Citations

Background Cardiovascular surgical outcomes reports are few for vascular type IV of Ehlers- Danlos Syndrome (vEDS) compared to non-vascular types I-III (nEDS). Methods To define cardiovascular surgical outcomes among adult patients (≥18 years) with EDS types, a review of our institution's in-house STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database-compliant software and electronic medical records from Mayo Clinic (1993–2019) was performed. Outcomes were compared for vEDS patients and nEDS patients. Demographics, baseline characteristics, operative, in-hospital complications and follow-up vital status were analyzed. Results Over the study time frame, 48 EDS patients underwent surgery (mean age 52.6 ± 14.6 years; 48% females). Of these, 17 patients had vEDS and 31 patients had nEDS. Six patients (12.5%) underwent prior sternotomy. Urgent or emergent surgery was performed in 10 patients (20.8%). Aortic (vEDS 76.5% vs. nEDS 16.1%) and mitral procedures (vEDS 11.8% vs. nEDS 48.4%) were the two most common cardiovascular surgeries performed (p < .01 and p = .007, respectively). Cardiopulmonary bypass time (CPB) (165 ± 18 vs. 90 ± 13 min; p = .015) and aortic cross clamp times (140 ± 14 vs. 62 ± 10 min; p < .001) were longer for vEDS patients. There was 1 (2.1%) early and 7 (14.6%) late deaths; 6 among vEDS and 2 among nEDS patients. Survival at 5 (80% vs. 93%), 10 (45% vs. 84%) and 15 years (45% vs. 84%) was lower in patients with vEDS (p = .015 for each comparison). Conclusion Cardiovascular surgeries are significantly more complex with longer bypass and cross clamp times for type IV vEDS compared to nEDS patients. Reduced overall survival underscores the complexity and fragility of vEDS patients.

Background: There is a paucity of literature regarding systemic semilunar valve (SSLV) dysfunction in patients with Fontan circulation. We sought to describe our center's 47-year experience with systemic semilunar valve replacement or repair (SSLVR) in patients with Fontan circulation. Methods: The Mayo Clinic Fontan Database is a comprehensive institutional database that stores clinical information of 1176 patients from 1973 to 2021. It was reviewed to identify patients who had a SSLV intervention at the time of or after Fontan. A cohort of 15 patients was identified and a retrospective review of their records was performed. Results: Fourteen patients had SSLV replacement (all mechanical) and one had a repair. SSLVR occurred up to 29 years following the Fontan (mean 11.3 ± 9 years, median 14 years). Thirteen of 14 with SSLVR were performed after Fontan and one was done at the time of initial Fontan. This was an older cohort and mean age at the time of Fontan was 8.7 ± 9.4 years (median 4 years). Indication for the operation was > moderate SSLV regurgitation in all patients. Six patients had decreased ventricular function (EF < 50%) prior to SSLVR and 8 had reduced function after SSLVR. Conclusion: Fortunately, the need for SSLV intervention after Fontan was rare, as evidenced by our small cohort extracted from a large single-institution database spanning a 47-year time period. Reduced preoperative and postoperative ejection fraction was common but did not seem to impact the outcome. Optimal timing for SSLV intervention after Fontan remains unclear.

Abstract Introduction: Plamotamab (XmAb13676) is a humanized bispecific antibody that binds both CD20 and CD3 to recruit cytotoxic T cells to kill CD20 expressing malignant cells. Interim results of an ongoing first-in-human (FIH), dose-escalation study (XmAb13676-01; NCT02924402) in subjects with relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) are reported. Methods: The study is an FIH, multi-center, open-label, phase 1, dose-escalation study in subjects with R/R NHL with a standard 3 + 3 design. The primary objectives are to determine safety, tolerability, and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended dose of plamotamab. Secondary objectives include preliminary anti-tumor activity and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of plamotamab. This study has 3 Parts: Part A, escalating dose cohorts that establish an initial priming dose as part of repeated weekly infusions at a fixed, weight-based dose in a 28-day cycle; Part B, with a dosing schedule consisting of a priming dose on Cycle 1 Day 1, established in Part A, followed by step-up dosing (SUD) on subsequent weeks; and Part C is an SUD regimen with flat and less frequent dosing. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) prophylaxis with dexamethasone, antihistamine, and acetaminophen was mandated prior to each administration of plamotamab. Treatment was continued for 2 cycles or longer if there was evidence of therapeutic benefit. Results: At data cut-off (01Jul2021), 80 subjects with NHL have been treated. Subjects had a median age of 62 years (range 32-89), a median of 4 prior therapies (range 1-10), and had been diagnosed a median of 28 months (range 6-353) prior to treatment in the study. The most common treatment-related adverse event was CRS. Overall, 50 subjects (62.5%) experienced CRS, with 4 (5.0%) experiencing Grade ≥ 3 CRS. No related neurotoxicity &gt;Grade 2 has been observed. Treatment responses for NHL were assessed by the Lugano criteria or International Working Group criteria for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia. There have been 23 objective responses (43.4% overall response rate [ORR]) and 13 (38.2%) at doses of ≥ 80 µg/kg or flat dosing in all evaluable subjects with NHL and diffuse large cell B-cell lymphoma, respectively. In the efficacy-evaluable, follicular lymphoma population, at doses of 80-360 µg/kg or flat dosing, objective responses were observed in 8/10 (80%) subjects. After implementation of flat dosing, as opposed to weight-based dosing, a 50% ORR (4/8 evaluable subjects) has been observed in NHL subjects in that cohort. An MTD has not been reached, and dose escalation is ongoing. Overall, 4 out of 16 (25%) evaluable subjects with prior CAR-T therapy responded to plamotamab. Conclusions: Plamotamab demonstrated evidence of clinical activity in heavily pretreated subjects with R/R NHL. CRS was generally manageable with premedication. The study is ongoing with further optimization of dose and schedule. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Patel: Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy. Michot: GSK: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Innate Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; H3 biomedecine: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gamamabs: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Exelixis: Research Funding; Eos: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Debiopharm: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo,: Research Funding; Clovis: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding; Boeringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Blueprint: Research Funding; Beigene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Argen-x: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Aduro: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; ASTEX: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Chanan-Khan: Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals, NonoDev, Starton: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Ascentage: Research Funding; Cellectar: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Tabi; Ascentage, Starton, Cellectar, NonoDev, Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Honoraria; BieGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Consultancy. Ghesquieres: Janssen: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Science: Consultancy, Honoraria. Byrd: Vincerx Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis, Trillium, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics, Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Newave: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cartron: Roche, Celgene-BMS: Consultancy; Danofi, Gilead, Novartis, Jansen, Roche, Celgene-BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria. Portell: Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; SeaGen: Research Funding; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; BeiGene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Morphosys: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; VelosBio: Research Funding. Solh: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Partner Therapeutics: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Wierda: Loxo Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; GSK/Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; KITE Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Genzyme Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding. Johnson: Xencor: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Garcha: Xencor: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Promedim: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Ribrag: AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Research Funding; MSD Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argen-X: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaMar: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Liebowitz: Xencor: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Phillips: Incyte: Consultancy, Other: received travel expenses from Incyte, Research Funding; ADCT, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, Incyte, Karyopharm, Morphosys, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

