Citations

ABSTRACT Glioblastoma (GBM), the most aggressive primary brain tumour in adults, presents significant challenges due to its universal recurrence and limited survival rates. A key driver of GBM progression is the subpopulation of brain tumour‐initiating cells (BTICs), which contribute to therapy resistance and interact with the tumour microenvironment, particularly the cellular components in the subventricular zone (SVZ). Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are critical mediators of intercellular communication, carrying bioactive molecules, such as proteins and RNAs, that can modulate the behaviour of recipient cells. This study investigates the role of EVs in GBM's communication with non‐cancer cells. We utilised the proximity‐labelling system TurboID to achieve global and unbiased labelling of proteins within GBM‐derived EVs. By inducing TurboID expression in primary‐cultured human BTICs from GBM patients, we achieved efficient biotinylation of EV proteins without compromising vesicle integrity, and performed proteomic analysis of biotinylated proteins, which revealed a diverse cargo within BTIC‐EVs. Our method marks the first implementation of TurboID for unbiased global labelling of EV protein cargo in primary cells. This approach facilitates the investigation of EV‐mediated communication and potential therapeutic targets, contributing to the understanding of GBM's complex interactions with the brain's microenvironment and identification of biomarkers for improved diagnosis and treatment response.

ABSTRACT Background Up to 20% of patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody–associated vasculitis (AAV) and kidney involvement progress to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) despite therapy. The role of monoclonal gammopathy (MG) in disease progression in patients with AAV is not well understood. Methods We conducted a retrospective study to identify patients diagnosed with AAV and renal involvement who had undergone monoclonal protein testing between November 1999 and December 2023. A total of 167 patients were included in the renal survival analysis and were categorized into monoclonal positive (n = 34) and monoclonal negative (n = 133) groups. For the mortality analysis, we expanded the cohort to include an additional 26 patients who were dialysis-dependent at baseline and remained on dialysis throughout follow-up, resulting in a total of 193 patients. We performed multivariate Cox analysis to identify predictors of adverse renal events [>40% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or ESKD (eGFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m², need for dialysis or transplantation)] and mortality. Results Median age of the cohort was 68 (58.5–74.5) years, with 50.8% males, 65.8% MPO positive, and 64.6% receiving rituximab as induction therapy. After adjusting for baseline proteinuria, sclerotic Berden class and induction therapy, MG was associated with adverse renal events [hazard ratio (HR) 3.29 (95% confidence interval 1.12–9.68), P = .03]. MG at baseline was not associated with mortality [HR 1.65 (0.87–3.12), P = .12], however patients with persistent MG at 6 months had higher mortality compared with those without MG or those whose MG was not sustained [HR 3.95 (1.10–14.21), P = .035]. Conclusions Patients with AAV and renal involvement who have MG are at significantly increased risk of adverse renal events even after adjusting for factors such as eGFR and degree of chronicity (known predictors of poor renal outcome). The exact mechanism by which MG portends poor outcomes is poorly understood, and additional research is required.

Objectives: The practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the American Brachytherapy Society (ABS), the American College of Nuclear Medicine (ACNM), the American Radium Society (ARS), the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI). This document summarizes current evidence-based guidelines for the administration of Yttrium radioembolic therapy to the liver, including training requirements, evidence-based guidelines for administration, and safe practice for administration. Methods: This practice parameter was revised according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/ClinicalResources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters—Interventional and Cardiovascular Radiology of the ACR Commission on Interventional and Cardiovascular, Committee on Practice Parameters and Technical Standards—Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging of the ACR Commission on Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging and the Committee on Practice Parameters—Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the ABS, the ACNM, the ARS, the SIR, and the SNMMI. Results: This review seeks not to be a comprehensive discussion of radiotherapy to the liver, but rather, seeks to provide a parameter for safe and effective therapy. We discuss the qualifications of physicians involved in this therapy, basic indications, contraindications, procedural work-up, safe-handling, and regulatory requirement for the administration of selective internal radiation therapy to patients that are likely to benefit. The goal of this document is not to define which patients are best treated by these therapies, as this is best determined for individual patients after multidisciplinary review. A consistent and evidence-based approach to therapy, however, would benefit all patients who are offered this therapy. This document seeks to provide a framework for current best practices for the administration of the 2 currently available radioembolization devices. Conclusions: As Yttrium-90 radiotherapy to the liver occupies a growing role in the treatment of primary and metastatic liver cancer, this review seeks to assist clinicians of all involved specialties to optimize the efficacy and safety of these procedures.

