Citations

Abstract Background Approximately 12,000 adolescents and young adults (ages 15-39, AYAs) are diagnosed with a primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor each year. DNA methylation profiling has transformed CNS tumor classification by refining diagnostic accuracy and identifying biologically distinct subtypes, but its application has not been systematically evaluated in the AYA population. In this study, we examined the spectrum of CNS tumor types across age groups, with a focus on the AYA population. Methods We assembled a large dataset of CNS tumor samples with age annotations and methylation profiles matching with high confidence to a CNS tumor type using the NCI/Bethesda classifier. Prevalence of tumor type, methylation class and DNA copy number aberrations were compared across age strata (pediatric, AYA and adult). Results The cohort of 21,099 CNS tumors included 5139 tumors from AYAs (24%), which showed a mixed pattern, with tumors typical of childhood (e.g. medulloblastoma) as well as those common in older adults (e.g. glioblastoma). Several tumor types were specifically enriched in the AYA, including IDH-mutant astrocytoma, pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma, posterior fossa group B ependymoma, and diffuse hemispheric glioma, H3 G34-mutant, among others. Distinct methylation subclasses of multiple tumor types were observed in the AYA, and patterns of genomic aberrations showed age-specific distributions. Conclusion Large-scale methylation profiling revealed unique classification patterns of CNS tumors in AYAs, with specific tumor types, subclasses, and genomic alterations enriched in this population. These data may serve as a valuable reference resource for better understanding the spectrum of CNS tumors affecting AYA patients.

Abstract Workplace stress is one of the main sources of stress for adults, although physiological and cognitive factors may impact each person's stress response. Numerous studies have shown heart rate, heart rate variability, neural activity, and cognitive performance are affected by stress. Additionally, visual and auditory stimuli in one's environment have been shown to affect individuals' reaction to stressful events. To our knowledge, few studies have examined how each of these physiological and cognitive measures relate to one's perception of stress, the ability to recover from stress, and what environmental factors may help with stress recovery. Here, 80 healthy adults performed a laboratory-controlled stress induction task where they experienced and recovered from an acute psychological stressor (Trier Social Stress Test, TSST, using verbal math skills and a public presentation that was videotaped). Throughout the assessment, heart rate, heart rate variability, and neural activity were measured using wearable devices to assess changes before, during, and after the stressor. Additionally, participants were assessed their perceived stress levels at specific times throughout the assessment. After the psychological stressor, participants were randomly assigned to one of four recovery conditions within a multisensory relaxation room: Control (C), Auditory Only (A), Visual Only (V), or Combined Auditory and Visual (AV). During the stressor, anxiety, heart rate, and beta EEG power increased and high-frequency power and heart rate variability decreased, confirming participants reactivity to the stressor ( P < 0.01 for all vs. baseline). Only the V and AV conditions led to notable reductions in anxiety (15 and 17%, respectively) vs. the C condition, but these did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference between V and AV, suggesting a stronger impact of V. We observed no differences between conditions during recovery for HR and HRV. Overall, these findings suggest the visual features of the relaxation room impacted self-reported anxiety, however physiological and neurological effects did not demonstrate a statistically meaningful response.

Abstract Background TOPAZ-1 demonstrated durvalumab + gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) superiority over GemCis in first-line treatment of advanced biliary tract cancers. Real-world data from US patients and patients excluded from TOPAZ-1 (patients with autoimmune conditions [AICs] who did not receive immunotherapy) are lacking. We report real-world data for patients with cholangiocarcinoma treated with durvalumab + GemCis. Methods This retrospective, observational study enrolled adult patients diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma in the US from the International Cholangiocarcinoma Patient Registry (ICPR) treated with first-line durvalumab + GemCis between 2021–2023. De-identified medical records from ICPR were obtained directly from consenting patients/caregivers. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics (primary objective; assessed at initial diagnosis), comorbidities, second-line treatment modalities, median real-world overall survival (mrwOS), and median real-world time to next treatment (mrwTTNT; initiation of first-line treatment and last activity in the database or death) are reported. Results Seventy patients received first-line durvalumab + GemCis: 13 (18.6%) had AIC(s) and 57 (81.4%) did not. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities are shown (Table). Median (quartile 1–3) time from diagnosis to start of first-line treatment was 1.0 (0.7–1.7) months; median follow-up from first dose of first-line treatment was 7.0 (3.7–12.1) months. The mrwOS (95% CI) was 15.5 (15.1–not evaluable [NE]) months. mrwTTNT (95% CI) was 10.8 (10.4–15.7) months overall and was 20.8 (10.4–NE) months in patients who died without receiving subsequent treatment (censored at date of last activity). Among patients with AIC(s), &lt;5 received second-line therapy (all received chemotherapy alone). Among patients with no AICs, 15 received second-line treatment; 11 (73.3%) received targeted therapy alone and &lt;5 received chemotherapy alone. Conclusions This dataset demonstrates patients with AIC(s) are treated with durvalumab + GemCis in clinical practice. The mrwOS for durvalumab + GemCis in this patient population is consistent with TOPAZ-1 and global real-world studies.

