Citations

Abstract Background Physical activity (PA) is an established protective factor for colorectal cancer (CRC), but it is unclear if genetic variants modify this effect. To investigate this possibility, we conducted a genome-wide gene–PA interaction analysis. Methods Using logistic regression and two-step and joint tests, we analyzed interactions between common genetic variants across the genome and PA in relation to CRC risk. Self-reported PA levels were categorized as active (≥ 8.75 MET-h/wk) vs. inactive (< 8.75 MET-h/wk) and as study- and sex-specific quartiles of activity. Results PA had an overall protective effect on CRC (OR [active vs. inactive] = 0.85; 95%CI = 0.81–0.90). The two-step GxE method identified an interaction between rs4779584, an intergenic variant near the GREM1 and SCG5 genes, and PA for CRC risk (p-interaction = 2.6×10 − 8 ). Stratification by genotype at this locus showed a significant reduction in CRC risk by 20% in active vs. inactive participants with the CC genotype (OR = 0.80; 95%CI = 0.75–0.85), but no significant PA–CRC association among CT or TT carriers. When PA was modeled as quartiles, the 1-d.f. GxE test identified that rs56906466, an intergenic variant near the KCNG1 gene, modified the association between PA and CRC (p-interaction = 3.5×10 − 8 ). Stratification at this locus showed that increase in PA (highest vs. lowest quartile) was associated with a lower CRC risk solely among TT carriers (OR = 0.77; 95%CI = 0.72–0.82). Conclusions In summary, we identified two genetic variants that modified the association between PA and CRC risk. One of them, related to GREM1 and SCG5 , suggests that the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP)-related, inflammatory, and/or insulin signaling pathways may be associated with the protective influence of PA on colorectal carcinogenesis.

Abstract Background Despite advances in diagnosis and management, the interstitial lung disease (ILD) lexicon is plagued by ambiguous and inconsistent terminology that complicates communication and impedes knowledge generation. The objective of this Fleischner Society Consensus Statement was to produce standardized terminology for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes. Methods Interviews with 10 experts were used to identify ILD clinical diagnoses and major phenotypes. The preferred terms for each entity and potential alternatives were identified, alongside the rationale for the preferred term. Entities with more than one potential term were the subject of an online modified Delphi survey posed to the 29 committee members, aiming to achieve consensus. Committee members rated their agreement with the initially preferred term—5 (strongly agree), 4 (agree), 3 (neutral/unsure), 2 (disagree), and 1 (strongly disagree)—with the option to provide additional comments. Median score ≥4 and interquartile range ≤1 were considered consensus agreement. Terms not reaching agreement were discussed by video conference, followed by an additional survey that incorporated feedback. Results From the 60 initial terms, there were two root terms that required upfront consensus before survey initiation (ILD and interstitial pneumonia) and another eight terms that had no alternative suggested by the committee or in the literature. Agreement was met by 47/50 terms (94%) in Round 1 of the survey. The three terms (6%) that did not reach agreement met agreement in Round 2. Conclusions This document provides standardized recommended terms for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes that will facilitate communication among clinicians, researchers, patients, and other stakeholders.

Abstract Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have shown remarkable efficacy in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and are now used routinely. While allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains a curative option for HL, there are concerns prior CPIs may exacerbate post–allo-HCT complications, particularly graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), and lead to worse outcomes. Given the relative paucity of data, we performed a Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research/European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation study to examine the impact of prior CPIs in allo-HCT. We included 2186 adult patients aged &gt;18 years who received a first allo-HCT using a matched related, unrelated, or haploidentical donor from 2008 to 2023. Twenty-seven percent of patients received prior CPIs. GVHD prophylaxis was posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) in 55.8% of patients in the CPI cohort, and 35% in the non-CPI cohort. Median follow-up among survivors was longer for the non-CPI (39 months) than CPI cohort (16.5 months). In multivariate analysis, prior CPI exposure did not affect overall survival (OS) or nonrelapse mortality, but resulted in improved progression-free survival (non-CPI vs CPI hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 0.67-0.98; P = .03) and lower relapse incidence (HR, 0.58; 0.45-0.76; P &lt; 001). While grade 2 to 4 (HR, 1.26; 1.04-1.53; P = .02) and 3 to 4 (HR, 1.41; 1.04-1.92; P = .03) acute GVHD (aGVHD) were increased, differences in chronic GVHD (cGVHD) were not significant. PTCy–based GVHD prophylaxis resulted in improved OS, lower grade 2 to 4 aGVHD, and cGVHD in patients with prior CPI exposure. In summary, allo-HCT should still be considered a curative option for patients with HL in the era of CPIs.

