Citations

Abstract INTRODUCTION Few African American (AA) donors have been included in post mortem Alzheimer's disease (AD) studies compared to European‐ancestry (EA) individuals. METHODS We generated transcriptome‐wide bulk pre‐frontal cortex (PFC) gene expression data from 125 AA donors with neuropathologically determined AD and 82 AA controls. RESULTS Transcriptome‐wide significant differential expression was observed with 482 genes. The most significant, ADAMTS2 , showed 1.52 times higher expression in AD cases ( p = 2.96x10 −8 ). Comparison of findings with those from a recent gene expression study of EA brain donors revealed substantial concordance, including ADAMTS2 . Other associations not observed in EA results may be especially relevant to AD risk in the AA population. Examination of AA AD GWAS‐implicated variants identified several expression quantitative trait loci. CONCLUSION This first large‐scale AA brain AD gene expression study identified many differentially expressed genes, including ADAMTS2 , and supports gene expression as a molecular pathway underlying the impact of several AA AD risk variants. Highlights We performed the largest African American brain tissue Alzheimer's disease (AD) gene expression study. Expression differences for 482 genes, notably ADAMTS2 , were study‐wide significant. Many significant differentially expressed genes are involved in energy metabolism. Several previously known AD‐associated variants in African Americans are eQTLs. These results advance knowledge of the genetic basis of AD in the AA population.

Abstract Nephrotic syndrome is a rare, heterogeneous kidney disorder characterized by proteinuria, hypoalbuminemia, and edema. To elucidate its genetic architecture, we conducted a large-scale, electronic health record (EHR)-linked, multi-ancestry genome-wide association study comprising 5,214 cases and 1,601,060 controls. We identified 37 distinct loci associated with disease risk, including novel associations at JAML and STPG2 , and confirmed prior signals at PLA2R1 , HMCN1 , and APOL1 . Fine-mapping of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) revealed the strongest association at DRB103:01:01G in individuals of European ancestry (OR = 2.01, P = 1.4×10⁻²⁰), alongside nominal ancestry-specific associations in African ( DOA01:01:05 ) and Latino ( DPB1*14:01:01G ) populations. Transcriptome-wide association analysis (TWAS) identified 484 significant gene-tissue associations, including C4A in kidney cortex. Expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) mapping revealed numerous cis-eQTLs in glomerular and tubular renal tissues, largely within the MHC region. We observed significant genetic correlation between adult and pediatric nephrotic syndrome (Rg = 0.63, P = 3.5x10 -11 ), suggesting shared genetic etiology. Pathway analyses implicated estrogen receptor signaling and histone modification. Mendelian randomization implicated APOM expression and apomorphine exposure with increased disease risk (OR = 4.93, P = 1.8x10 -19 ). These results expand the understanding of nephrotic syndrome pathogenesis and highlight ancestry-informed targets for therapeutic development.

469 Background: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially life-threatening complication of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Multiple professional organizations, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), have developed clinical guidelines addressing FN management. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework offers a structured method for assessing the evidence underlying these recommendations. Methods: A comparative analysis was conducted across guidelines. Key domains, including definitions, risk stratification, empiric antimicrobial therapy, duration of antimicrobial therapy, use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), and antimicrobial prophylaxis were assessed. Recommendations were analyzed for concordance and the certainty of supporting evidence was appraised using the GRADE framework. The certainty of the evidence was graded as high, moderate, low, or very low. Results: All five guidelines uniformly defined FN as fever ≥38.3°C or sustained ≥38.0°C accompanied by neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count <500 cells/µL), despite very low-certainty evidence supporting these specific thresholds. Risk stratification using validated tools, such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score and the Clinical Index of Stable Febrile Neutropenia (CISNE), is recommended based on moderate-certainty evidence. Empiric monotherapy with anti-pseudomonal beta-lactam agents is recommended across guidelines and supported by high-certainty evidence. Antifungal therapy is recommended for persistent fever beyond 4–7 days in high-risk patients based on low-certainty data. Variability was noted in the suggested duration of antibacterial therapy and the role of therapeutic G-CSF based on low-certainty evidence. Recommendations for antimicrobial prophylaxis are consistent across high-risk populations. Conclusions: Despite broad agreement in foundational management principles for febrile neutropenia, differences exist in the application of therapeutic G-CSF and the duration of empiric antibiotics. These findings underscore the need for high-quality clinical trials to inform harmonized, evidence-based recommendations. This synthesis identifies priority areas for stewardship initiatives and quality-of-care improvement.