AbstractIntroductionMotoric cognitive risk (MCR), a clinical syndrome characterized by slow gait speed and subjective cognitive complaints, has been associated with dementia risk. The neuropathological features underlying MCR remain poorly understood.MethodsThe Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) community‐based cohort study classified participants using standardized criteria as MCR+/– and mild cognitive impairment (MCI)+/– at study baseline (2011–2013). We examined the 5‐year dementia risk and baseline brain structural/molecular abnormalities associated with MCR+ and MCI+ status.ResultsOf 5023 nondemented participants included, 204 were MCR+ and 1030 were MCI+. Both MCR+ and MCI+ participants demonstrated increased dementia risk. The pattern of structural brain abnormalities associated with MCR+ differed from that of MCI+. Whereas MCI+ was associated with comparatively smaller volumes in brain regions vulnerable to Alzheimer's disease pathology, MCR+ status was associated with smaller volumes in frontoparietal regions and greater white matter abnormalities.DiscussionMCR may represent a predementia syndrome characterized by prominent white matter abnormalities and frontoparietal atrophy.

Significance Statement Although corticosteroids are an effective first-line therapy for minimal change disease, relapse, steroid dependence, and intolerance are common in this podocytopathy of unknown etiology. The efficacy of B cell–targeted therapies in some patients suggests an autoantibody-mediated etiology. This study describes the novel discovery in both adults and children with minimal change disease of autoantibodies targeting nephrin, a critical component of the podocyte slit diaphragm that ensures integrity of the glomerular filtration barrier. This observation aligns with the established proteinuric effect of antinephrin antibodies demonstrated in animal models. These findings identify an important autoimmune mechanism in a subset of patients with minimal change disease and provide a framework for the application and development of precision medicine strategies in this condition. Background Failure of the glomerular filtration barrier, primarily by loss of slit diaphragm architecture, underlies nephrotic syndrome in minimal change disease. The etiology remains unknown. The efficacy of B cell–targeted therapies in some patients, together with the known proteinuric effect of anti-nephrin antibodies in rodent models, prompted us to hypothesize that nephrin autoantibodies may be present in patients with minimal change disease. Methods We evaluated sera from patients with minimal change disease, enrolled in the Nephrotic Syndrome Study Network (NEPTUNE) cohort and from our own institutions, for circulating nephrin autoantibodies by indirect ELISA and by immunoprecipitation of full-length nephrin from human glomerular extract or a recombinant purified extracellular domain of human nephrin. We also evaluated renal biopsies from our institutions for podocyte-associated punctate IgG colocalizing with nephrin by immunofluorescence. Results In two independent patient cohorts, we identified circulating nephrin autoantibodies during active disease that were significantly reduced or absent during treatment response in a subset of patients with minimal change disease. We correlated the presence of these autoantibodies with podocyte-associated punctate IgG in renal biopsies from our institutions. We also identified a patient with steroid-dependent childhood minimal change disease that progressed to end stage kidney disease; she developed a massive post-transplant recurrence of proteinuria that was associated with high pretransplant circulating nephrin autoantibodies. Conclusions Our discovery of nephrin autoantibodies in a subset of adults and children with minimal change disease aligns with published animal studies and provides further support for an autoimmune etiology. We propose a new molecular classification of nephrin autoantibody minimal change disease to serve as a framework for instigation of precision therapeutics for these patients.