BACKGROUND: Small, randomized trials of patients with cervical artery dissection showed conflicting results regarding optimal stroke prevention strategies. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with cervical artery dissection treated with antiplatelets versus anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a multicenter observational retrospective international study (16 countries, 63 sites) that included patients with cervical artery dissection without major trauma. The exposure was antithrombotic treatment type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets), and outcomes were subsequent ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage (intracranial or extracranial hemorrhage). We used adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting to determine associations between anticoagulation and study outcomes within 30 and 180 days. The main analysis used an as-treated crossover approach and only included outcomes occurring with the above treatments. RESULTS: The study included 3636 patients (402 [11.1%] received exclusively anticoagulation and 2453 [67.5%] received exclusively antiplatelets). By day 180, there were 162 new ischemic strokes (4.4%) and 28 major hemorrhages (0.8%); 87.0% of ischemic strokes occurred by day 30. In adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting, compared with antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of subsequent ischemic stroke by day 30 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.45–1.12]; P =0.145) and by day 180 (adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.28–2.24]; P =0.670). Anticoagulation therapy was not associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage by day 30 (adjusted HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.35–5.45]; P =0.637) but was by day 180 (adjusted HR, 5.56 [95% CI, 1.53–20.13]; P =0.009). In interaction analyses, patients with occlusive dissection had significantly lower ischemic stroke risk with anticoagulation (adjusted HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18–0.88]; P interaction =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not rule out the benefit of anticoagulation in reducing ischemic stroke risk, particularly in patients with occlusive dissection. If anticoagulation is chosen, it seems reasonable to switch to antiplatelet therapy before 180 days to lower the risk of major bleeding. Large prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

Abstract Background Pediatric cancer rehabilitation is a growing field, and pediatric rehabilitation medicine physicians play an important role in the care continuum for children and adolescents with cancer. However, the current practice patterns and experiences of pediatric physiatrists in cancer rehabilitation are not well known. Objective To evaluate the status of pediatric cancer rehabilitation care by board‐certified pediatric physiatrists in the United States, including their practice pattern, experience, and comfort level in cancer‐related conditions. Design An online 37‐question Research Electronic Data Capture survey was developed by members of a pediatric cancer rehabilitation committee of a national physiatry organization. Descriptive data analysis was performed. Setting Survey invitations were sent via email to potential participants and posted on social media sites, including an online physiatry community forum and a pediatric physiatrist private group. Patients (or Participants) Targeted participants were board‐certified pediatric physiatrists who treat pediatric patients with cancer diagnoses. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure(s) Survey questions pertained to respondents' practice setting and patient population, type of cancer rehabilitation provided, presence of a cancer rehabilitation program at their institution, and their learning experience in pediatric cancer rehabilitation. Results A total of 107 board‐certified pediatric physiatrists completed the survey, representing 57 institutions in the United States, the majority of which were academic centers ( n = 95; 88.8%). Ninety‐seven (90.7%) reported their practice consisted of >75% pediatric patients, and 95 (88.8%) indicated <25% pediatric patients in the practice have cancer diagnoses. Forty respondents representing 19 institutions (33.3%) reported an established cancer rehabilitation program at their institution, though of these, 23 (57.5%) indicated that more improvement to their program was needed. Sixty‐three respondents (58.9%) gained experience in cancer rehabilitation from fellowship, 51 (47.7%) from residency, and 47 (43.9%) from mentorship; majority ( n = 102; 95.3%) also learned from self‐study or on the job. Participants' comfort level on cancer‐related conditions varied. Conclusions This survey, aimed at board‐certified pediatric physiatrists who practice pediatric cancer rehabilitation, highlights the variety in training experiences and practice exposure among respondents. Concomitant with this was a variance in reported comfort levels in treating the different cancer‐related diagnoses. This raises for discussion what training opportunities might be strengthened as the subspeciality continues to grow.