501 Background: Targeted treatment options have significantly improved outcomes for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), but oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs) who provide care for fewer numbers of patients with CLL are challenged to remain current with continuously changing treatment paradigms. To assess ongoing educational needs, we analyzed the treatment choices made by HCPs in an online survey for select cases of poor-prognosis CLL and compared these with the choices of experts in CLL treatment for the same clinical scenarios. Methods: As part of a CME program, HCPs could access an online algorithm to enter specific characteristics of a CLL case scenario and receive treatment recommendations from 5 US-based CLL experts. Experts made recommendations in July 2024 for 146 possible case patients built into the algorithm. After entering their case characteristics, HCPs were asked to enter their planned treatment prior to viewing the expert recommendations. We compared expert and HCP treatment choices across various case scenarios that were entered into the algorithm, with a focus on previously untreated CLL with del(17p)/mutated TP53 or R/R CLL. Results: Between August 2024 and February 2025, 346 cases were entered into the algorithm by 174 HCPs. Among responding HCPs, 38% were based in the UK/EU, 24% in the US, and 10% in Asia; 62% treated ≤10 patients with CLL per month and 49% sought recommendations for a specific patient in their practice. Among 231 cases of previously untreated CLL entered, 91 (39%) sought recommendations for del(17p)/mutated TP53 disease. For cases with no major comorbidities and previously untreated CLL with del(17p)/mutated TP53 , all experts recommended acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib; in 19 cases submitted by HCPs practicing in locations where second-generation BTK inhibitors (BTKi) are approved for CLL (including the US, EU, and Japan), 58% planned 1 of these treatments for this case scenario, 17% planned ibrutinib-based therapy, and 11% planned venetoclax-based therapy. Among case scenarios requiring third-line therapy after progressing with 2 regimens including a covalent BTKi and venetoclax plus an anti-CD20 Ab (with progression <2 years after completing treatment), all experts would recommend a noncovalent BTKi (eg, pirtobrutinib), with 1 expert indicating they would also consider CAR T-cell therapy. For the same case scenario among 6 US-based HCPs, 1 planned pirtobrutinib and 3 planned CAR T-cell therapy. Overall, after reviewing expert recommendations, 61% of HCP respondents whose planned treatment differed from the experts indicated that they would change their approach, and 20% indicated barriers to implementing the recommendations. Conclusions: Our findings provide insight into potential educational needs among HCPs who manage patients with CLL, suggesting that targeted expert-led education could benefit these HCPs.

98 Background: Prior authorization (PA) purports to control costs and ensure adherence to evidence-based guidelines but negatively impacts cancer care. Radiation oncology (RO) represents a minority of overall cancer spending yet bears a disproportionately high PA burden. Limited research exists on the effects of PA on patient outcomes and administrative workload within RO clinics. Methods: From 9/2024 to 10/2024, an online survey was open to U.S. members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology assessing experiences with PA including disposition (approval/denial/appeal including peer-to-peer [P2P] review) and perceived impact on patient care and administrative workload. Outcomes included treatment delays, changes from recommended treatment, and patient event including hospitalization, ED visits, permanent disability, or death. Descriptive statistics evaluated responses. Results: Of 736 responding radiation oncologists (16% response rate), 83% reported a rise in PA over the past three years, with 58% noting the burden has increased greatly. In the past year, 50% reported that more than half of their cases required PA, with a median approval rate of 75% and median overturn rate of 82% for denials. For more than half of their cases, nearly half of physicians (43%) noted that P2P was a futile effort to overturn PA denials due to insurance policies. Most (75%) reported that PA resulted in their practice needing to reallocate staff; 91% reported worsening burnout due to PA. P2P reviews were particularly burdensome, averaging 1.65 hours per week. A third (30%) reported that PA requirements had caused serious complications for their patients, including 7% who reported PA had contributed to patient death. Almost all (91%) reported PA-related treatment delays for some of their patients, with 58% indicating average delays of ≥5 days. Most (81%) reported that at times they had to use radiation techniques they considered less optimal due to PA, including 58% who were forced to deviate from national guidelines. The most common reasons for not appealing a PA denial were anticipated delays (73%), perceived futility based on prior PA experiences (62%), and administrative burden (45%). Conclusions: The administrative and clinical burdens associated with PA have significant implications for patient care, physician well-being, and healthcare resource allocation in RO. Treatment delays, compromised therapies, and adverse patient outcomes are commonly reported and underscore the need for PA reform to improve patient outcomes, reduce physician burnout, and improve efficiency.

