Citations

Introduction: Over the past decade, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a therapeutic option for treating severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients. Patients with liver cirrhosis are at high risk for operative morbidity and mortality when they undergo cardiac surgery. In the present study, in-hospital outcomes are compared in cirrhotic patients undergoing TAVR vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR). Methods: The study population was derived from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2011 and 2012 using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) procedure codes 35.21 and 35.22 for SAVR, and 35.05 and 35.06 for TAVR. Patients<50 years of age and those with concomitantly other valvular procedures were excluded. ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes were used to identify patients with liver cirrhosis including those with other manifestations of cirrhosis such as portal hypertension and esophageal varices. Using propensity score matching, two matched cohorts were derived in which the outcomes were compared using chi-square test, fisher’s exact test, and student’s t-test. Results: There were 30 cirrhotic patients in the SAVR and TAVR group each after propensity score matching. Compared to the TAVR group, the patients in the SAVR group had higher mean cost of hospitalization ($79,263 vs. $63,913, p=0.12), mean post-procedural length of stay (14.3 days vs. 6.2 days, p<0.01), any complications rate (80.0% vs. 60.0%, p=0.09), rate of transfusion of blood or blood products (56.7% vs. 30.0%, p=0.037) and liver complications rate (20.0% vs. 10.0%, p=0.4). The in-hospital mortality rate was same in both the groups (6.7%). Conclusions: In high-risk cirrhotic patients, TAVR is a viable option for aortic valve replacement compared to SAVR.

Abstract Background: More than two thirds of patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) have estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) tumors. In most countries, current standard-of-care first-line treatments include an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant, a selective ER degrader, combined with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. Concurrent use of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists is recommended for men and premenopausal women with ABC. Nevertheless, almost all ABCs eventually become resistant to endocrine therapy and the disease is incurable in these cases. New therapies are needed to combat endocrine therapy resistance, maintain patient health-related quality-of-life, and delay the need for chemotherapy. AZD9833 (camizestrant) is a highly potent, next-generation selective ER degrader and pure ER antagonist that has demonstrated anticancer properties across a range of preclinical models, including those with ER-activating mutations (Scott et al, AACR 2020). A Phase I dose-escalation and expansion study (SERENA-1) has demonstrated that AZD9833 is well tolerated and has a promising antitumor activity when administered alone or in combination with the cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib (Baird et al, SABCS 2020). SERENA-4 (NCT04711252) is a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, Phase III trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AZD9833 in combination with palbociclib for patients with ER+/HER2− ABC who have not received systemic treatment in the advanced disease setting. Methods: SERENA-4 will enroll 1342 patients with de novo or recurrent ER+/HER2− ABC who have not previously received systemic treatment for their locoregionally recurrent or metastatic disease. Patients with recurrent disease must have received adjuvant aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen therapy for at least 24 months without relapse. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive oral treatment with either (a) AZD9833 75 mg once daily, palbociclib 125 mg once daily for 21 days followed by 7 days off treatment and a placebo for anastrozole 1 mg once daily or (b) anastrozole 1 mg once daily, palbociclib (same as active arm) and a placebo for AZD9833 75 mg once daily. Men and premenopausal women will also receive a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS; up to 5 years). Secondary endpoints include overall survival (up to 8 years), second PFS, time to chemotherapy, objective response rate, and changes in health-related quality-of-life measures. Enrollment began in January 2021. As of 02 July 2021, the number of open sites is 57 across 15 countries. Acknowledgments: We thank Julia Mawer, PhD, of Oxford PharmaGenesis, Oxford, UK, for providing medical writing support funded by AstraZeneca Funding: The SERENA-4 trial is funded and overseen by AstraZeneca. © 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. Reused with permission. This abstract was accepted and previously presented at the 2021 ASCO Annual Meeting. All rights reserved. Citation Format: Fabrice André, Seock-Ah Im, Patrick Neven, Richard D Baird, Johannes Ettl, Matthew P Goetz, Erika Hamilton, Hiroji Iwata, Zefei Jiang, Anil Abraham Joy, Vincent Haddad, Andrew Walding, Manuel Selvi Miralles, Cynthia Huang Bartlett, Antonio Llombart-Cussac. SERENA-4: A Phase III comparison of AZD9833 (camizestrant) plus palbociclib, versus anastrozole plus palbociclib, for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who have not previously received systemic treatment for advanced disease [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-11-06.

