Citations

Introduction Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), has potential associations with higher rates of diabetic retinopathy (DR) complications including proliferative DR (PDR) and diabetic macular edema (DME). The purpose of this study was to determine whether an association exists between semaglutide and PDR and treatment-requiring DR/DME. Research design and methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 14 databases (six administrative claims and eight electronic health records) in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics Evidence Network. Adults with T2D on semaglutide, other GLP-1RA (dulaglutide, exenatide), or non-GLP-1RA medications (empagliflozin, sitagliptin, glipizide) from 1 December 2017 to 31 December 2023 were included. The association between semaglutide and PDR or treatment-requiring DR/DME was assessed using an active-comparator cohort design comparing new users of semaglutide as second-line T2D treatment to those on other GLP-1RAs and non-GLP-1RAs. Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Network-wide HR estimates were generated using a random-effects meta-analysis. Results The study included 810 390 new semaglutide users for T2D. PDR risk for semaglutide was similar to dulaglutide (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.54, p=0.51), empagliflozin (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, p=0.41) and sitagliptin (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.55, p=0.57) but was lower than glipizide (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.88, p=0.01). The risk for treatment-requiring DR/DME for semaglutide was similar to empagliflozin (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.02, p=0.06) but lower than dulaglutide (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.91, p=0.02), sitagliptin (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81, p=0.008) and glipizide (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.91, p=0.02). Conclusions and relevance We did not identify increased risk for either PDR or treatment-requiring DR/DME comparing semaglutide with other GLP-1RAs or non-GLP-1RAs. Patients with T2D should still undergo close eye care follow-up, particularly when initiating new antihyperglycemic medications.

Introduction: The use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to guide lower extremity deep venous stent placement is associated with improved identification of the degree of maximal vessel stenosis, vessel obstruction, and thrombus burden, compared to venography alone. As the US medical system moves towards value-based care, the financial impact of interventional tools requires close consideration. Currently, there are limited evaluations of the cost effectiveness of IVUS during venous procedures. Research Question: This study seeks to examine the cost-effectiveness of IVUS in lower extremity deep venous interventions. Methods: Medicare fee-for-service claims data from 2016 through 2021 for beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years undergoing lower extremity venous interventions with stent placement, thrombolysis, and/or thrombectomy were analyzed. Cost ratios between IVUS-guided and non-IVUS-guided procedures were assessed using gamma regression, adjusting for demographic and clinical variables. Results: A total of 52,610 patients were included, with 42.6% undergoing IVUS-guided procedures. IVUS utilization varied by setting, with higher usage in hospital-based outpatient centers (75.3%) and ambulatory surgical centers/outpatient-based laboratories (ASC/OBL; 86.4%) compared to inpatient hospitalizations (10.4%). Among inpatient procedures, IVUS-guided venous intervention was associated with greater cost than non-IVUS procedures at 90 days, with an adjusted cost ratio of 1.04 (95% CI 1.01-1.07), yet was associated with an average 0.6-day shorter hospitalization (p < 0.001; Figure 1, Figure 2 ). There were marginal increased costs associated with use of IVUS in inpatient procedures persisting through one- and three-years follow-up, with adjusted cost ratios of 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.08) and 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.09), respectively. In contrast, IVUS use was associated with significant cost savings in outpatient settings, with adjusted cost ratios of 0.71 (95% CI 0.69-0.73) in hospital-based outpatient settings and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.78) in ASC/OBL at 90 days. These cost savings persisted at one- and three-year follow-up. Conclusions: IVUS-guided venous intervention was associated with cost savings in outpatient and ASC/OBL settings, while maintaining near cost equivalence in inpatient settings. These findings suggest that in addition to the clinical benefit of IVUS for venous intervention, IVUS is a cost-effective strategy, particularly in the outpatient setting.