Abstract Objective This study aimed to understand the factors limiting access to medications for the preventive treatment of migraine and to improve access to evidence‐based preventive care. Background For decades, the effective use of medication for the preventive treatment of migraine was limited by slow onset, slow and complex dose titration schedules, modest benefits, drug interactions, frequent side effects, and very low long‐term adherence. The calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) targeted preventive medications mitigate some of these limitations and demonstrated substantial therapeutic benefits in a significant proportion of adults with migraine. The American Headache Society considers these medications among the first‐line options for migraine prevention, although access to them remains limited. The American Migraine Foundation hosted a single‐day, multidisciplinary expert panel discussion to identify barriers to optimal preventive care and developed recommendations to address them. Methods Participants identified and prioritized barriers and used a modified nominal group technique to achieve consensus on them. A series of moderated discussions in plenary and breakout sessions was used to create possible solutions. Modified nominal group technique was also employed to achieve consensus on the priorities among these barriers and to achieve whole‐group consensus on the recommendations. Ethical issues that inform access were discussed. Results Participants included eight neurologists and board‐certified headache specialists, six representatives of reimbursement decision‐makers, six employees of life sciences companies, four patient advocates with lived experience with migraine, and a medical ethicist. Among those who have consulted healthcare professionals and received a diagnosis of migraine, we identified four main barriers to accessing preventive treatment: restrictive prior authorization requirements, the perceived lack of real‐world evidence and treatment guidelines, the need for clinician education, and the need for patient education. Consensus recommendations for eliminating barriers centered on using new evidence to evaluate policies that restrict the selection of first‐line therapies, initiating/improving collaboration among stakeholders, sharing of data and best practices, and increased training. Participants agreed to explore novel definitions of the value of preventive treatment and to establish the Migraine Prevention Network to facilitate ongoing cooperation and collective action. However, due to financial limitations, staffing changes, and time constraints, post‐meeting discussions led to a shift from establishing a broad Migraine Prevention Network to forming smaller task forces focused on the top‐priority barriers (real‐world evidence and The Patient Playbook ) identified through collaborative voting among American Headache Society, American Migraine Foundation, and industry stakeholders. Conclusions Adults with migraine face multiple barriers in accessing novel migraine‐specific, CGRP‐targeted preventive treatment. Stakeholders in the delivery of care, including clinicians, reimbursement decision‐makers, life sciences companies, and patient and clinician advocates, may be able to overcome many of these barriers and improve access by working with and on behalf of patients.

ImportancePatients with metastatic castration–resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring BRCA1/2 alterations are eligible to receive poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors as single agents or in combination with an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor after these agents showed survival improvement in their landmark clinical trials. However, data are limited regarding the uptake of PARP inhibitors in these patients.ObjectiveTo investigate the use of PARP inhibitors in patients with mCRPC harboring BRCA1/2 alterations.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used the deidentified Flatiron-Health electronic health record–derived database of US community and academic practices to extract patient-level data. The data cutoff date was May 31, 2024. Patients with mCRPC with evidence of harboring BRCA1/2 alterations and alive after August 15, 2020 (ie, 3 months after the approval of the first PARP inhibitor, rucaparib, in mCRPC) were included. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2024 to May 2025.ExposuresAge, race and ethnicity, insurance status, and practice type at the time of mCRPC diagnosis.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe receipt of PARP inhibitors. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to assess the association between the exposures and the main outcome.ResultsOf 24 105 patients with metastatic prostate cancer, 443 male patients (median [IQR] age, 72 [65-79] years) had mCRPC with BRCA1/2 alterations and were eligible and included in our analysis. Of these patients, 227 (51.2%) received a PARP inhibitor, whereas 216 (48.8%) did not. Compared with patients covered by a commercial health plan, those covered by Medicare were significantly more likely to receive a PARP inhibitor (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.66; P = .047). The odds of receiving a PARP inhibitor were not significantly higher in patients treated in community practice compared with those treated in academic centers (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.00-2.70; P = .05).Conclusions and RelevanceThis retrospective cohort study of patients with mCRPC and evidence of BRCA1/2 alterations found that approximately half of patients did not receive PARP inhibitors despite evidence of survival improvement in this population. These findings highlight the need to increase awareness of the survival data and access to life-prolonging therapies in patients with mCRPC.