Abstract Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell malignancy that is characterized by diverse clinical presentations. Although biochemical assessment of disease activity is commonly used to monitor treatment response, findings on magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT), among other imaging modalities, have proven to harbor prognostic value. We sought to corroborate these findings by examining the prognostic significance of fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT scanning in the setting of newly diagnosed MM. We retrospectively analyzed 195 patients with a PET/CT available at diagnosis and at 6 months posttreatment to examine their value as an adjuvant metric to conventional hematologic responses in terms of time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS). The median TTNT and OS for the entire cohort were 24.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 20.4-29.1) and 79 months (95% CI, 63.1-119.1), respectively. When comparing PET/CT negative (−) with PET/CT positive (+) patients, we found significantly prolonged median TTNT (55.2 vs 17.8 months, P &lt; .0001) and OS (unreached vs 60.8 months, P &lt; .0001) in the former group. We then examined the additive value of PET/CT on the hematologic response achieved at 6 months and found that PET/CT (−) is associated with significantly increased median TTNT and OS for the very good partial response (VGPR) group and the less than VGPR group. Importantly, PET/CT retained prognostic significance after adjusting for multiple other predictive variables. We conclude that a PET/CT (−) at 6 months confers a significant prognostic advantage for patients with newly diagnosed MM and adds significant value to the hematologic response assessment.

Background and objectives Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Methods Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%–74% agreement. Results Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. Conclusion By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia.

Background: Dynamic supination is a well-recognized cause of congenital clubfoot deformity relapse. However, there is no consensus on how to diagnose it and there are varied approaches in its management. This study aims to define dynamic supination and indications for treatment by presenting consensus from an international panel of experts using a modified Delphi panel approach. Methods: An international panel of 15 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons with clinical and research expertise in childhood foot disorders participated in a modified Delphi panel on dynamic supination in congenital clubfoot. Panelists voted on 51 statements using a 4-point Likert scale on dynamic supination, clinical indications for treatment, operative techniques, and postoperative casting and bracing. All panelists participated in 2 voting rounds with an interim meeting for discussion. Responses were classified as unanimous consensus (100%), consensus (80% or above), near-consensus (70% to 79%), and indeterminate (69% or less). Results: Consensus was achieved for 34 of 51 statements. Panelists agreed dynamic supination is present when the forefoot is supinated during swing phase of gait with initial contact on the lateral border of the foot. There was also agreement that dynamic supination results from muscle imbalance between the tibialis anterior and the peroneus longus and brevis. There was no consensus on observation of hindfoot varus in dynamic supination, operative indications for posterior release of the ankle joint, or incisional approach for tibialis anterior tendon transfer. Reference to the calcaneopedal unit concept, planes of movement, and phases of gait were deemed important factors for consideration when evaluating dynamic supination. Conclusions: Consensus statements from the Delphi panel can guide diagnosis and treatment of dynamic supination in clubfoot deformity relapse, including clinical decision making regarding preoperative casting, surgical approach, and postoperative immobilization. Near-consensus and indeterminate statements may be used to direct future areas of investigation. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Clinical success with intravenous (IV) oncolytic virotherapy (OV) has to date been anecdotal. Here, we conducted a phase 1 clinical trial of systemic OV therapy and investigated the mechanisms of action in responding T-cell lymphoma (TCL) patients. A single IV dose of VSV-IFNβ-NIS was administered to patients with relapsed refractory hematologic malignancies to determine safety and efficacy across 4 dose levels (DL). Correlative studies were undertaken to evaluate viremia, virus shedding, virus replication and immune responses. Fifteen patients received VSV-IFNβ-NIS (7 multiple myeloma, 7 TCL, 1 acute myeloid leukemia); 3 patients were treated at each DL1 through DL3 (0.05, 0.17, and 0.5 x 1011 TCID50), and 6 at DL4 (1.7 x 1011 TCID50). There were no dose limiting toxicities. 3 of 7 patients with TCL had RECIST responses: a 3-month PR at DL2, a 6-month PR and a durable CR ongoing at 20 months at DL4. Viremia peaked at the end of infusion and no infectious virus shedding was detected. Plasma interferon-β levels, a biomarker of VSV-IFNβ-NIS replication, peaked between 4h and 48h post infusion. The patient with CR had robust viral replication with increased ell free DNA in her plasma, a very high peak IFNβ level of 18,213 pg/ml, a strong anti-VSV neutralizing antibody response, and increased numbers of tumor reactive T-cells. VSV-IFNβ-NIS as a single agent was effective in patients with TCL resulting in durable disease remissions in heavily pretreated patients. Correlative analyses suggest that responses may be due to a combination of direct oncolytic tumor destruction and immune-mediated tumor control. Further clinical testing is warranted. (This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03017820).

