Citations

We here present evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine. These guidelines, created by the Italian Society for the Study of Headache and the International Headache Society, aim to offer clear, actionable recommendations to healthcare professionals. They incorporate evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials and expert-based opinions. The guidelines follow the GRADE approach for assessing the quality of evidence. The guideline development involved a systematic review of literature across multiple databases, adherence to Cochrane review methods, and a structured framework for data extraction and interpretation. Although the guidelines provide a robust foundation for migraine treatment, they also highlight gaps in current research, such as the paucity of head-to-head drug comparisons and the need for long-term outcome studies. These guidelines serve as a resource to standardize migraine treatment and promote high-quality care across different healthcare settings.

We here present evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine. These guidelines, created by the Italian Society for the Study of Headache and the International Headache Society, aim to offer clear, actionable recommendations to healthcare professionals. They incorporate evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials and expert-based opinions. The guidelines follow the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for assessing the quality of evidence. The guideline development involved a systematic review of literature across multiple databases, adherence to Cochrane review methods, and a structured framework for data extraction and interpretation. Although the guidelines provide a robust foundation for migraine treatment, they also highlight gaps in current research, such as the paucity of head-to-head drug comparisons and the need for long-term outcome studies. These guidelines serve as a resource to standardize migraine treatment and promote high-quality care across different healthcare settings.

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM), the most aggressive primary brain tumor in adults, presents significant challenges due to its universal recurrence and limited survival rates, exacerbated when proximal to the lateral ventricles (LV). The subpopulation of brain tumor-initiating cells (BTICs) plays a pivotal role in tumor initiation and invasiveness, interacting with the microenvironment, particularly the cellular components in the subventricular zone (SVZ). Some mechanisms of intercellular communication present in the SVZ include paracrine, autocrine, direct cell contact, gap junctions, nanotubes, and more recently extracellular vesicles (EVs). EVs are membrane-bound particles released by cells that are central to intercellular communication. They have the ability to carry bioactive proteins, RNA, and other molecules that influence recipient cell behavior.This study investigates the role of EVs in GBM's communication with non-cancer cells. Our findings indicate that BTIC-derived EVs promote migration and proliferation (*p < 0.02, ****p <0.001) in neural progenitor cells (NPCs) in vitro, highlighting the EVs' role in altering the microenvironment. To identify the protein cargo contained in GBM-derived EVs, we utilized the innovative proximity-labeling system TurboID. We successfully induced TurboID expression in primary-cultured human BTICs from GBM patients, enabling the unbiased biotinylation of proteins in EVs. We isolated biotinylated proteins from BTIC lysates and BTIC-EVs, preserving the integrity of EVs, and conducted proteomic analysis via mass spectrometry. Our method marks the first implementation of TurboID for unbiased global labeling of EV protein cargo in primary GBM cells. This approach facilitates the investigation of EV-mediated communication and potential therapeutic targets, contributing to the understanding of GBM's complex interactions with the brain's microenvironment and the identification of biomarkers for improved diagnosis and treatment response. Citation Format: Marissa Russo, Emily Norton-Ramos, Maria Jose Ulloa Navas, Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, Hugo Guerrero-Cazares. Elucidating glioblastoma-derived extracellular vesicle cargo using TurboID: Implications for tumor microenvironment adaptation [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 6579.

Background Stroke remains a concern after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Several studies attempted to identify correlates of stroke but there remains a need for better predictors. Objective This study aims to characterize the aortic arch to identify potential correlates of stroke after TAVR using a patient cohort that includes cases with and without stroke. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 52 patients who underwent TAVR at Mayo Clinic and Maria Cecilia Hospital. Of these patients, 26 had a stroke after TAVR and 26 did not (control). Anatomical characterization was performed on each patient. Patient-specific 3D digital models of the ascending aorta, aortic arch, and calcium were created for each patient. Geometrical measurements, including cross-sectional areas, volumes, tortuosity, curvature, and length of the model were recorded. Results There was no significant difference in the various area measurements between the two groups, but the aortic arch cross-sectional area ratio (cerebral ostia cross-sectional areas/arch cross-sectional area) was significantly higher in the stroke group. Additionally, there was no significant difference in tortuosity, curvature, aortic volume, and length of the aorta. Aortic valve calcium score, aorta calcium, and aortic arch type (I, II, or III) were not significantly different between the groups. The prevalence of a bovine arch (BA) configuration was significantly higher in the stroke group (46% vs 8% control, p < 0.05). Conclusion Aortic arch cross-sectional area ratio and BA variant were the most significant correlates of stroke after TAVR.

Abstract “Nonclassical” myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPNs) represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies characterized by a wide range of clinical manifestations. Unlike classical MPNs, there is no standardized management approach for these conditions, particularly concerning the indications for and management of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. To address this gap, the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) Practice Harmonization and Guidelines (PH&G) Committee and the Chronic Malignancies Working Party (CMWP) have collaborated to develop shared guidelines aimed at optimizing the selection and management of patients with these rare forms of neoplasms. A comprehensive review of the literature from the publication of the revised fourth edition of the (2016) World Health Organization classification onward was conducted. A multidisciplinary group of experts in the field convened to produce this document, which was developed through multiple rounds of draft circulation. Key recommendations include the early identification of potential transplant candidates, particularly in cases of chronic neutrophilic leukemia, chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL)/CEL, not otherwise specified (CEL-NOS), myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions with FGFR1, JAK2, ABL1, and FLT3 rearrangements, MDS/MPN with neutrophilia/atypical chronic myeloid leukemia, and MDS/MPN, NOS. For patients with MPN, NOS/MPN unclassifiable, standard recommendations for myelofibrosis should be applied. Similarly, in MDS/MPN with thrombocytosis, transplantation is recommended on the basis of established MDS guidelines. Given the current lack of robust evidence, this document will serve as a valuable resource to guide future research activities, providing a framework for addressing critical unanswered questions and advancing the field.

Objectives: Cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) is an uncommon malignancy accounting for <5% of all esophageal carcinomas. Treatment of CEC varies and is adapted from established regimens used for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or the lower esophageal and head and neck. The present systematic review and guidelines are intended to assist treatment decision making for patients with CEC based on the available evidence. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, and Study Design (PICOTS) framework, the evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using Cochrane and PRISMA 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included prospective Phase II to III trials and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2013 and February 23, 2024 in the Ovid Medline database. These references were assessed through the American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) methodology. A systematic review PRISMA 2020 checklist confirmed the completion of essential elements. RAND-UCLA consensus methodology was used by the expert panel to rate the appropriateness of the treatment options. Results: ARS AUC recommendations include (1) larynx preservation using endoscopic resection (EMR or ESD) alone for the typical case with pT1a cN0 cM0 CEC, (2) definitive CRT for the typical case with cT1bN0M0 in patients who cannot undergo endoscopic resection, (3) larynx-preserving using definitive CRT (with or without induction chemotherapy) for the typical case with nonmetastatic locally advanced CEC (advanced T-stage tumors or involved lymph nodes), with surgery reserved for those patients with incomplete response or locoregional recurrence. Conclusions: This ARS AUC summary provides guidelines for the management of SCC of the cervical esophagus provides based on available evidence. Topics that warrant further investigation include optimization of (1) patient selection; (2) multimodality therapies including chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted agents; (3) radiation dose, schedule, and treatment volume; and (4) supportive care for patients with CEC. Ongoing trials continue to improve outcomes for patients with CEC.