Background: Among cardiac amyloidosis subtypes, transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR) has gained increased recognition with the development of disease-specific therapies. Tafamidis, a selective oral stabilizer of the transthyretin tetramer, has emerged as an effective treatment. In the broader heart failure landscape, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have become cornerstone therapies across the ejection fraction spectrum, improving survival and reducing hospitalizations in both HFrEF and HFpEF. However, the clinical benefit of combining Tafamidis with SGLT2i in ATTR remains largely unknown. Hypothesis: Combination therapy with Tafamidis and SGLT2i provides added clinical benefits in patients with ATTR cardiac amyloidosis. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adults with confirmed ATTR cardiac amyloidosis diagnosed via 99mTc-pyrophosphate scintigraphy and treated with Tafamidis alone or with an SGLT2i across three academic centers from January 2019 to February 2025. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were collected from medical records. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling were used, adjusting for age, sex, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, ejection fraction (EF), and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Results: Among the 1,211 patients included in the 3-year follow-up analysis,946 received Tafamidis monotherapy and 265 received a combination of Tafamidis and an SGLT2i. The mean age of the cohort was 71.9 years (SD ±9.4), and 87.3% were male. A total of 142 mortality events occurred, with a higher cumulative mortality rate observed in the tafamidis-only group (16.3%) compared to the combination group (9.4%) (log-rank p = 0.042). In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, combination therapy with Tafamidis and an SGLT2i was independently associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality (adjusted HR =0.576, 95% CI:0.334–0.992, p =0.04). Additionally, increasing age (HR =1.049, 95% CI:1.024–1.074, p < 0.001) was associated with higher mortality, while EF(HR =0.971, 95% CI:0.958–0.984, p< 0.001) and GFR (HR =0.975, 95% CI:0.965-0.985, p< 0.001) were with lower mortality. Conclusion: Combination therapy with Tafamidis and SGLT2i was associated with improved survival compared to Tafamidis alone in ATTR cardiac amyloidosis. Further prospective trials are needed to validate these findings and guide therapy optimization.

Introduction: Heart failure (HF) affects interstitial lung structure and function. AI-assisted quantitative computed tomography (qCT) offers possibility of objective assesment of lung structure, allowing to detect the presence and the severity of HF. Hypothesis: Can automated qCT analysis discriminate HF from controls and identify tissue structures most linked to degree of congestion ? Methods: Subjects underwent right heart catheterization (RHC), native CT chest imaging (full inspiration/expiration) by Naeotom-α photon-counting CT scanner (Siemens), lab testing, echocardiography. Automated AI-based analysis (VIDA Diagnostics) was employed to evaluate lung volumes, densities and tissue texture. Image series were used in mediastinal and lung window reconstruction with slice thickness 0,8 mm and increments 0,5 mm. Results: 186 HF patients (85% HFrEF, NYHA 2.8±0.5, 58 y, 80% males, NTproBNP 4491 pg/ml, LVEF 26%) and 43 controls of similar sex and BMI were analyzed; both groups free of primary lung disease. In HF, 85 % had PH (mPAP>20mmHg). HF patients had comparable inspiratory lung volume, reduced air volume and increased lung tissue volume, compared to controls. Mean lung density (-782±50 vs -832±25 HU, p<0.0001), density variability and estimated lung fluid content (21.3 vs 16.7%, p<0.0001) were all higher in HF compared to controls. Across various density cut-offs, the most notable difference was at lung tissue density < -856 HU at inspiration. Lung tissue density corelated with mean PA pressure (r=0.49, p<0.0001), and less with pulmonary vascular resistance (r=0.21, p=0.006). Insp/exp scan analysis showed no difference in air trapping, but reduced lung tissue compliance (Jacobian strain: 1.8±0.4 vs 1.6±0.3, p=0.0005) in HF. Lung texture analysis showed increased ground-glass opacity (GGO) mass (48.8 g vs 9.1 g; p < 0.001), reticulation (42.2 g vs. 8.4 g; p < 0.001) and consolidation (0.5 g vs 0.2 g; p=0.0011) in HF compared to controls, with no difference in honeycombing. GGO mass correlated strongly with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) (r=0.48, p<0.001) and mitral regurgitation grade (r=0.28,<0.0001), but not with inflammation (hsCRP, IL6, WBC), smoking exposure or oncotic pressure. Conclusions: qCT distinguished HF patients from controls by increased lung tissue mass, reduced air volume, increased lung density and increased mass of GGO and reticulation. GGO mass in HF strongly reflects increased hydrostatic pressure, but not inflammation.

Abstract Purpose: AXL, a receptor tyrosine kinase related to oncogenic processes, is aberrantly expressed in various cancers and associated with treatment resistance. Enapotamab vedotin (EnaV), a novel anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models, including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase 1/2 study assessed the safety and preliminary efficacy of EnaV in solid tumors. Patients and Methods: This study comprised dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases; both phases investigated EnaV once every 3 weeks (Q3W) and EnaV on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (3Q4W). Primary objectives determined the maximum tolerated dose (dose escalation) and safety (dose expansion). Pharmacokinetic profile, antitumor activity, and AXL expression were also assessed. Results: During dose escalation, 32 patients received EnaV Q3W; 15 received EnaV 3Q4W. The maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose were 2.2 mg/kg in Q3W and 1.0 mg/kg in 3Q4W schedules. In dose expansion, 189 patients received EnaV Q3W; 70 received EnaV 3Q4W. Common adverse events in dose expansion included fatigue, constipation, nausea, decreased appetite, and diarrhea. Overall response rates ranged from 4.5% to 12.5% with Q3W dose schedule and from 9.1% to 11.5% with 3Q4W dose schedule. Disease control rates for NSCLC cohorts were 40.9% to 50.0%. NSCLC subset analysis demonstrated correlation between radiomics signature and disease control. The relationship between clinical activity and AXL expression was not apparent. Conclusions: EnaV had an acceptable safety profile; however, because the evaluation of antitumor activity did not show clinically meaningful responses, clinical development of EnaV was discontinued. Significance: EnaV, an anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, showed single-agent antitumor activity in preclinical models. This phase 1/2 study of EnaV demonstrated a manageable safety profile and antitumor activity in selected tumor types. Further studies exploring alternative targeting modalities, patient selection, and/or combinations are needed.