Abstract RATIONALE: Susceptibility to severe COVID-19 and long COVID may be influenced by pre-existing lung structure. ECG-gated, non-contrast cardiac CT scans, originally acquired for assessing coronary artery calcium, are available in multiple longitudinal cohort studies and have been previously validated against lung CT scans for densitometry; however, protocol variation across cohorts may hinder direct comparison. To address this, we developed a quality control (QC) rubric to grade cardiac CT scans for standardized quantitative lung measures across cohorts. METHODS: C4R assessed SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes in 14 NHLBI cohorts, of which 10 (six community-based and four longitudinal case-control studies) included CT scans (12,459 participants with lung and 13,752 with cardiac CTs). Logic rules were applied to categorize scans (Table): Grade “A-B” scans had 2-3.5mm slice thickness, at least 20 axial slices, no lung cropping in axial view and lung and airway volumes greater than the cohort-specific 1st percentile. “C-D” scans had one lung obscured by cropping around the heart, so quantitative measures were restricted to the lung in complete view. “F-H” scans were deemed unusable, suffering from low slice count (&lt;20), severe image cropping, low lung or airway volumes (&lt; 1st%ile). Visual inspection was performed on a sample from each category to ensure accuracy. Percent of lung voxels in low attenuation areas &lt; -950 HU (LAA950), high attenuation areas (-600 to -250 HU, HAA) and 15th percentile HU value (perc15) were measured. Within-participant variability was quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: We performed QC on cardiac CT scans from an initial sample of 6,275 participants from three C4R cohorts (ARIC, CARDIA, MASALA), imaged with GE or Siemens scanners. Of these, 5,125 (81.7%) were graded “A-B”, 496 (7.9%) were “C-D” and 654 (10.4%) were “F-H”. The percentage of “F-H” scans varied widely across cohorts [&lt;1% to 26%] due to image cropping. Among the 5,621 cardiac CT scans graded A-D, the mean±SD for LAA950, HAA and perc15 respectively were 1.1±2.1%, 7.2±4.7% and -887±33 HU. Repeated imaging was available for 107 participants (time interval 5.1±0.7y). For paired scans in grades A-B (n=101/107), the within-participant correlation for LAA950, HAA and perc15 were 0.91, 0.38 and 0.74 respectively. CONCLUSION: Initial application of QC to cardiac CT scans identified scans with high reproducibility, with the aim to provide valid quantitative lung metrics on over 20,000 highly characterized participants in C4R.

Abstract Background: Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a diverse type of cancer. For several years, platinum-based chemotherapy (Gemcitabine and Cisplatin) has been the standard treatment and serves as the foundation for current immunotherapy combinations. The typical response rates are generally between 20% and 30%. In this study, we present the results of preclinical efficacy trials conducted on CCA patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models, correlating them with the baseline multiomics profiling of these models to identify molecular characteristics linked to treatment response. Methods: Tumor samples from twenty-eight CCA PDX were used to isolate RNA and protein to be included in multiomics analysis (Phosphoproteomics, Proteomics, and Transcriptomics). A subset of PDX models were treated with various doses of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin. The Median Efficacy Index (MEI) was calculated as the ratio of the difference in median of delta in tumor volume at the last day of the study between the treatment and the control arms divided by the median of delta in tumor volume of the control at the last day of the treatment (positive= growth, negative=inhibition, and 0=no efficacy). A Hierarchical All-Against-All algorithm was utilized to compare multiomics features to the MEI and pathway analysis completed for identified molecular features. Pathway enrichment was calculated using the KEGG database, and random-forest variable selection chose the pathways most influential in predicting sensitivity or resistance. Results: After conducting preclinical efficacy trials, the 11 tested CCA PDX models were classified into sensitive, moderately sensitive, and resistant models based on the MEI on each treatment arm. The top up-regulated genes were identified for Gemcitabine response (SRPK2, GLK2, and RIOK2) and Cisplatin response (NTRK1, PRPF4B, and SRPK2). The top up-regulated genes related to Gemcitabine resistance were NTRK1, PIP5K1C, and CSNK2A2, while those related to Cisplatin resistance were SRPK1, PRPF4B, and CSNK2A1. Downregulation of the anti-folate resistance pathway is a strong predictor of gemcitabine sensitivity, and the lysine degradation pathway is a strong predictor of cisplatin sensitivity. Conclusion: Multiomics signatures of cholangiocarcinoma can forecast responses to standard chemotherapy in preclinical models. New markers of resistance to Gemcitabine and Cisplatin were discovered, linked to NTRK1, SRPK1, and SRPK2. These resistance profiles will be tested using suitable targeted therapies on the resistant CCA patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. Citation Format: Amro M. Abdelrahman, Danielle M. Carlson, Ellen L. Larson, Erik Jessen, Dong-Gi Mun, Isaac Lynch, Alessandro Fogliati, Stella Konadu Adjei Antwi, Aushinie Abeynayake, Akhilesh Pandey, Mark J. Truty, Gregory J. Gores, Rory L. Smoot. Baseline multiomics and chemotherapy efficacy in preclinical trials using patient-derived xenograft models of cholangiocarcinoma can reveal distinct signatures of chemotherapy response [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 6762.

