Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

97 citation(s) found for "Dahiya, G".

Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated with Standard-of-Care Axicabtagene Ciloleucel: Results from the US Lymphoma CAR-T Cell Consortium
Tamaresis, John , Lekakis, Lazaros J. , Oluwole, Olalekan O. , Deol, Abhinav , Sehgal, Alison R. , Hill, Brian T. , Ulrickson, Matthew L. , Rapoport, Aaron P. , Neelapu, Sattva S. , Dahiya, Saurabh , Lunning, Matthew A. , Oluwole, Olalekan O , Spiegel, Jay Y. , Jain, Michael D. , Nastoupil, Loretta J. , Ghobadi, Armin , Lin, Yi , Reagan, Patrick Michael , McGuirk, Joseph P. , Goy, Andre Henri , Andreadis, Charalambos Babis , Muñoz, Javier , Westin, Jason R. , Chavez, Julio C , Jacobs, Miriam T. , Bennani, N. Nora , Vose, Julie M. , Miklos, David B. , Locke, Frederick L.

Blood | November 23, 2021 | Volume: 138 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 3826-3826

10.1182/blood-2021-147488 Get It

Abstract Introduction: Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy that induces durable responses in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma. At a median of 27.1 months follow-up on the ZUMA-1 trial, median overall survival (OS) was 25.8 months with 39% progression free survival (PFS) at 2 years post-infusion (Locke, Lancet Onc 2019). We previously reported outcomes of axi-cel patients treated with standard of care therapy at a median follow up of 12.9 months, including 42% who did not meet eligibility criteria for ZUMA-1 based on co-morbidities (Nastoupil, JCO 2020). Here we report results from this cohort at a median follow up of 32.4 months, as well as late outcomes of interest including cytopenias, infections and secondary malignancies. Methods and Results: The US Lymphoma CAR-T Consortium comprised of 17 US academic centers who contributed data independent of the manufacturer. Two hundred and ninety-eight patients underwent leukapheresis with intent to manufacture standard of care axi-cel as of September 30, 2018. In infused patients (n=275), OS and PFS were calculated from date of infusion. After median follow-up of 32.4 months (95% CI 31.1 - 34.3), median OS was not reached (95% CI 25.6 - not evaluable) (Figure 1A) with 1-, 2- and 3-year OS of 68.5% (95% CI 62.6-73.7), 56.4% (95% CI 50.1-62.2) and 52.2% (95% CI 45.7-58.2%), respectively. Median PFS was 9 months (95% CI 5.9-19.6) (Figure 1B); 1-, 2- and 3-year PFS was 47.4% (95% CI 41.4-53.2), 41.6% (95% CI 35.6-47.5) and 37.3% (95% CI 31.3-43.2), respectively. Twenty-seven PFS events occurred at or after 1 year post infusion;19 events were progressive lymphoma, with the latest relapse observed 28 months after axi-cel infusion. Eight patients died while in remission from their lymphoma: 4 from secondary malignancy, 3 from infection, and 1 from unknown causes. Results of multivariable modeling were similar to our prior analysis: factors associated with both a shorter PFS and shorter OS included male sex, elevated pre-lymphodepletion LDH, and poor ECOG status. Complete blood count and B- and T-cell recovery data were collected at 1 and 2-years post-infusion, excluding patients who had relapsed or been treated for secondary malignancy at time of collection (Table 1). Rates of neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count ≤1000) at 1- and 2- years were 9.2% (10/109) and 11.2% (9/80) and rates of CD4 count ≤200/ul were 62% (23/37) and 27% (7/26). Recovery of B cells was seen in 54% (15/28) and 57% (13/23) at 1-and 2-years post infusion. Infections were reported in 31.2% (34/109) patients between 6- and 12-months post infusion, and 17% (18/109) were severe, requiring either hospitalization and/or IV antibiotics. Twenty-one patients (24%, 21/89) had an infection between 1- and 2- years, 11% of which were severe. Twenty percent (10/49) of patients between 2- and 3-years had an infection and 4 (8%) were severe. Neutropenia, low CD4 counts, and IgG levels were not associated with infection, though patients with infection between 6-12 months were more likely to have received IVIG (p<0.001). No patient in this cohort died of COVID-19. Twenty-two of 275 (8%) patients were diagnosed with subsequent malignancy after axi-cel treatment: 14/275 (5%) patients were diagnosed with myeloid malignancies (MDS (n=12), AML (n=1), CMML (n=1)); other malignancies included squamous cell carcinoma of skin (n=3); sarcoma (n=1); endometrial (n=1); lung (n=1); mesothelioma (n=1) and AITL (n=1). Patients with myeloid malignancy had a median age of 62 at axi-cel apheresis (IQR 56-67), 64% were male and median lines of prior therapy was 4 (IQR 3-6), including 36% with a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Eleven patients were in remission from lymphoma at myeloid malignancy diagnosis, while 3 were diagnosed after progression and interval therapy. Conclusion: This multi-center retrospective study showed similar long-term results to the ZUMA-1 trial, despite including patients who did not meet ZUMA-1 eligibility criteria based on comorbidities. Sixteen percent of PFS events were seen after 1 year, largely due to disease progression. Late infection was common but was not explained by persistent neutropenia or low CD4 counts. Subsequent malignancy, including MDS, occurred in 8% of patients and require further study to better identify patients at risk. J.Y.S and M.D.J contributed equally; S.D and M.L contributed equally. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Jain: BMS, Kite/Gilead, Novartis, Precision Biosciences, Takeda: Consultancy. Nastoupil: Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: DSMC, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Caribou Biosciences: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Denovo Pharma: Other: DSMC; Bayer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ghobadi: Atara: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Wugen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Lin: Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sorrento: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reagan: Seagen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Curis: Consultancy. Oluwole: Curio Science: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. McGuirk: EcoR1 Capital: Consultancy; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite/ Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expense, Kite a Gilead company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astelllas Pharma: Research Funding; Pluristem Therapeutics: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Allovir: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Deol: Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy. Sehgal: Juno/Celgene: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Goy: AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; LLC(Targeted Oncology): Consultancy; Xcenda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Xcenda: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Vincerx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Elsevier's Practice Update Oncology, Intellisphere, LLC(Targeted Oncology): Consultancy; Hoffman la Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie/Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Phamacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Michael J Hennessey Associates INC: Consultancy; Genentech/Hoffman la Roche: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Honoraria, Other; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Vincerx pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Physicians' Education Resource: Consultancy, Other: Meeting/travel support; Incyte: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genomic Testing Cooperative: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Leadership role; Infinity/Verastem: Research Funding; Rosewell Park: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; OncLive Peer Exchange: Honoraria; Elsevier PracticeUpdate: Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; COTA (Cancer Outcome Tracking Analysis): Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Leadership role; Hackensack Meridian Health, Regional Cancer Care Associates/OMI: Current Employment. Hill: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gentenech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte/Morphysis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene (BMS): Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Andreadis: CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding; GenMAB: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; Epizyme: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Atara: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Muñoz: Seagen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Fosunkite: Consultancy; Innovent: Consultancy; Debiopharma: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Acrotech: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Aurobindo: Speakers Bureau; Physicians' Education Resource: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; OncView: Honoraria; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria. Westin: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; 47 Inc: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Umoja: Consultancy; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Chavez: Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Adaptive: Research Funding; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Bennani: Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board. Vose: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding. Miklos: Pharmacyclics: Patents & Royalties; Adaptive Biotechnologies, Novartis, Juno/Celgene-BMS, Kite, a Gilead Company, Pharmacyclics-AbbVie, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, AlloGene, Precision Bioscience, Miltenyi Biotech, Adicet, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite, a Gilead Company, Amgen, Atara, Wugen, Celgene, Novartis, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Bioscience, Adicet, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Takeda, Adaptive Biotechnologies and Miltenyi Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Roche, Genentech, Becton Dickinson, Isoplexis, Miltenyi, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Biosciences, Adicet, Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Neelapu: Takeda Pharmaceuticals and related to cell therapy: Patents & Royalties; Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene Therapeutics, Cell Medica/Kuur, Incyte, Precision Biosciences, Legend Biotech, Adicet Bio, Calibr, Unum Therapeutics and Bluebird Bio: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Poseida, Cellectis, Celgene, Karus Therapeutics, Unum Therapeutics (Cogent Biosciences), Allogene, Precision BioSciences, Acerta and Adicet Bio: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene, Kuur, Incyte, Precision BioSciences, Legend, Adicet Bio, Calibr, and Unum Therapeutics: Other: personal fees. Locke: GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Calibr: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Wugen: Consultancy, Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Umoja: Consultancy, Other; Cowen: Consultancy; EcoR1: Consultancy; Emerging Therapy Solutions: Consultancy; Gerson Lehrman Group: Consultancy; Moffitt Cancer Center: Patents & Royalties: field of cellular immunotherapy; Legend Biotech: Consultancy, Other; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Iovance Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role. Dahiya: Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Atara Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; Miltenyi Biotech: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Lunning: Spectrum: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy.
Sarcomatous Meningioma: Diagnostic Pitfalls and the Utility of Molecular Testing
Lucas, Calixto‐Hope G. , Devine, Patrick, Solomon, David A. , Giannini, Caterina , Reifenberger, Guido , Dahiya, Sonika , Caccamo, Darío V., Solomon, David A , Giannini, Caterina , Dahiya, Sonika , Perry, Arie

Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology | June 15, 2021 | Volume: 80 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 764-768

10.1093/jnen/nlab053 | PMID 34128073 Get It

Abstract Anaplastic meningiomas can have a sarcomatous appearance on histology but true sarcomatous (metaplastic) differentiation is rare. These tumors follow an aggressive clinical course with recurrence and poor clinical outcomes. Due to significant overlap in morphology and immunohistochemical profiles, distinguishing between sarcomatous transformation of a meningioma and a true sarcoma can be challenging. Here, we outline potential diagnostic pitfalls and the utility of ancillary molecular testing in 3 patients diagnosed with sarcomatous meningiomas. We report loss of typical meningothelial markers in sarcomatous meningiomas. Ancillary molecular testing can support the diagnosis of sarcomatous meningioma when a molecular signature consistent with meningioma is seen, such as inactivation of the NF2 gene. Recognition of this rare transformation in meningioma can prevent a misdiagnosis of a primary sarcoma, whether sporadic or radiation-induced from prior treatment of a more classic meningioma.
Optimization of duplex velocity criteria for diagnosis of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis: A report of the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) Vascular Testing Division Carotid Diagnostic Criteria Committee
Gornik, Heather L. , Gardener, Hannah , Benenati, James F., Dahiya, Nirvikar , Kupinski, Ann Marie , Leers, Steven A., Lilly, Michael , Lohr, Joann M. , Pellerito, John S. , Rholl, Kenneth S., Vickery, Melissa A, Hutchisson, Marge, Needleman, Laurence , Rundek, Tatjana , Hamburg, Naomi M.

Vascular Medicine | May 19, 2021 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 515-525

10.1177/1358863x211011253 | PMID 34009060 Get It

Diagnostic criteria to classify severity of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis vary across vascular laboratories. Consensus-based criteria, proposed by the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound in 2003 (SRUCC), have been broadly implemented but have not been adequately validated. We conducted a multicentered, retrospective correlative imaging study of duplex ultrasound versus catheter angiography for evaluation of severity of ICA stenosis. Velocity data were abstracted from bilateral duplex studies performed between 1/1/2009 and 12/31/2015 and studies were interpreted using SRUCC. Percentage ICA stenosis was determined using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) methodology. Receiver operating characteristic analysis evaluated the performance of SRUCC parameters compared with angiography. Of 448 ICA sides (from 224 patients), 299 ICA sides (from 167 patients) were included. Agreement between duplex ultrasound and angiography was moderate (κ = 0.42), with overestimation of degree of stenosis for both moderate (50–69%) and severe (⩾ 70%) ICA lesions. The primary SRUCC parameter for ⩾ 50% ICA stenosis of peak-systolic velocity (PSV) of ⩾ 125 cm/sec did not meet prespecified thresholds for adequate sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (sensitivity 97.8%, specificity 64.2%, accuracy 74.5%). Test performance was improved by raising the PSV threshold to ⩾ 180 cm/sec (sensitivity 93.3%, specificity 81.6%, accuracy 85.2%) or by adding the additional parameter of ICA/common carotid artery (CCA) PSV ratio ⩾ 2.0 (sensitivity 94.3%, specificity 84.3%, accuracy 87.4%). For ⩾ 70% ICA stenosis, analysis was limited by a low number of cases with angiographically severe disease. Interpretation of carotid duplex examinations using SRUCC resulted in significant overestimation of severity of ICA stenosis when compared with angiography; raising the PSV threshold for ⩾ 50% ICA stenosis to ⩾ 180 cm/sec as a single parameter or requiring the ICA/CCA PSV ratio ⩾ 2.0 in addition to PSV of ⩾ 125 cm/sec for laboratories using the SRUCC is recommended to improve the accuracy of carotid duplex examinations.
Diagnostic and procedural intraoperative ultrasound: technique, tips and tricks for optimizing results
Lubner, Meghan G. , Gettle, Lori Mankowski , Dahiya, Nirvikar , Pickhardt, Perry J. , Kim, David H. , Ziemlewicz, Timothy J.