ABSTRACT Aims The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation (TR) across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) to conservative (medical) management across LVEF categories. Methods and results Patients with severe isolated TR from the TRIGISTRY, a multicentre international registry, were categorized based on LVEF (preserved ejection fraction [pEF]: ≥50%, mildly reduced ejection fraction [mrEF]: 41–49%, and reduced ejection fraction [rEF]: ≤40%). We assessed the impact of treatment modality and procedural success (mild-to-moderate or lower residual TR) on 2-year survival within each LVEF category. Among 2384 patients, 1383 had pEF, 400 had mrEF, and 601 had rEF. Compared to conservative management, surgery (p < 0.0005) and TTVI (p < 0.0001) were associated with a survival benefit in patients with pEF. No significant survival advantage was observed in patients with mrEF (p = 0.28 for both), nor in those with rEF (p = 0.76 and p = 0.22, respectively). Similar results were obtained when surgical and transcatheter interventions were grouped (p < 0.0001, p = 0.17 and p = 0.29 in patients with pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Patients with residual TR after TTVI exhibited a trend toward worse survival compared to those managed conservatively across all LVEF categories (p = 0.47, p = 0.33 and p = 0.008 in pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Conclusions Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention, whether surgical or transcatheter-based, was associated with improved survival in patients with pEF but not in those with mrEF or rEF. Residual TR remained a significant prognostic factor across the entire LVEF spectrum. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection when considering TTVI in individuals with rEF.

Abstract Background and Aims The TRISCEND II trial demonstrated superior clinical benefits for patients with ≥severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) treated with the EVOQUE transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) system plus medical therapy vs medical therapy alone. This work reports 1-year and 18-month outcomes in patients stratified by baseline TR severity. Methods The multicentre, prospective TRISCEND II trial enrolled 400 patients with symptomatic, ≥severe TR, and randomized 2:1 to TTVR (n = 267) or control (n = 133). In a post hoc analysis, patients were stratified into severe TR (n = 172) and massive/torrential TR (n = 220) cohorts. Clinical and quality-of-life outcomes were reported at 1 year, with Kaplan–Meier estimates for all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization assessed at 18 months. Study oversight included an independent echocardiographic core laboratory, clinical events committee, and data safety monitoring board. Results One year after TTVR, TR was ≤mild in 95.2% of severe TR and 95.3% of massive/torrential TR patients. The primary safety and effectiveness endpoint (win ratio) favoured TTVR over control regardless of baseline TR severity: severe {1.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 2.43]} and massive/torrential [2.20 (1.55, 3.14)]. At 18 months, TTVR patients had similar mortality to controls [rate difference: severe 0.2% (−11.6, 11.9), massive/torrential −5.8% (−17.6, 6.0)], whereas HF hospitalization rates favoured TTVR in the massive/torrential cohort [vs control, severe 9.8% (−3.0, 22.7), massive/torrential -15.2% (−28.9, −1.5)]. Conclusions Patients with ≥severe TR benefit from TTVR, experiencing improvements in TR severity, functional capacity, and quality of life regardless of baseline TR severity, with a signal for greater benefit in patients with more advanced disease.

ABSTRACT Background Multimodality therapy incorporating a combination of cytoreductive surgery (CRS), intraperitoneal (IP) and systemic therapy continues to evolve for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) However, treatment and outcomes vary depending on tumor of origin. Aims To develop Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) guidelines to facilitate treatment decision‐making for patients with PC based on available evidence. Materials and Methods The American Radium Society (ARS) multidisciplinary expert panel performed a comprehensive systematic review. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in seven representative clinical scenarios through a well‐established modified Delphi consensus methodology. Results Treatment of PC is often treated with a combination of CRS and IP ± systemic chemotherapy but specific recommendations exist for different tumor types and outcomes vary. Discussion Treatment of PC is complex and varies depending on origin of primary tumor and extent of disease. These AUC assist in patient and treatment selection for different clinical scenarios. Conclusion A summary of recommendations is outlined to guide practitioners on the management of PC from different tumor origins.

