Citations

OBJECTIVE Multiple meningiomas (MMs) occur in as many as 18% of patients with meningioma, and data on progression-free survival (PFS) are scarce. The objective of this study was to explore the influence of the number of lesions and clinical characteristics on PFS in patients with WHO grade I meningiomas. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed the records of all adults diagnosed with a meningioma at their three main sites from January 2009 to May 2020. Progression was considered the time from diagnosis until radiographic growth of the originally resected meningioma. A secondary analysis was performed to evaluate the time of diagnosis until the time to second intervention (TTSI). Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to assess whether the number of lesions or any associated variables (age, sex, race, radiation treatment, tumor location, and extent of resection) had a significant impact on PFS and TTSI. RESULTS Eight hundred thirty-eight patients were included. Use of a log-rank test to evaluate PFS and TTSI between a single and multiple lesions showed a significantly shorter progression for MM (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed significantly inferior PFS on MM compared to a single lesion (hazard ratio [HR] 2.262, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.392–3.677, p = 0.001) and a significantly inferior TTSI for patients with MM when compared to patients with a single meningioma (HR 2.377, 95% CI 1.617–3.494, p = 0.001). By testing the number of meningiomas as a continuous variable, PFS was significantly inferior for each additional meningioma (HR 1.350, 95% CI 1.074–1.698, p = 0.010) and TTSI was significantly inferior as well (HR 1.428, 95% CI 1.189–1.716, p < 0.001). African American patients had an inferior PFS when compared to non-Hispanic White patients (HR 3.472, 95% CI 1.083–11.129, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS The PFS of meningiomas appears to be influenced by the number of lesions present. Patients with MM also appear to be more prone to undergoing a second intervention for progressive disease. Hence, a closer follow-up may be warranted in patients who present with multiple lesions. These results show a decreased PFS for each additional lesion present, as well as a shorter PFS for MM compared to a single lesion. When assessing associated risk factors, African American patients showed an inferior PFS, whereas older age and adjuvant therapy with radiation showed an improved PFS.

AbstractWaldenström macroglobulinemia (WM)/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (LPL) is often differentiated from myeloma based on the presence of lytic bone lesions (LBL). However, WM/LPL can present with LBL, and management is poorly understood. We describe a case of an 81‐year‐old woman with LPL who presented with LBL and was successfully treated with chemoimmunotherapy.

The middle meningeal artery (MMA) has always been the workhorse corridor for devascularization of dural-based intracranial lesions and, more recently, has been established as a target for the endovascular management of chronic subdural hematomas. The MMA anatomy is complex and deceitful, and its territory of irrigation (including cranial nerves) is poorly understood. Furthermore, MMA variations and anastomoses are more frequent than expected, which may predispose to procedure-related morbidity. A literature search was conducted in electronic databases per PRISMA guidelines for studies describing normal and abnormal MMA anatomy including variations in MMA origin and dangerous anastomoses. Our institutional case series of greater than 100 MMA embolizations for management of chronic subdural hematomas were reviewed for abnormal MMA anatomy, and clinically relevant case examples are presented. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the MMA to provide a better understanding and appreciation of this artery, including pearls and pitfalls, that we hope will aid the neurosurgeon and neurointerventionalist in safely tackling these lesions.

AbstractAs prevention trials advance with autosomal dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) participants, understanding the similarities and differences between ADAD and “sporadic” late‐onset AD (LOAD) is critical to determine generalizability of findings between these cohorts. Cognitive trajectories of ADAD mutation carriers (MCs) and autopsy‐confirmed LOAD individuals were compared to address this question. Longitudinal rates of change on cognitive measures were compared in ADAD MCs (n = 310) and autopsy‐confirmed LOAD participants (n = 163) before and after symptom onset (estimated/observed). LOAD participants declined more rapidly in the presymptomatic (preclinical) period and performed more poorly at symptom onset than ADAD participants on a cognitive composite. After symptom onset, however, the younger ADAD MCs declined more rapidly. The similar but not identical cognitive trajectories (declining but at different rates) for ADAD and LOAD suggest common AD pathologies but with some differences.

Extramedullary multiple myeloma is seen in advanced and aggressive disease and occurs due to plasma cell infiltration of sites other than the bone marrow. Myelomatous ascites or pleural effusion is seen in less than 1 % of cases and can be differentiated from infectious etiologies based on fluid cytology.

