Citations

Abstract Vertebral metastatic disease results from many types of cancer and can have a devastating impact on patient mobility, psychological health, quality of life, and ultimately overall patient survival. However, the development of radiotherapy and surgical techniques has rapidly surged in conjunction with ongoing advances in basic science and translational studies. In this review, we discuss the paradigm shift in our understanding of the epidemiology and treatment algorithms for spinal oncology, ranging from preoperative optimization strategies, radiation and surgical techniques, the utilization of molecular markers and targeted therapeutics in medical oncology, and prognostication tools that underscore a new multidisciplinary approach to spinal oncology care.

Abstract Objectives Dravet syndrome (DS) is a drug‐resistant developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, often requiring three or more antiseizure medications (ASMs). Consequently, the therapeutic landscape is highly complex, combining DS‐specific agents (stiripentol, STP; cannabidiol, CBD; fenfluramine, FFA), non‐specific ASMs, and non‐pharmacologic options such as dietary therapy or neuromodulation. In addition, recognition of patients' changing needs across the lifespan, together with the essential contribution of caregiver education to effective treatment oversight—including awareness of potential drug–drug interactions and adverse events—emphasizes the value of an integrated and forward‐looking approach. A consensus initiative was developed to guide clinicians in the management of patients with DS, with a particular focus on STP‐containing regimens. Methods Based on a literature review and clinical vignette discussions, a nominal group of five international DS experts developed 38 statements across six themes: (i) general principles, (ii) guiding physicians to empower families, (iii) STP as add‐on to specific and non‐specific Dravet ASMs, (iv) FFA in regimens containing STP, (v) CBD in regimens containing STP, and (vi) patient follow‐up during treatment initiation. Statements were scored on a 9‐point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 9 = strongly agree) first by the nominal group and then by an international panel of 59 DS clinicians. Consensus was defined as ≥75% rating ≥7 and/or a median ≥8. Results Thirty‐four of the 38 statements (89%) reached consensus among both the nominal group and the international panel; one did not reach consensus in either, and three reached consensus only among the nominal group. Both panels agreed on the importance of involving families in treatment decisions and follow‐up, as well as on key aspects of polytherapy management, including ASM initiation, treatment adjustments, and adverse event management. Significance This international consensus integrates evidence and clinical expertise to establish shared principles that address a long‐standing gap in the polytherapeutic management of Dravet syndrome. Plain Language Summary Dravet syndrome is a rare and severe form of epilepsy that begins in early childhood, with seizures that often persist throughout life. Because the disease is highly drug resistant, most patients are treated with polytherapy, making clinical management complex for clinicians. This consensus brings together published evidence and expert experience to provide practical guidance on the management of polytherapy in Dravet syndrome, supporting clinicians in optimizing patient care.

Background Suicidal behaviour shows notable sex differences, and understanding whether genetic factors contribute to these differences is critical for identifying at-risk individuals and prevention. Objective We aim to investigate the genetic contribution to suicide attempts and examine whether genetics account for sex differences in incidence. Methods This population-based cohort study includes 3.1 million individuals born 1963–1998 and followed through Swedish National Registers, including hospitals and specialist outpatient diagnoses and cause of death data. Suicide attempts were identified using ICD codes, indicating intentional self-harm, self-harm using lethal methods or leading to hospitalisation, or resulting in death. Familial aggregation, coaggregation, pedigree heritability and genetic correlations were estimated using genealogical data. For sex-specific analyses, we examined mother–daughter, female sibling, father–son and male sibling pairs, separately. Findings Suicide attempts were more common among females than males (3.3% vs 2.6%). In both sexes, risk aggregated within families (ORs ranged 1.6–3.4 across relative types) and was higher in first-degree than second-degree relatives. Familial aggregation was stronger in females than in males, and in same-sex first degree relatives compared with cross-sex pairs. Pedigree heritability was 41.9% (95% CI 36.0 to 48.4%) and did not differ significantly by sex (female 51.4% (95% CI 40.1% to 58.6%), male 45.1% (95% CI 32.3% to 52.5%), Bootstrap p value 0.40). Suicide attempt showed moderate to high pedigree genetic correlations with psychiatric disorders, strongest with substance use disorders (SUD, r g =0.85 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96)), with no significant sex differences. The genetic correlation between female and male suicide attempts was high (0.85 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.99)), suggesting a substantial genetic overlap. Conclusions Suicide attempt has a moderate heritable component that largely overlaps between females and males and with other psychiatric disorders, particularly SUD. Stronger familial aggregation in females and in same-sex pairs highlights the potential role of sex-specific environmental or social factors. Future research should focus on non-genetic contributors and their potential interaction with genetic factors to better understand and address sex disparities in suicidal behaviour Clinical implications Genetic risk for suicide attempt is substantial but does not fully explain sex differences in incidence. Clinicians should, therefore, consider non-genetic, including sex-specific environmental and social factors, alongside family history and psychiatric comorbidity when assessing suicidal risk.

TPS276 Background: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can evolve into a neuroendocrine-like subtype with aggressive behavior and poor outcomes (1). Nuclear Receptor-Binding SET Domain Protein 2 (NSD2) is overexpressed in prostate cancer and is a driver of both androgen-receptor (AR)-dependent signaling and of neuroendocrine differentiation, where cancer cells lose AR dependence and response to AR pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) (2,3,4). In studies of patient-derived neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) models, genetic depletion of NSD2 led to restoration of AR expression, reversal of adeno-to-neuroendocrine differentiation, and re-sensitization to ARPI (4). We hypothesize that NSD2 inhibition can reverse resistance to ARPIs in patients with progressive mCRPC, including with neuroendocrine differentiation. KTX-2001 is an oral, potent and selective small molecule inhibitor of NSD2. It is the sponsor’s second NSD2 inhibitor to enter the clinic. The sponsor’s first in class NSD2 inhibitor, KTX-1001, was shown to be tolerable and have preliminary efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (5). Methods: STRIKE-001 (NCT07103018) is a multicenter, open-label phase 1 dose escalation trial of KTX-2001 monotherapy (Part A) and KTX-2001 + darolutamide (Part B). Key inclusion criteria are males age ≥18 years with mCRPC, progression after receiving ARPI, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0-1, willingness to undergo biopsy if safe and feasible, and life expectancy of ≥6 months. Participants take KTX-2001 by mouth once daily alone (Part A) or with darolutamide 600 mg twice daily (Part B). Dose escalation of KTX-2001 in Parts A and B will follow a 3+3 design and occur in parallel at multiple planned dose levels. Primary objectives are to assess the safety and tolerability, determine MTD, and determine RP2D(s) for further study of KTX-2001 alone and in combination with darolutamide. Secondary objectives include characterization of efficacy and PK parameters for both KTX-2001 monotherapy and in combination with darolutamide. Exploratory objectives include study of pharmacodynamic effects, circulating tumor cells, and cell-free DNA. 1. Conteduca V, Eur J Cancer 2019. 2. Parolia A, Nat Genet 2024. 3. Aytes A, Nat Commun 2018 4. Li J, bioRxiv 2023.07.18.549585 5. Bories P, Blood Vol 144, Suppl 1,2024. Clinical trial information: NCT07103018 .

Abstract Background: Fatty Acid Synthase (FASN) is a key lipogenic enzyme co-regulated with HER2 and highly expressed in ER+ and HER2+ BC. Its targeting downregulates HER2 expression. Our preclinical studies revealed that FASN inhibition can sensitize or restore sensitivity to trastuzumab, paclitaxel and ET in HER2+ BC models. Denifanstat (deni, formerly TVB-2640) is a novel FASN inhibitor that demonstrated promising clinical activity and safety in a prior phase I trial as either monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the objective tumor response rate (ORR) of deni plus trastuzumab (H) in combination with paclitaxel (T) or ET. Methods: Two independent, phase II clinical trials were initiated to assess the efficacy and safety of deni plus H in combination with T (Cohort A) or ET (Cohort B). Key inclusion criteria included HER2+ MBC resistant to HER2-directed therapy, measurable disease, unlimited ET, ≤6 prior chemotherapy or antibody drug conjugate regimens, and confirmation of HER2+ MBC on a pre-registration biopsy. Deni was administered 100 mg/m2 orally once daily. HP or H plus ET (fulvestrant or aromatase inhibitor) was administered at standard dose and schedule. Blood was collected on Cycle 1 Day 1 (C1D1), C1D8 and C2D1 for serum FASN analysis. An additional MBC tumor biopsy was collected on C2D1 for correlative studies. A 2-stage Simon design with a safety-run in was used to test the null hypothesis that the true ORR is at most 5% against the alternative it is at least 20%. With a sample size of 32 patients (pts) per cohort, if ≥4 responses are seen, this design has a 90% chance of rejecting the true ORR is <5% when the true ORR is ≥20% at a 0.10 level of significance. The decision to close both trials to enrollment early was multifactorial. Results: From August 2017 - February 2024, 33 pts with HER2+ MBC pre-registered, among which 17 were eligible and 16 were evaluable (15 pts in Cohort A and 1 pt in Cohort B). The most common reason for ineligibility was HER2-negative status on central review of the pre-registration biopsy. Median age was 57 years (range 35-80). All pts were non-Hispanic and 13 (81.3%) were White. Median prior lines of therapy was 5 (range 0 - 11). In Cohort A, there were 5 partial responses; thus, the primary endpoint was met with the ORR estimated to be 33.3% (90% CI: 14.2-57.7%). The median PFS time was 7.0 months (95 %CI: 3.7 - 11.3), and median OS was 25.7 months (95%CI: 10.2 - NE). No dose limiting toxicities were observed during the C1 safety run-in (6 pts). In Cohort A, 7 (46.7%) developed a grade 3 or 4 adverse event (AE) attributed to combination therapy. Grade ≥2 AEs regardless of attribution occurring in ≥20% of all pts included anemia, fatigue, neutropenia, palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE), and peripheral neuropathy. Treatment was discontinued due to progression (12; 80%) or AE (3; 20% - pneumonitis; neuropathy; PPE). In Cohort B, the pt maintained stable disease through 8 cycles with grade 3 ALT increase, and she remained alive 31.2 months post-registration. Median C1D1 FASN level was 32.7 ng/mL (IQR: 18.7 - 49.6 ng/mL). There was minimal association between C1D8 and C2D1 FASN levels and time to disease progression (C1D8 n=9, Spearman rank correlation coefficient (r s) = 0.040; C2D1 n=13, r s = -0.019). Analyses of changes in MBC tumor expression of FASN, phospho-AKT, and phospho-S6 are in progress. Conclusion: Deni combined with HP provided clinical antitumor activity in pts with HER2+ MBC resistant to trastuzumab. Expected paclitaxel-associated AEs were observed. Nearly half of pts experienced a grade 3 or 4 AE attributed to the combination therapy, and 20% stopped treatment due to AE. Further study of deni, H plus ET is necessary to draw safety and efficacy conclusions. Citation Format: T. C. Haddad, V. J. Suman, R. R. Roa, B. J. Ernst, R. Lupu, T. Vander Steen, M. H. Solanki, M. Keeney, D. W. Northfelt, K. S. Anderson, T. J. Hobday, S. Chumsri, J. E. Hoppenworth, J. L. Carroll, K. V. Giridhar, C. C. O’Sullivan, R. A. Leon-Ferre, M. P. Goetz. Phase II Trial of the FASN Inhibitor, Denifanstat (TVB-2640), Plus Trastuzumab in Combination with Paclitaxel or Endocrine Therapy (ET) in Patients with HER2+ Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Resistant to Trastuzumab [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-01-16.