In REACH3 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03112603 ), ruxolitinib was investigated versus best available therapy (BAT) for 3 years in patients with steroid-refractory/dependent chronic graft-versus-host-disease (SR/D-cGVHD). Patients received ruxolitinib (10 mg twice daily) or BAT for 24 weeks; thereafter (weeks 24-156), patients continued randomized treatment, entered long-term survival follow-up, or crossed over from BAT to ruxolitinib. In 329 randomly assigned patients (ruxolitinib: 165; BAT: 164), the median failure-free survival (FFS) was 38.4 months for ruxolitinib versus 5.7 months for BAT (hazard ratio, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.27 to 0.49]). Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached for ruxolitinib versus 6.4 months for BAT. Ruxolitinib-treated patients had a higher probability of FFS (ruxolitinib: 56.5%; BAT: 18.2%) and maintaining a response (ruxolitinib: 59.6%; BAT: 26.7%) at 36 months. Median overall survival was not reached. Nonrelapse mortality and malignancy relapse/recurrence events were low. In 70 patients who crossed over to ruxolitinib, the overall response rate (50.0%) at week 24 and best overall response (81.4%) during the crossover period were consistent with the primary analysis of randomly assigned patients. No new safety signals were observed. Ruxolitinib provided longer FFS and DOR than BAT, demonstrating sustained efficacy and manageable safety over 3 years of follow-up in patients with SR/D-cGVHD.

Objectives: Esophageal cancer (EC) often presents with dysphagia due to tumor obstruction. Esophageal stenting has the potential of palliating dysphagia, improving nutrition, preventing aspiration, and improving quality of life (QoL) but may be associated with risks. The present systematic review and guidelines are intended to assist treatment decision-making when considering stent placement in patients with EC based on the available evidence. Methods: Using the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing and study design framework, the evidence was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included prospective phase II-III trials and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2010 and December 3, 2024 in the Ovid Medline database. These references were assessed by American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) methodology. RAND-UCLA consensus methodology was used to rate the appropriateness of the use of stents. Results: ARS AUC recommendations include (1) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate in patients with early-stage EC in whom upfront surgery is planned; (2) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate in patients with locally-advanced EC in whom neoadjuvant/perioperative therapy and esophagectomy or definitive chemoradiation is planned; (3) esophageal stenting may be appropriate in the setting of metastatic EC, especially in patients with short life expectancy with limited treatment options; (4) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate for benign stricture following curative-intent therapy; (5) esophageal stenting is usually not appropriate for locally recurrent tumor in the setting of prior radiation; and (6) esophageal stenting is usually appropriate for management of tracheoesophageal fistula before curative-intent treatment. Conclusions: This ARS AUC summary provides guidelines for the use of esophageal stents in patients with EC provides based on available evidence.

Abstract There is a general separation between medical and business education, despite the substantial intersection of these fields in hospital and industry settings. This separation hinders medical innovators, who rarely have opportunities to see how entrepreneurial concepts apply to the translation of medical innovation. To address this, the Office of Entrepreneurship at Mayo Clinic Florida provides experiential entrepreneurial training through an internal pitch competition: the alligator tank (AT). This study evaluates the impact and efficacy of the first seven years of the AT. Key metrics include a modified technology readiness level (TRL), determined by the presence of a disclosure, prototype, and preliminary data. A high TRL is not indicative of success in the pitch competition, leveling the playing field for early-stage inventions. The AT is characterized by broad representation across academic and professional ranks, departments, and genders, as well as strong participant retention. Innovators with prior disclosures are more likely to win the AT, presumably due to their experience. The AT serves as an institution-wide initiative that cultivates an inclusive, supportive innovation culture, fosters interdisciplinary medical innovation, and helps advance innovation maturity. Adopting the AT framework may help similar medical systems build an innovation ecosystem within their institutions.