Citations

Abstract Background Glioblastoma (GBM) remains a devastating cancer with limited treatment options, largely due to its heterogeneity. While supramaximal resection has recently provided survival benefits, therapeutic profiling of different tumor compartments, particularly its infiltrative edge remains largely unexplored. Methods Here, we leveraged magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided multi-sampling, collecting 2 cores and 2 margins per case, to query GBM heterogeneity. Whole-exome and RNA-seq with drug testing in two patient-derived 3D models were used to reveal similarities and differences in genomic and transcriptomic makeups, cellular compositions, and drug responses across cores and margins. Bioinformatics interrogations further identified response biomarkers. Results Mutation analysis showed that oncogenes exhibited a higher degree of spatial heterogeneity than tumor suppressor genes, regardless of MRI status. While the mesenchymal transcriptional subtype with extracellular matrix remodeling, stress response, and immune programs were preferentially enriched in enhancing cores, proneural tumors with neurological processes favored non-enhancing margins. Using a 15-drug GBM-targeted panel, ERK (ulixertinib) and PI3K pathway (paxalisib, CC-115) inhibitors showed preferential efficacy in enhancing cores and non-enhancing margins, respectively. The anti-apoptosis, pan-Bcl2 agent navitoclax and the epigenetic drug trotabresib represented the most effective, tumor-wide monotherapies. Importantly, drug combinations generally outperformed single agents across all regions. Conclusions This work demonstrates the regional heterogeneity of therapeutic vulnerabilities in GBM ex vivo, showing various drugs with tumor-wide or MRI-enhancement informed activity. These findings offer preclinical bases of numerous monotherapies and drug combinations for future clinical trial design.

Abstract Newer approaches to control alloreactivity may produce similar transplant outcomes using HLA-mismatched donors vs HLA-matched unrelated donors (MUD). However, prospective comparisons are lacking. BMT CTN 1702 used a donor search prognosis score to assign patients to an 8/8 HLA MUD or the center’s preference of haploidentical related donors (HAPLO), mismatched unrelated donors (MMUD), or umbilical cord blood (UCB). Outcomes of MUD were compared to HAPLO, MMUD, and UCB transplantation after adjusting for covariates. Patients (n = 1179 [93% adults]) underwent transplantation with MUD (n = 772), HAPLO (n = 254), MMUD (n = 112), and UCB (n = 41) at a median of 3.7, 3.4, 3.9, and 3.8 months from enrollment. Posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) was used in 23.9%, 83.9%, 65.2%, and 0% of MUD, HAPLO, MMUD, and UCB. In multivariate analyses, compared to MUD, survival was lower for UCB (hazard ratio [HR], 2.65; P< .001) but not statistically different for HAPLO and MMUD (HRs, 1.08 and 1.18, respectively). Relapse risk was not significantly different by donor, but treatment-related mortality (HR, 3.31; P< .001) and disease-free survival (HR, 1.99; P = .002) were inferior for UCB but not different for HAPLO and MMUD than MUD. In patients who received PTCy, HAPLO and MMUD were associated with increased grade 3 or 4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD; HR, 2.39 [P = .017] and 2.53 [P = .038], respectively) and chronic GVHD (HR, 1.71 for both; P = .028 and .080) than MUD, but other outcomes were not different. HAPLO or MMUD may be used to expedite transplantation when finding MUD is unlikely. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03904134.

Rural populations are underrepresented in cognitive impairment research and have limited resources for education about brain and cognitive health, Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, or caregiving. As our Outreach, Recruitment, and Engagement team aimed to expand activities into more rural communities, we also wanted to better understand the characteristics of the communities surrounding our center and gain insight into the social exposome of the areas. The goal of the manuscript is to reflect on our experience and share measures that were useful in this effort, which can be further enriched and adjusted by other outreach teams.

Background. Pancreas transplantation (PT), historically limited to patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), is currently performed successfully in selected patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, contemporary practice patterns and eligibility criteria for PT in T2D remain incompletely characterized. Methods. The International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association Pancreas Transplant Interest Group developed an electronic survey to assess center-level approaches to patient phenotyping, candidacy, and peri- and posttransplant management for PT in patients with T2D. The survey was distributed to international transplant professionals during an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association Pre-Congress meeting on June 15, 2025. Results. Thirty-seven participants completed the survey. Most respondents’ programs offer PT for T2D only when a kidney transplant is also indicated. Fewer respondents’ programs also offer PT alone (10%), evaluate T2D candidates on a case-by-case basis (3%), or do not offer PT to patients with T2D (10%). Total daily insulin requirement and body mass index (BMI) were the most selected factors in determining eligibility. Considerable variability existed in metabolic thresholds: 62% of programs reported no C-peptide cutoff, whereas nearly half required a BMI of <30 kg/m 2 for C-peptide-positive candidates. Respondents frequently recommend weight-optimization strategies, including lifestyle modification, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and bariatric surgery for candidates exceeding acceptable BMI thresholds. Surgical technique, induction, and maintenance immunosuppression and early posttransplant glycemic management were largely uniform between T2D and T1D recipients. Conclusions. International practice reflects broad but heterogeneous adoption of PT for T2D, with most participants restricting its use to candidates requiring kidney transplantation and emphasizing integrated clinical phenotyping approaches.

