Citations

The therapeutic landscape of the management of stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has drastically evolved with the incorporation of immunotherapy and targeted therapy. Stage III NSCLC accounts for one-third of the cases and the treatment strategy of these locally advanced presentations are diverse, ranging from surgical to non-surgical options; with the incorporation of chemo-immunotherapy, radiation, and targeted therapies wherever applicable. The staging of this disease has also changed, and it is essential to have a strong multidisciplinary approach to do justice to patient care. In this article, we aim to navigate the nuanced approaches in the diagnosis and treatment of stage III NSCLC and expand on the evolution of the management of this disease.

Abstract The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP‐NETs), is meant to be dynamic, requiring periodic updates to optimize AJCC staging definitions. This entails the collaboration of experts charged with evaluating new evidence that supports changes to each staging system. GEP‐NETs are the second most prevalent neoplasm of gastrointestinal origin after colorectal cancer. Since publication of the AJCC eighth edition, the World Health Organization has updated the classification and separates grade 3 GEP‐NETs from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. In addition, because of major advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for GEP‐NETs, AJCC version 9 advocates against the use of serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis and monitoring of GEP‐NETs. Furthermore, AJCC version 9 recognizes the increasing role of endoscopy and endoscopic resection in the diagnosis and management of NETs, particularly in the stomach, duodenum, and colorectum. Finally, T1NXM0 has been added to stage I in these disease sites as well as in the appendix.

Abstract Innovation in medical imaging artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) demands extensive data collection, algorithmic advancements, and rigorous performance assessments encompassing aspects such as generalizability, uncertainty, bias, fairness, trustworthiness, and interpretability. Achieving widespread integration of AI/ML algorithms into diverse clinical tasks will demand a steadfast commitment to overcoming issues in model design, development, and performance assessment. The complexities of AI/ML clinical translation present substantial challenges, requiring engagement with relevant stakeholders, assessment of cost-effectiveness for user and patient benefit, timely dissemination of information relevant to robust functioning throughout the AI/ML lifecycle, consideration of regulatory compliance, and feedback loops for real-world performance evidence. This commentary addresses several hurdles for the development and adoption of AI/ML technologies in medical imaging. Comprehensive attention to these underlying and often subtle factors is critical not only for tackling the challenges but also for exploring novel opportunities for the advancement of AI in radiology.

Abstract There has been an increase in volume as well as an improvement in overall survival (OS) after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for hematologic disorders. It is unknown if these changes have affected racial/ethnic minorities equally. In this observational study from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research of 79 904 autologous (auto) and 65 662 allogeneic (allo) HCTs, we examined the volume and rates of change of autoHCT and alloHCT over time and trends in OS in 4 racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), non-Hispanic African Americans (NHAAs), and Hispanics across 5 2-year cohorts from 2009 to 2018. Rates of change were compared using Poisson model. Adjusted and unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models examined trends in mortality in the 4 racial/ethnic groups over 5 study time periods. The rates of increase in volume were significantly higher for Hispanics and NHAAs vs NHW for both autoHCT and alloHCT. Adjusted overall mortality after autoHCT was comparable across all racial/ethnic groups. NHAA adults (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.22; P = .004) and pediatric patients (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.3-2.03; P < .001) had a higher risk of mortality after alloHCT than NHWs. Improvement in OS over time was seen in all 4 groups after both autoHCT and alloHCT. Our study shows the rate of change for the use of autoHCT and alloHCT is higher in NHAAs and Hispanics than in NHWs. Survival after autoHCT and alloHCT improved over time; however, NHAAs have worse OS after alloHCT, which has persisted. Continued efforts are needed to mitigate disparities for patients requiring alloHCT.

Introduction: For patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) provide effective alternatives to warfarin. However, a better understanding is needed of how the introduction of NOAC therapy has improved use of any oral anticoagulation (OAC) for patients with AF. Methods: Within the NCDR PINNACLE registry, we identified 447,770 patients comprising 1,428,660 outpatient encounters with non-valvular AF and CHADS-VASc >1 between April 1, 2008 and September 30, 2014. We examined use of any OAC, any NOAC, and of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban individually over time. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with any OAC and NOAC use at the end of the study period, including CHADS-VASc score, age, weight, CAD, PAD, dyslipidemia, stroke/TIA, heart failure, gender, hypertension, and diabetes. Results: Use of any OAC increased from 52.1 to 61.2% during the study period among patients without a documented contraindication (p for trend <0.01) (Figure). Although warfarin use decreased from 52.1% to 36.8% (p for trend <0.01), use of NOACs increased from 0% to 24.4% (p for trend <0.01). Rivaroxaban was the most frequently prescribed NOAC at the end of the study period (12.1%), followed by dabigatran (6.6%), and apixaban (5.7%). Patient factors associated with use of OAC and NOACs are presented in the Table. Conclusions: In a large U.S. outpatient registry, introduction of NOACs into clinical practice has improved the use of any OAC for AF patients at high risk for stroke. However, more than 1 in 3 high risk patients without a documented contraindication were not treated with any OAC.

BACKGROUND COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) virus-specific antibody levels that translate into recipient posttransfusion antibody levels sufficient to prevent disease progression are not defined. METHODS This secondary analysis correlated donor and recipient antibody levels to hospitalization risk among unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients within the outpatient, double-blind, randomized clinical trial that compared CCP to control plasma. The majority of COVID-19 CCP arm hospitalizations (15/17, 88%) occurred in this unvaccinated, seronegative subgroup. A functional cutoff to delineate recipient high versus low posttransfusion antibody levels was established by 2 methods: (i) analyzing virus neutralization–equivalent anti–Spike receptor-binding domain immunoglobulin G (anti-S-RBD IgG) responses in donors or (ii) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS SARS-CoV-2 anti–S-RBD IgG antibody was volume diluted 21.3-fold into posttransfusion seronegative recipients from matched donor units. Virus-specific antibody delivered was approximately 1.2 mg. The high-antibody recipients transfused early (symptom onset within 5 days) had no hospitalizations. A CCP-recipient analysis for antibody thresholds correlated to reduced hospitalizations found a statistical significant association between early transfusion and high antibodies versus all other CCP recipients (or control plasma), with antibody cutoffs established by both methods-donor-based virus neutralization cutoffs in posttransfusion recipients (0/85 [0%] versus 15/276 [5.6%]; P = 0.03) or ROC-based cutoff (0/94 [0%] versus 15/267 [5.4%]; P = 0.01). CONCLUSION In unvaccinated, seronegative CCP recipients, early transfusion of plasma units in the upper 30% of study donors’ antibody levels reduced outpatient hospitalizations. High antibody level plasma units, given early, should be reserved for therapeutic use. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04373460. FUNDING Department of Defense (W911QY2090012); Defense Health Agency; Bloomberg Philanthropies; the State of Maryland; NIH (3R01AI152078-01S1, U24TR001609-S3, 1K23HL151826NIH); the Mental Wellness Foundation; the Moriah Fund; Octapharma; the Healthnetwork Foundation; the Shear Family Foundation; the NorthShore Research Institute; and the Rice Foundation.

Moritz F Sinner, 2012 Finalist and Presenting Author

Introduction/Purpose: To examine trends in patient presentation, diagnosis and outcomes of acute aortic dissection over 15 years since the original report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Methods: Patient data were collected at 28 international referral centers from 1996 up to the present. Trends were analyzed among 3275 patients divided according to date of enrollment into 6 equal groups and by Type: A (n=2110) or B (n=1165). Results: There was no change over time in the presenting complaints of severe or worst ever pain for Type A and Type B (90% and 96%, respectively), or in the incidence of chest pain ( 80% in Type A and 70% in Type B, respectively), with considerable overlap in chest vs. back pain between types. The report of pulse deficits did not change over time, present in 30% of Type A patients. Normal chest X-ray on presentation increased in Type A acute aortic dissection (AoD) from 13.7% to 31.3% over time (p-value for trend <0.001). In Type B the report of normal chest X-ray increased from 19.9% to 40.9% (p-value for trend <0.001). There were significant trends in initial imaging modalities for Type A: increased use of CT (from 49.4% to 71.6%, p-value for trend <0.001) and decreased use of TEE (from 45.3% to 25.4%, p-value for trend <0.001). For Type B, use of CT increased from 77.2% to 88.4% (p-value for trend .013). A decrease in overall mortality over time was significant for both Type A and Type B patients (see graph). Surgical mortality in Type A patients fell from 25.3% to 16.5% (p-value for trend 0 .003). Conclusions: No significant difference was seen over time in pain severity, chest pain, and presence of pulse deficits. The incidences of a normal chest X-ray, originally thought to be uncommon in dissection cases, increased over time to 30% in Type A and 40% in Type B AoD. Use of CT as the initial imaging modality increased for both Type A and Type B. Lastly, a significant decrease in overall mortality was seen for both Type A and Type B patients.