518 Background: Cisplatin (C) based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been the mainstay treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). However, the optimal choice of NAC is not well-established. We therefore conducted a network-meta-analysis (NMA) to assess comparative efficacy of different treatment options. Methods: Several electronic databases (MEDLINE, and EMBASE) and conference proceedings were systematically used to identify randomized trials evaluating first-line treatments in neoadjuvant MIBC. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and pathologic complete response (pCR). DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis was used to compute direct comparisons between NAC and local therapy (LT) only. Fixed effect NMA was conducted within the frequentist framework for mixed treatment comparisons. P-scores were used to assess relative treatment rankings. All statistical analyses were conducted in R (v 4.1.1). Results: This systematic review included 23 trials (25 references) with a total of 5313 patients with 10 unique treatments. Direct comparisons showed significant benefit in PFS (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.71-0.94), and in OS (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.78-0.92) with NAC when compared to LT only. However, the likelihood of achieving an objective response (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.72-1.95: I2: 85%) or CR (RR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.87-2.61; I2: 79%) was not different between the two arms. Data available in 15 trials contributed to the network for PFS outcome while only eight trials contributed to OS outcome. Mixed treatment comparisons showed significantly improved PFS with nintedanib-gemcitabine-cisplatin (NinGC; HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.20-0.87) and dose-dense-methotrexate-vinblastine-doxorubicin-cisplatin (ddMVAC; HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.43-0.88) compared to LT only. Consistent benefit was observed when NinGC (HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.24-0.97) and ddMVAC (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.96) were compared to GC only. However, no significant differences were observed between NinGC (rank 1) and ddMVAC (rank 2) or among other mixed treatment comparisons. Similarly, OS was significantly improved with NinGC (rank 1) relative to MVAC (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.17-0.97), MVC (HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.88), MC (HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.16-0.92), AC (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15-0.91), and GC (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.17-0.90). While similar results were observed with ddMVAC (rank 2) when compared to MVC (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.42-0.94), MC (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.42-0.98), and GC (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.92), no significant differences were observed with ddMVAC when compared to MVAC (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.38-1.01) and NinGC (HR: 1.70; 95% CI: 0.69-4.19). Conclusions: Current evidence shows improved PFS and OS with the use of neoadjuvant ddMVAC and Nin-GC in patients with MIBC relative to other treatment options.

360 Background: Pembrolizumab has been established as an effective treatment option in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma after the publication of KEYNOTE-564. However, the magnitude of benefit based on different risk categories is not well defined. Methods: We included full-text publications of phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma after a systematic search. The outcomes of interest included disease free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), all grade or grade ≥3 treatment related, and all cause adverse events. Mixed treatment comparisons were computed through a fixed-effect multivariate meta-regression within the frequent framework. Relative treatment rankings were assessed using P-scores. We used stratified baseline risks of disease progression from observational data and at 5, 10, 15 years from the Leibovich risk stratification system (based on risk scores ranging from 0 to ≥15). Corresponding intervention risks (CIRs) were then approximated using relative effect estimates (from NMA) and baseline risks. The difference between CIRs and baseline risks were calculated to present absolute risk differences in each baseline category. Results: This NMA included six RCTs with a total of 7525 participants and five unique treatment options. Mixed treatment comparisons showed significant DFS and OS benefit with pembrolizumab (rank 1) when compared against sunitinib (DFS HR 0.74 [0.55-0.99]; OS HR 0.51 [0.27-0.94]). However, there were no significant differences with pembrolizumab compared to pazopanib (DFS HR 0.81 [0.60- 1.09]; OS HR 0.54[0.29-1.01]) and axitinib (DFS HR 0.78 [0.54-1.14]; OS HR 0.52 [0.24-1.16]). The safety profiles were comparable. Absolute benefit of TKIs in adjuvant setting was minimal whereas this benefit increased with higher T and N patients in patients treated with pembrolizumab (Table). Similarly, the treatment benefit increased with higher Leibovich’s risk scores at 5, 10 and 15 years of follow up. Conclusions: The current analysis suggests that a risk adapted approach may be useful when considering adjuvant pembrolizumab in RCC patients.[Table: see text]

AbstractThe multicenter, phase Ib CC‐122‐DLBCL‐001 dose‐expansion study (NCT02031419) explored the cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent avadomide (CC‐122) plus rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients received avadomide 3 mg/day 5 days on/2 days off plus rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 8 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6, and day 1 of every third subsequent cycle for 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability; preliminary efficacy was a secondary endpoint. A total of 68 patients were enrolled (DLBCL [n = 27], FL [n = 41; 31 lenalidomide‐naïve, 10 lenalidomide‐treated]). Median age was 62 years (range, 33–84 years), and patients had received a median of 3 (range, 1–8) prior regimens. Among patients with DLBCL, 66.7% had primary refractory disease (partial response or less to initial therapy). Among patients with FL, 65.9% were rituximab‐refractory at study entry and 10.0% were lenalidomide‐refractory. The most common any‐grade avadomide‐related adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (63.2%), infections/infestations (23.5%), fatigue (22.1%), and diarrhea (19.1%). The most common grade 3/4 avadomide‐related AEs were neutropenia (55.9%) infections/infestations (8.8%), and febrile neutropenia (7.4%). In patients with DLBCL, overall response rate (ORR) was 40.7% and median duration of response (mDOR) was 8.0 months. In patients with FL, ORR was 80.5% and mDOR was 27.6 months; response rates were similar in lenalidomide‐naïve and ‐treated patients. Avadomide plus rituximab was well tolerated, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed in patients with R/R DLBCL and FL, including subgroups with typically poor outcomes. These results support further investigation of novel CELMoD agents in combination with rituximab in R/R DLBCL and FL.