Abstract Background & Objectives Based on the TOPAZ-I study, durvalumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) is now supported as a standard of care treatment for cholangiocarcinoma. Patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA) often have underlying autoimmune conditions (AICs) which could restrict immunotherapy use. Treatment patterns in patients with eCCA with AICs and non-autoimmune conditions (NAICs) are reported. Method This retrospective observational analysis of adult patients diagnosed with eCCA in the United States enrolled in the International Cholangiocarcinoma Patient Registry between 2019 and 2023, focused on those treated with durvalumab. The registry contains de-identified data from medical records obtained directly from consenting patients and caregivers. Patients were followed from index date (date of eCCA diagnosis) until the last activity in the database or death. Demographics, clinical characteristics, biomarkers, treatment patterns, and adverse events (AEs) are reported. Results Overall, 135 patients with eCCA were enrolled: 24 (17.8%) had 2:1 AICs and 111 (82.2%) had NAICs. Baseline demographics were comparable between groups: the median (quartile [Q]l-Q3) age at diagnosis was 63.0 (55.0-70.0) years, the mean number of comorbidities in the overall population was 10.1, and 50.4% of patients were female. PD-Ll positivity was noted in 12.6% of patients and HER2 positivity in 10.4%. Of 91 patients with eCCA who received first-line therapy, 34 (37.4%) received GemCis alone, 27 (29.7%) chemotherapy alone (non-GemCis +/- nab-paclitaxel), 9 (9.9%) GemCis plus nab-paclitaxel, 7 (7.7%) durvalumab plus GemCis, 7 (7.7%) durvalumab monotherapy or in combination, and 7 (7.7%) other regimens. Treatment patterns by autoimmune comorbidity status are also reported (Table). Overall, 129 patients (95.6%) had ≥1 AE; fatigue was the most common (71.1%). Conclusion More patients with eCCA received a first-line durvalumab-based regimen post-March 2022 vs the full study period. The use of durvalumab as first-line treatment in this subgroup may suggest that AICs do not restrict its use.

Abstract Purpose Elective genomic sequencing (EGS) returns monogenic disease findings in multiple genes, including potentially novel variants, and may also provide participants with carrier status, pharmacogenomic and other health-related information. The PeopleSeq Study assessed participants’ motivations for and concerns about EGS and the associated clinical and psychosocial outcomes across diverse EGS providers. Methods We administered a shared questionnaire to participants who chose to undergo EGS via 18 academic, clinical, or commercial EGS platforms. Results We enrolled 1575 participants, of whom 1147 (72.8%) completed a questionnaire after receiving their EGS results. A majority (60.3%) of the participants who completed a post-result questionnaire self-reported receiving results they assessed as important, including negative findings, and 75.9% reported a form of health-related utility. Among a subset (19.4%) who shared their EGS reports, 16.6% (37 of n =223) received a monogenic finding and self-reported results deemed “important” were consistent with EGS reports. Most participants (74.1%) discussed their results with their family, but fewer discussed their results with a healthcare provider other than the site team (41.7%) or had one or more medical visits as a direct result of their EGS testing (23.1%). Participants expressed diverse motivations for EGS, with 91.4% expressing interest in their personal disease risk and 54% who expressed quasi-indication-based motivations related to family medical history. Individuals motivated by family history reported important results at a significantly higher rate. Conclusions Early adopters of EGS are motivated by general interest in their health as well as quasi-indication-based considerations such as family history. A majority of participants learned results they considered medically important, but a much smaller segment engaged healthcare providers with their results.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the most common type of lymphoma, arises from various pathogenic mechanisms including gene translocations and fusions. Detection of gene rearrangements using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a standard practice for DLBCL diagnosis and guides treatment decisions. High-throughput chromosome conformation capture (Hi-C) DNA sequencing is a next-generation sequencing-based technology to identify genome-wide rearrangements using a single assay. In this study, Hi-C sequencing was performed using FFPE tissues from 159 patients with DLBCL, and identified 746 cancer genes at or proximal to the rearrangement breakpoints with a total of 1903 occurrences. Focusing on clinically important rearrangements, Hi-C detected 102 rearrangements of MYC, BCL2, and/or BCL6 in 92 patients and revealed the fusion partners, including 25 rearrangements missed by FISH. Causes of FISH negative results included FISH-cryptic breakpoints, complex or faint FISH signals, low percentage of FISH positivity, and issues related to tissue fixation. Moreover, in 20 patients (12.6%), Hi-C sequencing detected 22 rearrangements characteristic of other lymphoma types, including CCND1 rearrangements that could lead to reclassification as mantle cell lymphoma. Survival analysis for genome-wide rearrangements using machine learning models identified MYC, PD-L1, CCND1, BCL2, NTRK1/PRCC, RRAS, and FANCE rearrangements with significant prognostic effects in the DLBCL cohort. In conclusion, Hi-C sequencing detects gene rearrangements crucial for diagnosis in an unbiased and molecular manner and showed high sensitivity and specificity in our study. These advantages of Hi-C sequencing offer help to improve the workflow of clinical pathology laboratories, diagnostic precision, and treatment of large B-cell lymphoma.

Purpose: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer have unique physical, emotional, and social challenges. We aimed to identify key concerns among AYAs with cancer, evaluate pathways for connecting patients with resources, and inform the development of an AYA oncology program. Methods: This study was conducted at Mayo Clinic in Arizona and included English-speaking patients aged 18–39 years with recently diagnosed cancer. Participants completed a modified Needs Assessment Service Bridge questionnaire, which assessed patient-perceived needs with 39 items spanning 7 domains. An AYA nurse navigator discussed each participant’s results with them and connected them to the desired resources. Results: Of 52 eligible patients, 32 (62%) completed the questionnaire. Among them, 30 (94%) reported unmet needs in at least 1 domain and 19 (59%) reported unmet needs in 5 or more domains. The domains with the most frequently reported needs were health behaviors and wellness (81%), emotional health (72%), finances and everyday needs (59%), and work- and education-related assistance (56%). Younger participants reported more needs related to school life and scholarships/loans than did older participants. No significant differences were observed between the responses of men and women. Of 133 total needs identified by all participants, 93 (70%) were addressed by connecting patients to relevant resources. Conclusion: Systematic assessment of AYA needs and targeted connection to resources are essential for individualized and developmentally appropriate care. The current study identified key service gaps at our institution and will guide the continued evolution of our comprehensive AYA oncology program.

Objectives To evaluate biochemical recurrence‐free survival (BRFS) and metastasis‐free survival (MFS) as potential intermediate clinical endpoints (ICEs) for overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP). Patients and Methods Evaluable patients were selected from a retrospective dataset, resulting in a cohort of 879 patients with recurrent, non‐metastatic, hormone‐sensitive prostate cancer treated with sRP at 13 centres. ICE surrogacy was evaluated using a two‐stage approach: (i) at the individual‐patient level by fitting Clayton copula models and estimating Kendall's ( >0.7 indicating a strong association) and (ii) at the centre level, by fitting weighted linear regression of 5‐year OS on 3‐year BRFS and MFS. Results The two‐step analysis included 759 patients for BRFS (366 events) and 476 for MFS (137 events), with median follow‐up of 37 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 36–42 months) and 34 months (95% CI 31–37 months), respectively. At the individual‐patient level, MFS showed a strong association with OS (Kendall's 0.85, 95% CI 0.82–0.88), which was not observed for BRFS (Kendall's 0.63, 95% CI 0.56–0.69). At the centre level, neither 3‐year BRFS ( R 2 = 0.15; slope = 0.34, P = 0.2) nor 3‐year MFS ( R 2 = 0.21; slope = 0.26, P = 0.14) predicted 5‐year OS with sufficient explanatory power. Limitations include the fact that centre‐level analysis was based on single‐arm associations rather than on treatment‐effect surrogacy across arms, and retrospective data collection. Conclusions The BRFS should not be used as a surrogate endpoint in the sRP setting. MFS requires further validation in future prospective studies to confirm its association with OS. Patient‐reported outcomes, such as quality‐of‐life and treatment‐related toxicity, should be considered in parallel with OS.

Objective To evaluate the effects of mepolizumab therapy on the blood transcriptome in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) and to determine whether changes in gene expression predict responsiveness to mepolizumab treatment. Methods Fourteen consecutive patients diagnosed with SEA were prospectively enrolled. Each patient had sequential blood samples obtained pre-initiation and at 4, 8, and 12 weeks post-initiation of mepolizumab. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from blood samples for bulk RNA sequencing. Paired differential expression (DE) gene analysis was performed comparing baseline gene expression versus all timepoints. Changes in gene expression were also compared between responders versus nonresponders to mepolizumab treatment. Finally, gene set enrichment analysis was evaluated across timepoints and its interaction with the response to mepolizumab treatment. Results Principal component analysis of all genes demonstrated a homogeneous distribution, which did not separate into distinct groups based on either timepoint or therapeutic response. At week 12, 149 genes had significant DE (FDR &lt; 0.05) compared to baseline. When performing all-way timepoint comparisons, 74 genes (63 protein-coding) were found to be downregulated at weeks 4, 8 and 12 compared to baseline, but no differences were observed between post baseline timepoints. Twenty-eight genes (16 protein-coding) did change with progression of time and were associated with response to therapy, and 56 protein-coding genes distinguished responders and nonresponders. At week 12, nonresponders had a high enrichment of genes involved with signaling pathways, including cytokines, growth factors, cell differentiation markers, and protein kinases. Conclusion In this exploratory study, mepolizumab use was associated with limited global transcriptomic separation with some preliminary differential-expression and enrichment findings. No definitive mechanistic or predictive response signatures were identified due to the study limitations. Future studies, including larger cohorts followed for longer durations with interrogation of specific immune subsets, may offer additional insight into the pathophysiology of severe eosinophilic asthma and into predicting response to mepolizumab treatment.