Abstract Introduction: An Our Practice Advisory (OPA), formerly known as Best Practice Advisory (BPA), is an electronic health record (EHR) tool. OPAs identify key parameters to alert providers of potential interventions that could enhance quality of care. Such functionality is increasingly relevant given the rapid pace of new drug approvals. Within the Mayo Clinic system, we previously identified that amongst Mayo Clinic patients (pts) meeting the MonarchE criteria, 28% of pts did not undergo a documented discussion with their provider regarding the role of adjuvant abemaciclib (Premji, SABCS 2024). Further, a Flatiron study identified that only 40% of eligible pts received abemaciclib (Sandoval, Miami Breast 2025). To address this practice gap, in 2024 we began to implement EHR clinical decision support by creating an OPA trigger for pts eligible for an adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i). Here we report on ‘action taken’ versus not for the OPA and the most common reasons for re-prompts. Methods: The Mayo Breast Disease Group designed an OPA including pts who are within 14 months of a clinical or pathologic diagnosis of high-risk early-stage breast cancer. We leveraged structured data captured in the Epic staging forms (Epic Systems) to identify pts with clinical or pathologic T-stage, N-stage, grade, ± Ki-67/ multigene signature to identify ER+/HER2- pts eligible for adjuvant ribociclib or abemaciclib based on FDA approvals. The OPA was triggered by a patient encounter in oncology when endocrine therapy (but not CDK4/6i) was on the active medication list resulting in a hard stop. The OPA gathered limited details about whether adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors were discussed and whether the provider followed a link that resulted in prescribing one—considered an indicator of action taken. In this IRB-exempt quality improvement project, we describe the responses captured in the OPA trigger utilizing Epic tools. Results: The OPA went live on 1/10/2025. Over a 5-month period post OPA initiation, we identified 517 OPA alerts among 332 unique pts. Their median age was 62.5 years, and the majority were female (97%). The median time to resolve the OPA was 17.5 seconds (range 2-567 seconds). 12.6% (65/517) of the time there was ‘action taken’ by selecting the hyperlink to potentially start a treatment plan. Providers selected the following OPA pre-set responses: ‘re-prompt in one month’ 248 (48%), ‘patient not a candidate for therapy’ 48 (9%), ‘patient declines’ 69 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will prescribe’ 36 (7%), ‘not discussed’ 44 (9%), and unknown 72 (14%). The most common free text comments among the 517 OPA alerts (summarized) included: ‘revisit in future’ 108 (21%), ‘too early’ 65 (13%), ‘patient declines’ 66 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will start’ 31 (6%), ‘not a candidate’ 26 (5%), and ‘co-morbidities’ 18 (3%). Erroneous OPA prompting occurred in 14 (3%) who previously failed a CDK4/6i due to toxicity and in 18 (3%) for pts currently on a CDK4/6i. 30 (6%) OPA comments noted that they discussed or started therapy that day. Conclusion: The OPA offered clinical decision support and ensured that clinicians considered prescribing CDK 4/6i in all pts identified as eligible, and captured deferrals. Refinements are needed to ensure appropriate timing of OPA and minimize erroneous firing. The OPA remains active and captures the reason for deferral of adjuvant CDK 4/6i prescription. This data pairs real world decision making to better understand clinically meaningful application of improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Citation Format: S. Premji, P. Advani, S. Chumsri, L. Mina, J. Taraba, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, E. Cathcart-Rake, T. Haddad, B. Rudder, G. Choong, D. Idossa, C. O’Sullivan, S. Yadav, K. Ruddy, P. Peethambaram, T. Hobday, M. Goetz, R. Rao, B. Ernst, F. Batalini, R. Leon-Ferre, A. Tevaarwerk, K. Giridhar. Implementing an Our Practice Advisory (OPA) to provide clinical decision support for adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer: The Mayo Clinic Experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-11-10.