Citations

140 Background: In the phase II EXTEND iADT omPC basket, MDT+iADT improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs iADT. Here we present the primary results of the EXTEND cADT omPC basket. We further report a pre-specified combined analysis with updated results from the iADT basket and examine the effects of MDT on immunity. Methods: Patients with 1 to 5 omPC metastases were randomized 1:1 to MDT+cADT vs cADT (NCT03599765). MDT consisted of definitive local therapy. cADT consisted of ADT +/- second-generation anti-androgens. The primary endpoint was per-protocol PFS, defined by biochemical criteria (Prostate Cancer Working Group 3), radiologic measures (RECIST v1.1), clinical progression, or death. 87 patients were needed to show superiority at a one-sided P of 0.10 by log-rank test. CDR3 regions in rearranged T cell receptor (TCR) β-chains from pre- and post-enrollment peripheral blood were sequenced with immunoSEQ (Adaptive Biotech). TCR repertoire modulation was defined as having TCR expansion plus contraction using a false-discovery-corrected betabinomial model. TCR sequencing from the ORIOLE trial (NCT02680587) was assessed for external validation. Results: From 2018 to 2022, 87 randomized patients were treated per protocol (MDT+cADT: 45; cADT: 42). 39% had castrate resistant omPC. MDT was definitive radiotherapy in all cases. With median follow-up of 31 mo, median PFS was 47 mo after MDT+cADT vs 22 mo after cADT (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.23 to 1.08; one-sided P = 0.036). In the combined analysis (N=174) with median follow-up of 42 mo, MDT+ADT improved PFS (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.69; P < 0.001), radiologic PFS (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.97; P = 0.038), and castration-resistance free-survival (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.82; P = 0.013). MDT+ADT had higher odds of TCR repertoire modulation vs ADT (55% vs 15%, P < 0.001). This finding was validated in the ORIOLE trial (MDT: 57% vs observation: 19%, P = 0.03). Among the subset of patients with extreme responses, random forest modeling of 37 clinical/immune variables identified TCR repertoire modulation as the variable with highest importance; further, MDT+ADT induced TCR repertoire modulation in all patients with favorable responses (i.e. PFS > 4 years) and none with unfavorable responses (i.e. PFS < 1 year). Among all patients randomized to MDT+ADT, TCR repertoire modulation was associated with longer PFS (HR 0.21; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.76; P = 0.02). Conclusions: MDT+cADT met the PFS primary endpoint of the phase II EXTEND trial, warranting phase III testing. From the combined analysis, MDT+ADT may also improve longer term outcomes including radiologic PFS and castration-resistance-free survival. Improved outcomes may result from MDT-induced immunomodulation, with implications for future trial design. Clinical trial information: NCT03599765 .

TPS891 Background: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the standard first-line therapy for patients with high-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with carcinoma in situ (CIS) ± papillary tumors; however, patients whose disease is unresponsive to BCG therapy are unlikely to benefit from further courses of BCG. Bladder-preserving treatment options for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS ± Ta/T1 include intravesical gene therapy (nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg), intravesical chemotherapy (gemcitabine and docetaxel), and immunotherapy (intravenous pembrolizumab and intravesical nogapendekin alfa inbakicept-pmln). In a pivotal phase 3 study, 53.4% of participants (55/103) with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS ± Ta/T1 achieved a complete response (CR) within 3 months of a single instillation of nadofaragene firadenovec, and of them, 45.5% (25/55) maintained a CR at 12 months. Nadofaragene firadenovec in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy may further improve clinical efficacy. ABLE-22 (NCT06545955) is an interventional study evaluating the safety and efficacy of nadofaragene firadenovec alone or in combination with chemotherapy (gemcitabine and docetaxel) or immunotherapy (pembrolizumab) in participants with high-risk BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Reinduction for nonresponders once at month 3 will also be evaluated. Methods: ABLE-22 will include approximately 40 to 75 sites across the United States and Canada; however, sites in Asia, Australia, and Europe may be included. Participants (anticipated N=150) will be randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive nadofaragene firadenovec (n=50), nadofaragene firadenovec plus gemcitabine and docetaxel (n=50), or nadofaragene firadenovec plus pembrolizumab (n=50). Adults aged ≥18 years with documented NMIBC with CIS ± Ta/T1 that is unresponsive to ≥2 courses of BCG therapy within the last 12 months are eligible to enroll. The primary endpoint is CR (defined as absence of low- and high-grade NMIBC) at months 3 or 6, as participants with persistent NMIBC (any CIS, low-grade Ta, and >3 cm or multifocal high-grade Ta) will be offered reinduction once, at month 3. Secondary endpoints include durability of CR, incidence of muscle-invasive progression, cystectomy-free survival, pathologic staging, overall survival, and safety. Durability of CR will be assessed quarterly up to and including month 24; all other secondary endpoints will be assessed up to and including month 36. Exploratory endpoints include changes in expression of potential biomarkers in blood and urine. Results from this investigational, randomized, multicenter, open-label study evaluating the safety and efficacy of nadofaragene firadenovec alone or in combination with chemotherapy or immunotherapy are expected July 2028. Clinical trial information: NCT06545955 .

ImportanceMyeloperoxidase is one of the most abundant peroxidase enzymes in activated myeloid cells. Myeloperoxidase inhibitors may have a clinical benefit in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by slowing neurodegeneration via reduced neuroinflammation and oxidative stress.ObjectiveTo determine the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of verdiperstat, a selective myeloperoxidase inhibitor, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsVerdiperstat was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a multicenter, double-blind, perpetual platform design, randomized clinical trial, with sharing of trial infrastructure and placebo data across multiple regimens. The study was conducted at 54 ALS referral centers across the US from July 2020 to April 2022. Adult participants with a diagnosis of clinically possible, probable, laboratory-supported probable, or definite ALS defined by the revised El Escorial criteria were randomized to verdiperstat or regimen-specific placebo. An additional group of participants concurrently randomized to placebo from other regimens was included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive oral verdiperstat, 600 mg, twice daily or matching placebo for a planned placebo-controlled duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in disease severity, as measured by a joint model of ALS Functional Rating Scale–Revised and survival, with the treatment effect quantified by the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression of verdiperstat relative to placebo.ResultsA total of 167 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.4] years; 59 [35.3%] female; 108 [64.6%] male) were randomized to either verdiperstat (126 [75.4%]) or to placebo (41 [25.6%]). Among the participants randomized to the verdiperstat regimen, 130 (78%) completed the trial. The estimated DRR was 0.98 (95% credible interval, 0.77-1.24; posterior probability = 0.57 for slowing of disease progression [DRR &amp;lt;1]). Verdiperstat was estimated to slow progression by 2% vs placebo (95% credible interval, −23% to 24%; posterior probability 0.57). Verdiperstat was overall safe and well tolerated. Common adverse events in the verdiperstat group were nausea, insomnia, and elevated thyrotropin levels.Conclusions and RelevanceResults demonstrate that treatment with verdiperstat was unlikely to alter disease progression in ALS.Trial RegistrationClinical Trial Identifiers: NCT04297683 and NCT04436510

ImportanceAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal disease. The sigma-1 (σ1) receptor emerged as a target for intervention.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of pridopidine, a σ1-receptor agonist, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsPridopidine was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, platform trial. The study was conducted at 54 sites in the US from January 2021 to July 2022 (final follow-up, July 14, 2022). A total of 163 participants with ALS were randomized to receive pridopidine or placebo. An additional 122 concurrently randomized participants were assigned to receive placebo in other regimens and included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized 3:1 to receive oral pridopidine 45 mg twice daily (n = 121) or matching oral placebo (n = 42) for a planned duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in ALS disease severity, analyzed using a bayesian shared parameter model, which has components for function (Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale [ALSFRS-R]) and survival that were linked through an integrated estimate of treatment-dependent disease slowing across these 2 components. This was denoted as the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression on pridopidine relative to placebo. There were 5 key secondary end points: time to 2-point or greater reduction in ALSFRS-R total score among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, rate of decline in slow vital capacity among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, percentage of participants with no worsening in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, time to 1-point or greater change in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, and time to death or permanent assisted ventilation.ResultsAmong 162 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 35% female) who were randomized to receive the pridopidine regimen and included in the primary efficacy analysis, 136 (84%) completed the trial. In the primary analysis comparing pridopidine vs the combined placebo groups, there was no significant difference between pridopidine and placebo in the primary end point (DRR, 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.80-1.21]; probability of DRR &amp;lt;1, 0.55) and no differences were seen in the components of ALSFRS-R or survival. There was no benefit of pridopidine on the secondary end points. In the safety dataset (pridopidine, n = 121; placebo, n = 163), the most common adverse events were falls (28.1% vs 29.3%, respectively) and muscular weakness (24.0% vs 31.7%, respectively).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this 24-week study, pridopidine did not impact the progression of ALS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04297683, NCT04615923

Importance The etiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a fatal neurodegenerative disease, is unknown. However, neuroinflammation and complement activation may play a role in disease progression. Objective To determine the effects of zilucoplan, an inhibitor of complement C5, in individuals with ALS. Design, Setting, and Participants Zilucoplan was tested as regimen A of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2 to 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled perpetual platform clinical trial with sharing of trial infrastructure and placebo data across multiple regimens. Regimen A was conducted from August 17, 2020, to May 4, 2022. A total of 162 participants were randomized to receive zilucoplan (122 [75.3%]) or regimen-specific placebo (40 [24.7%]). An additional 124 concurrently randomized participants were randomized to receive placebo in other regimens. Interventions Eligible participants were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive zilucoplan or matching placebo within strata of edaravone and/or riluzole use for a planned duration of 24 weeks. Active drug (zilucoplan, 0.3 mg/kg) and placebo were provided for daily subcutaneous dosing. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was change in disease severity from baseline through 24 weeks as measured by the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale–Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score and survival, analyzed using a bayesian shared-parameter model and reported as disease rate ratio (DRR; &amp;lt;1 indicating treatment benefit). The study included prespecified rules for early stopping for futility. Outcome analyses were performed in the full analysis set comparing the zilucoplan group with the total shared placebo group (n = 164). Results Among the 162 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 59.6 [11.3]; 99 [61.1%] male), 115 (71.0%) completed the trial. The estimated DRR common to ALSFRS-R and survival was 1.08 (95% credible interval, 0.87-1.31; posterior probability of superiority, 0.24). The trial was stopped early for futility. No unexpected treatment-related risks were identified. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial of zilucoplan in ALS, treatment did not alter disease progression. The adaptive platform design of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial made it possible to test a new investigational product with efficient use of time and resources. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04297683

Importance Bioenergetic failure has been proposed as a driver of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). CNM-Au8 is a suspension of gold nanocrystals that catalyzes the conversion of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide hydride into NAD + , resulting in an increase of cellular adenosine triphosphate production. Objective To determine the effects of CNM-Au8 on ALS disease progression. Design, Setting, and Participants CNM-Au8 was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind platform trial. The study was conducted at 54 sites in the US from July 2020 to March 2022 (final follow-up, March 17, 2022). A total of 161 participants with ALS were randomized to receive CNM-Au8 (n = 120) or regimen-specific placebo (n = 41). Data from 123 concurrently randomized placebo participants in other regimens were combined for analyses. Interventions Eligible participants were randomized in a 3:3:2 ratio to receive CNM-Au8 60 mg daily (n = 61), CNM-Au8 30 mg daily (n = 59), or matching placebo (n = 41) for 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in ALS disease severity measured by a bayesian shared parameter model of function (based on the Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale) and survival, which provided an estimate of the rate of disease progression measured by the disease rate ratio (DRR), with a DRR of less than 1 indicating treatment benefit. Secondary end points included a Combined Assessment of Function and Survival using a joint-rank test, rate of decline in slow vital capacity (percent predicted), and survival free of permanent assisted ventilation. Results Among 161 participants who were randomized within the CNM-Au8 regimen (mean age, 58.4 years; 61 [37.9%] female), 145 (90%) completed the trial. In the primary analysis comparing the combined CNM-Au8 dosage groups vs the combined placebo groups, the primary end point (DRR, 0.97 [95% credible interval, 0.783-1.175]; posterior probability of DRR &amp;lt;1, 0.65) and the 3 secondary end points suggested no benefit or harm of CNM-Au8. In the active (n = 120) vs placebo (n = 163) groups, the most common adverse events were diarrhea (23 [19%] vs 12 [7%]), nausea (17 [14.2%] vs 14 [8.6%]), fatigue (12 [10.8%] vs 30 [18.4%]), and muscular weakness (24 [20%] vs 45 [27.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance No benefit of CNM-Au8 on ALS disease progression was observed at 24 weeks. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04297683 , NCT04414345

INTRODUCTION: Barrett esophagus (BE) is the strongest known risk factor for developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the second-most lethal cancer in the United States. Esopredict is a novel validated methylation-based biomarker assay that provides precise quantification of neoplastic progression risk in BE patients. Inherit challenges, including tissue heterogeneity, sampling error, interobserver variability, and inconsistent adherence to surveillance biopsy guidelines, may affect the predictive value results of Esopredict obtained at different anatomic locations or different sampling time points. METHODS: To investigate the spatiotemporal performance of Esopredict across multiple spatiotemporal sampling points, we profiled 220 biopsies obtained from 58 BE patients, including 11 patients with overlapping spatial and temporal biopsies. We focused on spatial profiling (i.e., multiple biopsies obtained at several anatomic locations during a single endoscopy) and temporal profiling (i.e., biopsies obtained from multiple endoscopies performed at different time points). Each patient had an initial histologic diagnosis of nondysplastic Barrett esophagus, indefinite for dysplasia, or low-grade dysplasia. Final follow-up (endpoint) biopsies showed either high-grade dysplasia or EAC (progressors), or nondysplastic Barrett esophagus, indefinite for dysplasia, or low-grade dysplasia (nonprogressors). Biopsies were analyzed with Esopredict to compute a progression risk score, which quantified the likelihood of future progression to high-grade dysplasia or EAC within 5 years. RESULTS: In 52 spatially profiled patients, Esopredict demonstrated a sensitivity of 81% (17/21 progressor patients), based on the highest-scoring biopsy from each patient; sensitivity increased to 100% (12/12) when end point biopsies occurred within 5 years of the index (initial) biopsy. In 28 temporally profiled patients, sensitivity was 100% (8/8 patients), based on the biopsy performed at the time point closest to the end point biopsy. DISCUSSION: Esopredict showed high predictive performance in multiple spatiotemporal samples in BE patients. These data further support the use of Esopredict as a robust test to distinguish high-risk BE patients, who may benefit from endoscopic eradication therapy or increased surveillance frequency, from low-risk patients, who may be candidates for less frequent surveillance and noninterventional observation.

BACKGROUND: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a debilitating and painful condition accompanied by sensory, autonomic, trophic, and/or motor abnormalities. Although CRPS is rare in the general population, the prevalence among individuals at higher risk, particularly posttraumatic and postsurgical patients, remains unknown. This study aims to provide a benchmark that quantifies CRPS prevalence in high-risk groups, and offers insights on potential predictors of developing CRPS. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify studies reporting prevalence of CRPS after an inciting event (eg, fracture, surgery), specifically 12-month and 24-month prevalence (primary outcomes), as well as 3-month and 6-month prevalence (secondary outcomes). Estimates from individual studies were transformed using double-arcsine transformation, and the resulting estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled in a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. RESULTS: We included 214 articles with data from 2491,378 participants worldwide (35 countries), of which 16,873 had CRPS. The pooled 12-month and 24-month global prevalence was 3.04% (95% CI, 2.64–3.48) and 6.46% (95% CI, 5.46–7.53), respectively. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to understand the impact of population-dependent (mechanism of injury, type of CRPS), contextual-dependent (socioeconomic status), and methodological-dependent (study design, publication year) factors. The 12-month prevalence was higher in countries with a high human development index (HDI) compared to those with a medium or very high HDI, was higher in participants with a traumatic inciting injury only versus those with surgical injury only or traumatic/surgical injury, and was higher in prospective versus retrospective studies. Meta-regression analysis showed that publication year was a significant moderator, with more recent articles reporting lower 12-month prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a benchmark of the global prevalence of CRPS, which anesthesiologists and pain specialists can use to prioritize early diagnosis and identify those at the highest risk for CRPS.

OBJECTIVE The definitive influence of prestroke disability on outcomes in patients with a low Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) treated with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large-vessel occlusion (LVO) remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the impact of prestroke disability on outcomes in this specific population. METHODS Data from 32 international centers for AIS-LVO patients with a low ASPECTS who underwent EVT between January 2013 and December 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Low ASPECTS and prestroke disability were defined as ASPECTS values of 2–5 and prestroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≥ 2. The primary outcome was a return to the prestroke mRS score at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were independent ambulation (mRS scores of 0–3) or a return to the prestroke mRS score at 90 days, good functional outcome (mRS scores of 0–2) or a return to the prestroke mRS score at 90 days, successful recanalization, and 90-day mortality. Safety outcomes were any intracranial hemorrhage or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. A symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was defined as an intracranial hemorrhage with an associated worsening of ≥ 4 points in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score. Outcomes were compared between patients with and without prestroke disability. RESULTS Of 293 patients, 50 (17.1%) had a prestroke disability. Of 50 patients, 20 (40.0%), 24 (48.0%), and 6 (12.0%) had prestroke mRS scores of 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The primary outcome showed no significant difference between the two groups. Compared with patients without prestroke disability, those with prestroke disability had a significantly smaller proportion of independent ambulation or return to prestroke mRS score (adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03–0.53) and good functional outcome or return to prestroke mRS score (adjusted OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05–0.91). Other secondary and safety outcomes showed no significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS The present study indicated that prestroke disability was not associated with a return to the prestroke mRS score at 90 days or intracranial hemorrhage. Physicians should not routinely exclude AIS-LVO patients with a low ASPECTS who have prestroke disability from EVT based on prestroke disability alone.