Abstract Rationale Increased risk of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) hospitalization and death has been reported among patients with clinical lung disease. Objectives To test the association of objective measures of prepandemic lung function and structure with COVID-19 outcomes in U.S. adults. Methods Prepandemic obstruction (FEV1/FVC &lt; 0.70) and restriction (FEV1/FVC ⩾ 0.7, FVC &lt; 80%) were defined based on the most recent spirometry exam conducted in 11 prospective U.S. general population–based cohorts. Severe obstruction was classified by FEV1 &lt; 50%. Percentage emphysema, percentage high-attenuation areas, and interstitial lung abnormalities were defined on computed tomography in a subset. Incident COVID-19 was ascertained via questionnaires, serosurvey, and medical records from 2020 to 2023 and classified as severe (hospitalized or fatal) or nonsevere. Cause-specific hazard models were adjusted for sociodemographics, anthropometry, smoking, comorbidities, and COVID-19 vaccination status. Measurements and Main Results Among 29,323 participants (mean age, 67 yr), there were 748 severe incident COVID-19 cases over median follow-up of 17.3 months from March 1, 2020. Greater hazards of severe COVID-19 were associated with severe obstruction (vs. normal; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.27), restriction (vs. normal; aHR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.12–1.76), and percentage emphysema (highest vs. lowest quartile; aHR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.03–2.61), but not greater high-attenuation areas or interstitial lung abnormalities. COVID-19 vaccination provided greater absolute risk reduction in these groups. Results were similar in participants without smoking, obesity, or clinical cardiopulmonary disease. Conclusions Prepandemic severe spirometric obstruction, spirometric restriction, and greater percentage emphysema lung on computed tomography were associated with risk of severe COVID-19. These findings support enhanced COVID-19 risk mitigation for individuals with impaired lung health and warrant further mechanistic studies on interactions of lung function, structure, and vulnerability to acute respiratory illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Data registries lack a definitive classification system that distinguishes different locations of colon cancer from one another. OBJECTIVE: To establish an international consensus on the definition of primary colon cancer segment locations. DESIGN: Between December 2022 and June 2023, Delphi survey study was conducted to seek opinions from relevant international experts and eventually develop a consensus definition of each colon cancer segment. SETTING: Three-round online-based Delphi survey study. INTERVENTIONS: Online survey included 17 questions. In the first two rounds, participating experts were asked to rank each statement on a scale of 1–9 (9 is the most relevant). Consensus statements and definitions were revised according to results, obtaining a consensus score of 7–9. During the third round and online meeting, definitions and statements reached a moderate or high consensus(above 4 in more than 70% of participants) were included. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Primary goal of our project was focused on precisely localizing the specific segment affected by primary colon cancer, rather than to identify surgical treatment or type of resection needed for particular segment. RESULTS: The first round included 331 experts, 301 (91%) completed the second round, and 295 (98%) completed the final round. Experts strongly supported the use of a “10 cm rule” to describe colon cancer sites at the flexures and anatomical landmarks for other segments. Regarding the definition of rectosigmoid cancer, experts from America and Europe reached a high consensus that the term rectosigmoid as a colon cancer location must be abolished in contrast to experts from Asia. Description of cancers overlapping segments achieved a consensus of 64%. LIMITATIONS: Subjective decisions are based on individual expert clinical experience. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey, the first internationally conducted consensus study, achieved a remarkable level of consensus among a panel of global experts. Ambiguity still exists regarding overlapping lesions. See Video Abstract .