Importance The definition of cure in stage II to III colon cancer (CC) remains unclear due to limitations in conventional end points, which include deaths and second primary tumors as events. These can complicate communication with patients regarding long-term outcomes. Objective To distinguish relapses from competing health-related events to classify long-term outcomes years after surgery and explore when the incidence of true relapses of the initial CC approaches 0% to define cure in this disease. Design, Setting, and Participants This pooled analysis of individual patient–level data from 15 phase 3 randomized clinical trials assessed time to CC-related relapse using Kaplan-Meier and Aalen-Johansen methods, with death and second primary tumors treated as competing risks. Cox regression models evaluated prognostic associations, stratified by sex, stage, and tumor. Patients with stage II to III CC who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy were included. All patients had undergone radical surgery for CC and received adjuvant chemotherapy with a median follow-up of at least 6 years. The Adjuvant Colon Cancer Endpoints (ACCENT) and the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy (IDEA) databases included adjuvant studies conducted between 1996 and 2015. Data were analyzed from February 2022 to June 2025. Exposures Adjuvant chemotherapy regimens varied across trials, including fluoropyrimidines alone or in combination with oxaliplatin or biologic agents. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was time to CC-related recurrence. The predefined threshold for cure was a recurrence risk below 0.5%. Results Of 35 213 included patients, 19 346 (54.9%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 60.2 (10.8) years. The incidence rate of recurrence peaked at 6.4% (1993 of 31 373) between month 6 and month 12 and decreased continuously until year 10 of follow-up never exceeding 0.5%. Recurrence rate appeared to increase again after year 10 and peaked at 2.0% during year 12.5 to year 13, a pattern observed exclusively in the MOSAIC trial. Competing-event analysis revealed that death and second primary tumors inflated the apparent recurrence rate, especially for older patients. The overall cumulative incidence of relapse with death as competing risk was lower among female patients (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76; P &amp;lt; .001). Conclusions and Relevance In this pooled analysis of phase 3 randomized clinical trials, a recurrence rate less than 0.5% occurred after 6 years from surgery, supporting a practical definition of cure. Recognizing this milestone may improve patient communication, guide follow-up duration, and reduce unnecessary long-term surveillance.

PURPOSE Older patients with ALL receiving conventional chemotherapy have poor survival due to toxic death and relapse. We hypothesized that a chemotherapy-free, targeted regimen using the anti-CD22 antibody-calicheamicin conjugate inotuzumab ozogamicin followed by the bispecific anti-CD19/CD3 T-cell engager blinatumomab would reduce toxic death and yield high rates of prolonged remission and survival. METHODS Eligible patients were age 60 years and older with untreated, Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)–negative, CD22-positive, B-cell ALL. Patients received up to two cycles of inotuzumab ozogamicin followed by four or five cycles of blinatumomab with intrathecal methotrexate CNS prophylaxis. The primary end point was 1-year event-free survival (EFS). RESULTS The 33 eligible patients had a median age of 71 years (range, 60-84) and a median CD22 expression of 92% (range, 21%-100%). Eight (24%) had previous chemotherapy or radiation for other cancers, six for multiple myeloma. The composite complete remission rate was 85% after two cycles of inotuzumab ozogamicin and 97% by the end of two cycles of blinatumomab. At a median follow-up of 30 months, the 1-year EFS and overall survival were 75% (95% CI, 61 to 92) and 85% (95% CI, 73 to 98), respectively. EFS was shorter with lower CD22 expression or detectable measurable residual disease at any time point. CONCLUSION Inotuzumab ozogamicin then blinatumomab without maintenance chemotherapy in older patients with untreated, Ph-negative, CD22-positive, B-cell ALL yields a high remission rate and excellent EFS. Given the lack of standard, safe, and effective therapies in this population, the regimen should be considered a standard treatment option.

Of the thousands of genes and substrates identified in KRAS-mutant signaling networks in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), more than 200 are transcription factors, implying extensive and complex transcriptional regulation. However, we observed that genetic suppression of the transcription factor MYC alone was sufficient to phenocopy the effect of KRAS suppression in signaling, growth, and metabolic processes in PDAC cells. We determined the gene transcription changes caused by acute suppression of MYC function in KRAS -mutant PDAC cell lines and performed dependency map and pathway analyses on the affected gene sets. The expression of 1685 genes was increased upon suppression of MYC, and this gene set may comprise the bulk of the MYC-regulated genes essential for PDAC growth. In contrast, the 1325 genes whose expression was inhibited may comprise a compensatory response to oncogenic stress, mediated in part by the GTPase RHO. MYC-dependent transcriptional activity was largely ERK dependent, and almost one-third of ERK-regulated genes were also regulated by MYC in PDAC cells. Furthermore, chemical proteomic profiling revealed MYC-regulated protein kinases that can be targeted therapeutically. Together, these data provide a molecular portrait of MYC-dependent signaling that encompasses potentially exploitable mechanisms for treating PDAC.