Abstract Background: trALL is an important secondary primary malignancy (SPM) that has recently been appreciated. While patients (pts) with MM have an 8%-17% risk of developing an SPM while on lenalidomide (R) maintenance following autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), trALL has been rarely observed. Little is known about the characteristics of trALL in pts with MM compared to pts who had other malignancies prior to the development of trALL. We define tALL as any prior exposure to cytotoxic chemotherapy and/or radiation for another malignancy, and herein, we report a comparative analysis of characteristics and outcomes of pts with trALL with and without MM from the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (MCCC). Methods: We performed a systematic search in the 3-site MCCC registry and included all pts diagnosed and received at least 1 cycle of ALL-directed therapy and/or underwent allogeneic transplantation (AlloHCT) for ALL between 2007-2020. All cases of trALL in this series are B-ALL. Comparisons of characteristics between trALL patients with and without MM were made using a Wilcoxon rank sum test (continuous variables) or Fisher's exact test (categorical variables). Time-to-event variables were compared using unadjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: 70 trALL pts (14 MM [20%], 56 non-MM [80%]) were identified during the study period. The median age at trALL diagnosis was 63.9 (range 47-71) for MM pts and 63.1 (range 18.2-84) for non-MM pts. Median follow-up from trALL diagnosis was 1.42 years (range 0.02-10.6 years). The most common prior non-MM malignancies among tALL pts were breast (28.6%), lymphoma (17.9%), myeloid (17.9%), and GU/GYN (14.3%). Amongst the 14 MM pts, 100% (n=10) had ISS-I disease, 8 (57%) had IgG K MM, 1 (n=10) had high risk cytogenetics, 8 (57.1%) received R-based induction , 4 (28.6%) received CyBorD induction, 4(28.6%) received VRD induction, 3 (21.4%) received RD induction. 10 (71.4%) pts were actively on R when they developed trALL, 8 (57.1%) pts received prior ASCT. The median time to develop trALL following ASCT for MM was 46.3 months (m), (95% CI 20.4-67.6), 12 (85.7%) pts received R maintenance with a median duration of 53m (95% CI 16.9-121). The median time to develop trALL after initiation of R maintenance was 61.2m (95% CI 16.9-123.4). The most common trALL induction regimen received was HyperCVAD which was used in 71.4% of MM pts and 51.8% of non-MM pts. In comparison to non-MM pts, MM patients had a significantly lower WBC at diagnosis (Median: 2.0 vs. 5.8, P=0.005),no t(9;22) BCR/ABL1 cytogenetics (0.0% vs. 35.7%, P=0.008), a higher frequency of hypodiploid/near-triploid (Ho-Tri) cytogenetics (42.9% vs. 12.5%, P=0.009), and a lower frequency of prior radiation therapy (7.1% vs. 44.6%, P=0.012). MM pts had a higher frequency of AlloHCT for trALL (71.4% vs. 42.9%, P=0.075) and were more commonly in complete response (CR) at transplant (100.0% vs. 70.8%, P=0.078). No trALL in MM pts were Ph-like ALL. There was a statistically significant difference in time to development of trALL between previous malignancy locations (P=0.018), with GU/GYN (Median: 9 years) having the longest time and myeloid (Median: 3 years) having the shortest time; MM was 6 years. In the overall pt cohort, 56 (80%) pts achieved a complete response after induction and 60% (n=25) were minimal residual disease (MRD)+ after induction. Pts with MM had a significantly lower likelihood of being MRD+ after induction (OR=0.09, P=0.015). Overall, 24.3% of pts relapsed after induction therapy for trALL; 39 (55.5%) died after trALL diagnosis including 43% (n=35) who died after AlloHCT. Although pts with MM tended to have better outcomes compared to non-MM trALL pts in terms of overall survival after trALL diagnosis (Figure 1A), survival after AlloHCT (Figure 1B), relapse rate after trALL diagnosis and non-relapse mortality after AlloHCT, none of these findings were statistically significant in this small cohort (Figure 1C). Conclusion: trALL is a unique SPM that can occur in pts with MM. It is associated with Ho-Tri cytogenetics and is BCR/ABL1 negative. The majority of MM pts that developed trALL had undergone prior ASCT and were on R maintenance when they developed trALL. Despite being more likely to have adverse cytogenetics features, MM-associated trALL has similar survival compared to non-MM-associated trALL which speaks to the poor survival outcomes of this SPM. Further research on trALL in MM pts is merited. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Litzow: Amgen: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Bergsagel: Janssen: Consultancy. Fonseca: Scientific Advisory Board: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caris Life Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Patent: Prognosticaton of myeloma via FISH: Patents & Royalties; Bayer: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Mayo Clinic in Arizona: Current Employment; Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; OncoTracker: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Dispenzieri: Takeda: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Murthy: CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ailawadhi: GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Medimmune: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Ascentage: Research Funding. Foran: actinium: Research Funding; taiho: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; OncLive: Honoraria; abbvie: Research Funding; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; takeda: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; aptose: Research Funding; revolution medicine: Honoraria; syros: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding.