Citations

AbstractNonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a valuable class of medications for orthopedic surgeons and often play a pivotal role in pain control. However, there are many common stipulations resulting in avoidance of its use in the treatment of musculoskeletal disease. This review summarizes the mechanism of action of NSAIDs as well as provides an overview of commonly used NSAIDs and the differences between them. It provides a concise summary on the osseous effects of NSAIDs with regard to bone healing and heterotopic ossification. Most of all, it serves as a guide or reference for orthopedic providers when counseling patients on the risks and benefits of NSAID use, as it addresses the common stipulations encountered: “It irritates my stomach,” “I have a history of bariatric surgery,” “I'm already on a blood thinner,” “I've had a heart attack,” and “I've got kidney problems” and synthesizes both current research and society recommendations regarding safe use and avoidance of NSAIDs.

PURPOSE Patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BRPC) after radical prostatectomy and a short PSA doubling time are at risk for distant metastases. Apalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist, and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) prolong survival in the metastatic setting. We evaluated whether intensification of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves outcomes in BRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS PRESTO is a randomized phase III, open-label trial in patients with BRPC and PSA doubling time ≤9 months (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03009981 ). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive a finite 52-week treatment course with ADT control, ADT + apalutamide, or ADT + apalutamide + AAP. The primary end point was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), defined as serum PSA >0.2 ng/mL after treatment completion. RESULTS Five hundred three patients were enrolled. The median PSA was 1.8 ng/mL (IQR, 1.0-3.6). At the first planned interim analysis, both experimental arms significantly prolonged PSA-PFS compared with the control arm (median, 24.9 months for ADT + apalutamide v 20.3 months for ADT; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.77]; P = .00047; median, 26.0 months for ADT + apalutamide + AAP v 20.0 months for ADT; HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.71]; P = .00008). Median time to testosterone recovery did not differ across treatment arms. The most common grade ≥3 adverse event was hypertension (7.5%, 7.4%, and 18% in ADT, ADT + apalutamide, and ADT + apalutamide + AAP arms, respectively). CONCLUSION Intensified AR blockade for a finite duration prolongs PSA-PFS with a manageable safety profile, without adversely affecting time to testosterone recovery. The addition of apalutamide to ADT should be considered in patients with high-risk BRPC.

TPS602 Background: Poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) is an aggressive malignancy comprising both pulmonary and extrapulmonary primary sites. NEC includes both small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC), as well as other neuroendocrine carcinomas arising from any primary organ. A substantial portion (~40%) of NEC arises from gastrointestinal primary sites. The optimal systemic therapy beyond first line platinum and etoposide is not established. There is a critical need to improve upon the median survival in the second line, as most patients do not survive more than 6 months. The efficacy of dual immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICIs) therapy in NEC shows some promise, but most tumors do not respond. One possible explanation for this is that the tumor microenvironment in NEC is non-inflamed. VSV-IFNβ-NIS is a vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV)-based oncolytic virus being tested in multiple early phase clinical trials. Preliminary studies of immune responses in patients receiving VSV-IFNβ-NIS therapy suggest some patients develop T cell responses to viral antigens and known tumor antigens. We hypothesize that VSV-IFNβ-NIS therapy may convert a non-inflamed or immune-excluded phenotype in NEC to a highly inflamed phenotype that sensitizes the tumor to ICIs. Methods: This is a phase 1-2 safety run-in study designed to determine the safety and efficacy of VSV-IFNβ-NIS in combination with dual ICI therapy, ipilimumab and nivolumab, followed by dose expansion in patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or NEC. After a safety run-in, we will be testing the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of VSV-IFNβ-NIS in an expansion cohort of patients with SCLC or NEC of any primary site. Patients must have previously progressed on at least one line of systemic therapy. Prior treatment with checkpoint inhibitors is permitted. Patients are treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab on day 1, followed by one RP2D of 1.0x10^11 TCID50 VSV-IFNβ-NIS on day 4, followed by nivolumab every 3 weeks and ipilimumab every 6 weeks until progression, up to 2 years. The primary objective is to estimate the response rate by RECIST 1.1. Secondary objectives include estimation of disease-control rate, duration or response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety signals. The NEC expansion cohort will seek to enroll 10 patients. If at least one objective response is observed, and safety is confirmed, the regimen will be considered for future study. Clinical trial information: NCT03647163 .