Importance Adjuvant radiotherapy can improve locoregional control and survival in patients with olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB), particularly with advanced-stage and histologic-grade disease. Standard radiotherapy treatment is with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Proton beam radiotherapy (PBRT) provides theoretical advantages in greater sparing of dose to uninvolved organs at risk. Objective To investigate if there are differences in the effectiveness and radiation treatment–related adverse events (RTAEs) between adjuvant IMRT and PBRT for patients with ONB. Design, Setting, and Participants This propensity score–matched cohort study included patients with ONB treated between February 2005 and April 2021 with either IMRT or PBRT at 9 academic tertiary care centers in North America. Patients were matched 1:2 based on age, modified Kadish stage, and Hyams grade. Data were analyzed from July 2024 to January 2025. Exposure Adjuvant IMRT or adjuvant PBRT. Main Outcomes and Measures Local recurrence-free survival (RFS), any RFS, and overall survival (OS). RTAEs, ie, grade 2 events or higher based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, were recorded for both modalities. Results Of 54 included patients, 27 (50%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 46.2 (15.4) years. A total of 18 were treated with PBRT and 36 were treated with IMRT. Most patients had modified Kadish stage C disease (33 of 54 [61%]), and 24 patients (44%) had Hyams grade III or IV disease. The RTAE rate was 20% (8 of 40); IMRT had a rate of 21% (6 of 29), and PBRT had a rate of 18% (2 of 11). The difference in the point estimates for 10-year RFS showed a potential clinical benefit favoring IMRT, although the wide confidence interval indicates uncertainty (10-year RFS: IMRT, 63.3%; 95% CI, 44.6-89.8; PBRT, 37.8%; 95% CI, 14.2-100; difference, 25.5 percentage points; 95% CI, −17.6 to 68.6). There were no clinically meaningful differences in 10-year local RFS (IMRT, 75.6%; 95% CI, 59.8-95.4; PBRT, 72.7%; 95% CI, 45.2-100; difference, 2.9 percentage points; 95% CI, −35.9 to 41.7) or 10-year OS (IMRT, 61.8%; 95% CI, 42.8-89.1; PBRT, 57.1%; 95% CI, 24.3-100; difference, 4.7 percentage points; 95% CI, −49.2 to 58.6), although wide confidence intervals indicate considerable uncertainty. Conclusions and Relevance Due to the imprecision of estimates, no definitive conclusions can be made regarding the comparative effectiveness of IMRT vs PBRT for patients with ONB. These preliminary data may inform the design of appropriately powered prospective studies evaluating the efficacy of PBRT vs IMRT in this population.

Abstract Understanding tumor cell dynamics can improve prognosis and treatment but remains limited for lung adenocarcinoma in people who have never smoked (NS-LUAD). With RNA sequencing data from 684 NS-LUAD cases and validation in an independent dataset, we identified three subtypes with distinct phenotypic traits and cell compositions. Additional genomic and histologic data further characterized the subtypes. “Steady,” marked by low proliferation, high alveolar cell fraction, moderate-to-well differentiation, and fewer driver gene alterations, is linked to prolonged survival and low immune evasion. “Proliferative” shows high proliferation markers, TP53 mutations, and gene fusions. “Chaotic,” with high epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition markers, has the worst prognosis, even within stage I tumors. Lacking known molecular or histologic characteristics, this aggressive subtype is solely identified by transcriptomic data. A 60-gene signature recapitulates the classification and predicts survival even within subgroups based on tumor stage or known genomic features, emphasizing its potential for improving early-stage NS-LUAD prognostication in clinical settings. Significance: The transcriptome of 684 NS-LUAD identifies three subtypes with different cellular dynamics and genomic and morphologic features. A 60-gene signature accurately stratifies subjects for mortality risk, even in stage I, offering a potential clinically applicable tool for treatment decision-making in patients with NS-LUAD. See related commentary by Azizi et al., p. 423