiroaki , DeJesus‐Hernandez, Mariely, Finch, NiCole A., Blitterswijk, Marka van , Nakamura, Masataka , Tsuboi, Yoshio , White, Adrianna E, DeJesus-Hernandez, Mariely, Dickson, Dennis W , van Blitterswijk, Marka , Koga, Shunsuke , Sekiya, Hiroaki , Fujioka, Shinsuke , Murray, Melissa E. , Wszołek, Zbigniew K. , Dickson, Dennis W.

Brain Pathology | July 11, 2024 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/bpa.13286 | PMID 38988008 Get It

AbstractAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by upper and lower motor neuron signs. There are, however, cases where upper motor neurons (UMNs) are predominantly affected, leading to clinical presentations of UMN‐dominant ALS or primary lateral sclerosis. Furthermore, cases exhibiting an UMN‐predominant pattern of motor neuron disease (MND) presenting with corticobasal syndrome (CBS) have been sparsely reported. This study aims to clarify the clinicopathological features of patients with UMN‐predominant MND. We reviewed 24 patients with UMN‐predominant MND with TDP‐43 pathology in the presence or absence of frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Additionally, we reviewed the medical records of patients with pathologically‐confirmed corticobasal degeneration (CBD) who received a final clinical diagnosis of CBS (n = 10) and patients with pathologically‐confirmed progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) who received a final clinical diagnosis of PSP syndrome (n = 10). Of 24 UMN‐predominant MND patients, 20 had a clinical diagnosis of an atypical parkinsonian disorder, including CBS (n = 11) and PSP syndrome (n = 8). Only two patients had antemortem diagnoses of motor neuron disease. UMN‐predominant MND patients with CBS less frequently exhibited apraxia than those with CBD, and they were less likely to meet clinical criteria for possible or probable CBS. Similarly, UMN‐predominant MND patients with PSP syndrome less often met clinical criteria for probable PSP than PSP patients with PSP syndrome. Our findings suggest that UMN‐predominant MND can mimic atypical parkinsonism, and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of CBS and PSP syndrome, in particular when criteria are not met.
Novel MAGIC composite scores using both clinical symptoms and biomarkers best predict treatment outcomes of acute GVHD
Akahoshi, Yu , Spyrou, Nikolaos , Weber, Daniela , Aguayo‐Hiraldo, Paibel , Ayuk, Francis , Chanswangphuwana, Chantiya , Choe, Hannah , Etra, Aaron , Grupp, Stephan A. , Schechter, Tal , Vášová, Ingrid, Wölfl, Matthias , Baez, Janna , Beheshti, Rahnuma, Eng, Gilbert, Gleich, Sigrun, Katsivelos, Nikolaos , Kowalyk, Steven, Morales, George , Young, Rachel , Chen, Yi‐Bin , Nakamura, Ryotaro , Ferrara, James L.M. , Grupp, Stephan A , Hexner, Elizabeth , Hogan, William J , Al Malki, Monzr M , Merli, Pietro , Qayed, Muna , Reshef, Ran , Ullrich, Evelyn , Katsivelos, Nikolaos , Chen, Yi-Bin , Nakamura, Ryotaro , Levine, John E , Ferrara, James L M , Aguayo-Hiraldo, Paibel , Akahoshi, Yu , Eder, Matthias , Hexner, Elizabeth O. , Hogan, William J. , Kitko, Carrie L. , Kraus, Sabrina , Malki, Monzr M. Al , Reshef, Ran , Zeiser, Robert , Levine, John E.

Blood | July 5, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1010-1021

10.1182/blood.2024025106 | PMID 38968143 Get It

Abstract Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) grading systems that use only clinical symptoms at treatment initiation such as the Minnesota risk identify standard and high-risk categories but lack a low-risk category suitable to minimize immunosuppressive strategies. We developed a new grading system that includes a low-risk stratum based on clinical symptoms alone and determined whether the incorporation of biomarkers would improve the model’s prognostic accuracy. We randomly divided 1863 patients in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) who were treated for GVHD into training and validation cohorts. Patients in the training cohort were divided into 14 groups based on similarity of clinical symptoms and similar nonrelapse mortality (NRM); we used a classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm to create three Manhattan risk groups that produced a significantly higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for 6-month NRM than the Minnesota risk classification (0.69 vs 0.64, P = .009) in the validation cohort. We integrated serum GVHD biomarker scores with Manhattan risk using patients with available serum samples and again used a CART algorithm to establish 3 MAGIC composite scores that significantly improved prediction of NRM compared to Manhattan risk (AUC, 0.76 vs 0.70, P = .010). Each increase in MAGIC composite score also corresponded to a significant decrease in day 28 treatment response (80% vs 63% vs 30%, P &lt; .001). We conclude that the MAGIC composite score more accurately predicts response to therapy and long-term outcomes than systems based on clinical symptoms alone and may help guide clinical decisions and trial design.