Abstract Antidepressants are widely prescribed for major depressive disorder, yet only one-third of patients achieve remission after initial treatment. Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of clinically assessed antidepressant response combined multiple antidepressant classes, potentially obscuring class-specific effects. This study focused on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), often first-line due to better tolerability. Data from 15 cohorts across four ancestries were integrated: European (N = 3887; 11 studies), East Asian (N = 1068; 4), African (N = 277; 1), and Admixed American (N = 250; 1). GWAS of non-remission and percentage improvement were conducted within cohorts, followed by ancestry-specific meta-analyses and trans-ancestry meta-regression. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based heritability was estimated in European samples. Polygenic scores were used for leave-one-out prediction and to assess shared genetic architecture with psychiatric traits. Gene-level and gene-set enrichment analyses were also performed. No genome-wide significant variants were identified for either outcome in any ancestry-specific or trans-ancestry analyses. However, trans-ancestry meta-regression yielded eight independent loci with suggestive associations (p < 1 × 10 −5 ) for non-remission and 17 for percentage improvement. Gene-set analyses revealed nominal enrichment of the serotonergic synapse pathway for non-remission. SNP-based heritability estimates were not significantly different from zero for either outcome. Better SSRI response was nominally associated with lower genetic predisposition to major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and schizophrenia. This study represents the largest trans-ancestry GWAS of SSRI response, highlighting emerging biological signals. Limited power emphasises the need for larger and ancestrally diverse cohorts to better characterise the genetic architecture of antidepressant response.

Abstract Objective This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of responsive thalamic stimulation as adjunctive therapy for drug‐resistant idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) with generalized tonic–clonic seizures (GTCSs). Methods NAUTILUS is a prospective, multicenter, single‐blind, randomized sham‐controlled pivotal trial. Patients were ≥12 years of age with drug‐resistant IGE and ≥2 GTCSs over a 3‐month baseline. Bilateral depth leads were targeted to the centromedian thalamus. One month later, patients were randomized to Active (responsive stimulation, n = 44) or Sham (no stimulation, n = 43). The effectiveness evaluation period (EEP) began 3 months postimplant through 1 year. After a second GTCS in the EEP, patients transitioned to open‐label active stimulation. The primary safety endpoint was the serious adverse device‐related event (SADE) rate at 84 days postimplant. The primary effectiveness endpoint was time‐to‐second‐GTCS during the EEP. Additional endpoints included median percent change in days with any generalized seizure, GTCS frequency, and responder rate (RR). Results Eighty‐seven patients were implanted across 23 US centers. The SADE rate was significantly below the performance goal (6.9%, p < .0001), with no adverse effects on cognition, mood, or sleep. The prespecified primary effectiveness endpoint was not significant. However, a post hoc mixed‐effects model considering all EEP days demonstrated greater GTCS reduction in the originally randomized Active group (61%) compared to patients originally randomized to Sham (49%, p = .030). Eighteen‐month outcomes included 76.8% median GTCS reduction, 62.5% RR, 40% GTCS‐free at that timepoint, and 77.8% median reduction in days with any generalized seizure. More than 90% of patients and 86% of physicians reported improvement on Global Impression of Change scales. Significance NAUTILUS is the first randomized controlled neuromodulation trial in IGE. Responsive thalamic stimulation provided a clinically meaningful and durable reduction in seizures with an acceptable safety profile, offering a much‐needed option for drug‐resistant IGE.

LBA5012 Background: There is a critical evidence gap on the relative benefits and harms of proton therapy (PT) compared with photon-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in prostate cancer. Herein we report early results from COMPPARE, a non-randomized comparative study of outcomes with PT and IMRT in prostate cancer. Methods: Between 2018-2022, 2524 patients from 51 facilities (28 PT and 23 IMRT) enrolled in COMPPARE, including 1501 treated with PT and 1023 treated with IMRT, and were followed prospectively. Treatment naïve patients with localized prostate cancer except those with very high-risk disease were eligible. Treatment was pragmatic with daily standard fractionation (1.8-2.1 Gy) and moderate hypofractionation (2.4-3.1 Gy) permitted. Use of rectal spacers and androgen deprivation were at physician discretion. Patient-reported quality of life data and treatment team-reported toxicity and disease control outcomes were collected at baseline and pre-specified time intervals via VisionTreeOptimalCare; treatment planning and delivery data were collected via the Advanced Treatment Consortium. We analyzed 1404 PT patients and 939 IMRT patients. We report the early primary endpoint of the study, a comparison of patient reported bowel urgency and bowel frequency at 2-years using the EPIC tool, and the secondary endpoints of 2-year CTCAE v5 ≥ grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity outcomes and 3-year freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP) results reported by the study teams. Results: Study sample size was targeted at 1,500 PT patients and 1,000 IMRT patients, and median follow-up time was 4.0 years. The primary endpoint and secondary toxicity 2-year endpoints focused on the alternative hypothesis of PT superiority. All results include inverse probability of treatment weighting. Using generalized linear mixed effects models, we found there to be no significant difference in EPIC bowel urgency scores (p = 0.324) or bowel frequency scores (p = 0.514) between PT and IMRT cohorts over time up to the 2-year endpoint. For grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity, the 2-year cumulative incidence was 5.2% for PT and 5.6% for IMRT. Gray’s Test for competing risks showed a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65-1.28, p = 0.6] for PT versus IMRT. The exploratory non-inferiority endpoint of 3-year FFBP was 98.0% for PT and 97.9% for IMRT, and Gray’s Test showed a HR of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.52-1.71, p = 0.90). Conclusions: Analysis of early results of COMPPARE show no significant differences between PT and IMRT in patient reported bowel frequency and urgency, grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity, or FFBP. Assessment of long-term disease control, late toxicity and secondary malignancy will require longer follow-up. Clinical trial information: NCT03561220 .