748 Background: Ripretinib is a switch-control tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for patients (pts) with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) who received prior treatment with 3 or more kinase inhibitors, including imatinib. Sunitinib is approved for advanced GIST after imatinib failure. In the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS) from the phase 3 INTRIGUE study, the OS event rate was 41% in the all-patient (AP) intent-to-treat (ITT) population, and OS was similar between treatment arms in both the KIT exon 11 ITT and AP ITT populations. Here, we present the final OS and updated safety from INTRIGUE. Methods: INTRIGUE (NCT03673501) is an open-label, phase 3 study of adults with advanced GIST who had disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib. Randomization was 1:1 to ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) or sunitinib 50 mg QD (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) and was stratified by KIT mutational status and imatinib intolerance. OS was a key secondary endpoint (the primary endpoint of progression-free survival was reported previously); final OS analysis was prespecified to occur with ≥200 and ≥145 events in the AP ITT and KIT exon 11 ITT populations, respectively. Data cutoff was March 15, 2023. Results: Of 453 pts, 444 received treatment; 40 remain on treatment (ripretinib, 28/223 [13%]; sunitinib, 12/221 [5%]). Treatment discontinuation was due to progressive disease (PD) by independent radiologic review (56%), PD by investigator (11%), clinical PD (6%), withdrawal of consent (6%), and adverse events (AEs; 5%). Fewer pts discontinued treatment due to AEs with ripretinib vs sunitinib (3% vs 6%). There were 211 OS events (47%) in the AP ITT population and 151 OS events (46%) in the KIT exon 11 ITT population. OS was similar with ripretinib vs sunitinib in the 2 ITT populations (Table). Fewer pts had grade 3/4 treatment-emergent AEs with ripretinib vs sunitinib (43% vs 67%). Dose interruptions and reductions were lower with ripretinib vs sunitinib. Median treatment duration for ripretinib vs sunitinib was 7.9 vs 6.5 months. Conclusions: In the finalOS analysis from the INTRIGUE study, OS was similar between treatment arms. The safety profile remained consistent and more favorable for ripretinib vs sunitinib in pts with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib. Clinical trial information: NCT03673501 . [Table: see text]

100 Background: HER2 is overexpressed in various GI tumors. Tucatinib (TUC), which is approved in combination with trastuzumab (Tras) in the US for previously treated RAS WT HER2+ metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor highly selective for HER2. Preliminary safety and antitumor activity results of TUC + trastuzumab + FOLFOX in patients (pts) with HER2+ GI cancers are presented. Methods: The phase 1b/2 SGNTUC-024 (NCT04430738) study evaluated TUC + Tras + FOLFOX in pts with HER2+ metastatic GI cancers in Cohorts 1A, 1B, 1D (pts in Japan), and 2B. For Cohorts 1A, 1B, and 1D (enrolled sequentially), eligible pts had unresectable or metastatic HER2+ GI malignancies, including mCRC. Cohort 2B is still enrolling, and pts with HER2+ mCRC are eligible. Pts received a combination of TUC 150 mg orally twice a day (PO BID; Cohort 1A) or TUC 300 mg PO BID (Cohorts 1B, 1D, and 2B) + Tras + FOLFOX. Pts in Cohort 2B were enrolled to further assess the study regimen. Antidiarrheal prophylaxis was required for Cohort 1D. Results: As of July 10, 2023, 25 pts were treated (5, 11, 7, and 2 in Cohorts 1A, 1B, 1D, and 2B, respectively). In Cohort 1A (TUC 150 mg PO BID), the most common TEAEs were diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, and proteinuria (each in 60.0% [3/5]). For pts receiving TUC 300 mg PO BID, the most common TEAEs were diarrhea (90.0% [18/20]) and fatigue (65.0% [13/20]). Table 1 presents the overall summary of adverse events. In Cohort 1A, Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to any treatment discontinuation were reported in 40.0% (2/5) pts, with 20.0% (1/5) discontinuing tucatinib. For pts treated with TUC 300 mg, TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were reported in 35.0% (7/20), with 15.0% (3/20) discontinuing tucatinib. One TEAE leading to death (aspiration) in Cohort 1A was unrelated to study treatment. Grade ≥3 diarrhea was observed in 45.5% (5/11) pts in Cohort 1B; most were observed in elderly pts or pts with gastric, gastroesophageal, or esophageal cancer or pts who were generally noncompliant with antidiarrheal treatment. No grade ≥3 diarrhea was observed in Cohort 1D. Among pts receiving TUC 300 mg, confirmed objective response rate was 83.3% (5/6) for mCRC, 40.0% (4/10) for gastroesophageal cancers, and 0% (0/4) for biliary tract cancer. Conclusions: TUC + Tras + FOLFOX showed manageable safety in the enrolled pt population and preliminary antitumor activity in pts with HER2+ mCRC and gastroesophageal cancer. This regimen will be compared with the standard of care (FOLFOX with or without bevacizumab/cetuximab) in the ongoing randomized, phase 3 study (MOUNTAINEER-03; NCT05253651) for pts with HER2+ RAS WT mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT04430738 . [Table: see text]

OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance on the reporting of norepinephrine formulation labeling, reporting in publications, and use in clinical practice. DESIGN: Review and task force position statements with necessary guidance. SETTING: A series of group conference calls were conducted from August 2023 to October 2023, along with a review of the available evidence and scope of the problem. SUBJECTS: A task force of multinational and multidisciplinary critical care experts assembled by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. INTERVENTIONS: The implications of a variation in norepinephrine labeled as conjugated salt (i.e., bitartrate or tartrate) or base drug in terms of effective concentration of norepinephrine were examined, and guidance was provided. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were significant implications for clinical care, dose calculations for enrollment in clinical trials, and results of datasets reporting maximal norepinephrine equivalents. These differences were especially important in the setting of collaborative efforts across countries with reported differences. CONCLUSIONS: A joint task force position statement was created outlining the scope of norepinephrine-dose formulation variations, and implications for research, patient safety, and clinical care. The task force advocated for a uniform norepinephrine-base formulation for global use, and offered advice aimed at appropriate stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: Management of hepatic encephalopathy relies on self-titration of lactulose. In this feasibility trial, we assess an artificial intelligence–enabled tool to guide lactulose use through a smartphone application. METHODS: Subjects with hepatic encephalopathy on lactulose captured bowel movement pictures during lead-in and intervention phases. During the intervention phase, daily feedback on lactulose titration was delivered through the application. Goals were determined according to number of bowel movement and Bristol Stool Scale reports. RESULTS: Subjects completed the study with more than 80% satisfaction. In the lead-in phase, less compliant subjects achieved Bristol Stool Scale goal on 62/111 (56%) of days compared with 107/136 (79%) in the intervention phase ( P = 0.041), while the most compliant subjects showed no difference. Severe/recurrent hepatic encephalopathy group achieved Bristol Stool Scale goal on 80/104 (77%) days in the lead-in phase and 90/110 (82%) days in the intervention phase ( P = NS), compared with 89/143 (62%) days and 86/127 (68%) days in the stable group. DISCUSSION: Dieta application is a promising tool for objective Bowel Movement/Bristol Stool Scale tracking for hepatic encephalopathy and may potentially be used to assist with lactulose titration.

Abstract Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated remarkable response rates in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Still, most patients eventually progress. Patterns of progression after ICIs are not well described and are essential to defining the role of local therapies in combination with ICIs. We identified patients who received ICIs for HL between 2013 and 2022. Fludeoxyglucose-18 positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) before initiating ICI and at progression on/after ICI were reviewed, and areas of active HL were recorded. An exploratory analysis of treatable progression included patients with ≤5 sites of disease on pre-ICI FDG-PET and progression only at pre-ICI sites. Ninety patients were identified; 69 had complete records, and of these, 32 (52%) had relapsed at ICI initiation, 17 (25%) were refractory, and 16 (23%) received ICI as first-line therapy. Forty-five of 69 patients had ≤5 sites of disease (limited) on pre-ICI FDG-PET. Patients with >5 sites of disease had a higher risk of progression, and every site of disease >5 sites conferred an additional 1.2x higher chance of progression. At a median follow-up of 4.0 years, 41 of 69 patients had progressed on/after ICIs (cumulative incidence 66.4%), and of these, 22 of 41 patients progressed only at pre-ICI sites (cumulative incidence 39.4%). In an exploratory analysis, the cumulative incidence of a treatable progression among 45 patients with limited disease was 34%. The cumulative incidence of any progression among this cohort was 58.9%. More than one-third of patients with limited disease before ICIs experienced progression only at pre-ICI sites of disease. These patients could be candidates for radiation during or after ICIs.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) resulted in a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) that persisted beyond the 2-year treatment period in patients with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC). Here, we report 5-year efficacy results from a prespecified overall survival (OS) interim analysis. In the intent-to-treat population, with a median follow-up of 54 months, the benefit of abemaciclib was sustained with hazard ratios of 0.680 (95% CI, 0.599 to 0.772) for IDFS and 0.675 (95% CI, 0.588 to 0.774) for DRFS. This persistence of abemaciclib benefit translated to continuous separation of the curves with a deepening in 5-year absolute improvement in IDFS and DRFS rates of 7.6% and 6.7%, respectively, compared with rates of 6% and 5.3% at 4 years and 4.8% and 4.1% at 3 years. With fewer deaths in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared with the ET-alone arm (208 v 234), statistical significance was not reached for OS. No new safety signals were observed. In conclusion, abemaciclib plus ET continued to reduce the risk of developing invasive and distant disease recurrence beyond the completion of treatment. The increasing absolute improvement at 5 years is consistent with a carryover effect and further supports the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk EBC.