The British Journal of Radiology | March 8, 2021 | Volume: 94 | Issue: 1121 | Pages: No page available

10.1259/bjr.20201406 | PMID 33684305 Get It

Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) is a valuable adjunctive tool that can provide real-time diagnostic information in surgery that has the potential to alter patient management and decrease complications. Lesion localization, characterization and staging can be performed, as well as surveying for additional lesions and metastatic disease. IOUS is commonly used in the liver for hepatic metastatic disease and hepatocellular carcinoma, in the pancreas for neuroendocrine tumors, and in the kidney for renal cell carcinoma. IOUS allows real-time evaluation of vascular patency and perfusion in organ transplantation and allows for early intervention for anastomotic complications. It can also be used to guide intraoperative procedures such as biopsy, fiducial placement, radiation, or ablation. A variety of adjuncts including microbubble contrast and elastography may provide additional information at IOUS. It is important for the radiologist to be familiar with the available equipment, common clinical indications, technique, relevant anatomy and intraoperative imaging appearance to optimize performance of this valuable imaging modality.
Growth Rate of Ovarian Serous Cystadenomas and Cystadenofibromas
Frederick, Ross P. , Patel, Anika G. , Young, Scott W. , Dahiya, Nirvikar , Patel, Maitray D , Young, Scott W , Patel, Maitray D.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine | December 19, 2020 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 2123-2130

10.1002/jum.15597 | PMID 33320368 Get It

Objectives We analyzed growth rates of benign ovarian serous cystadenomas and cystadenofibromas to understand what percentage would show a volume doubling time (DT) of less than 3 years, between 3 and 5 years, or greater than 5 years. Methods We retrospectively reviewed pathology records (January 1, 2014, to June 30, 2019) to find all surgically excised ovarian serous cystadenomas and cystadenofibromas. Imaging records were then reviewed to identify those that had been confidently identified with ultrasound imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, or computed tomography at least twice before surgical removal, with at least a 60‐day interval between studies. Three orthogonal measurements were recorded on the first and last imaging studies on which the mass was detected, with volume calculations by the prolate formula (product of 3 measurements multiplied by 0.52). The volume DT was calculated and grouped into 1 of 5 categories: (1) DT of less than 1 year; (2) DT of 1 to 3 years; (3) DT of 3 to 5 years; (4) DT of 5 to 10 years; and (5) no growth (any mass with a DT >10 years or showing a decrease in volume). Results A total of 102 of 536 cystadenomas and 44 of 227 cystadenofibromas met inclusion criteria. Of the 146 tumors, 40 (27.4%) had a DT of less than 1 year; 38 (26.0%) had a DT of 1 to 3 years; 22 (15.1%) had a DT of 3 to 5 years; 10 (6.8%) had a DT of 5 to 10 years; and 36 (24.7%) showed no growth. Conclusions A total of 53.4% of ovarian serous cystadenomas/cystadenofibromas have a DT of less than 3 years; 15.1% have a DT between 3 and 5 years; and 31.5% have a DT of greater than 5 years or show no growth.
Detection of Bleeding Complications After Renal Transplant Biopsy
Patel, Anika G. , Young, Scott W. , Dahiya, Nirvikar , Young, Scott W , Kriegshauser, J. Scott , Patel, Maitray D.

American Journal of Roentgenology | December 16, 2020 | Volume: 216 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 428-435

10.2214/ajr.20.22990 | PMID 33325737 Get It

Added Benefit and Risk of an Additional Biopsy or Targeting With Contrast‐Enhanced Ultrasound for Patients With Renal Transplants
Dahiya, Nirvikar , Zhang, Nan , Heilman, Raymond L. , Stanton, Melissa, Young, Scott W. , Kriegshauser, J Scott , Stanton, Melissa L, Young, Scott W , Patel, Maitray D , Kriegshauser, J. Scott , Smith, Maxwell L. , Patel, Maitray D.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine | October 26, 2020 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1603-1611

10.1002/jum.15544 | PMID 33103276 Get It

ObjectivesTo determine whether renal transplant diagnoses substantially change when 2 biopsy sites are chosen and whether contrast‐enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has value for targeting the second site.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 40 patients undergoing ultrasound‐guided renal transplant biopsy within 2 years of transplant: 20, surveillance; and 20, for cause. A CEUS examination was performed to identify cortical regions with subjectively altered flow. One biopsy was performed at the operator‐preferred (primary) site regardless of CEUS findings. Another biopsy was done at a second location, either targeted to an area in which CEUS perfusion findings differed from the primary site (targeted) or at a random location (secondary) if no other area differed. Specimens were randomly labeled A or B; pathologists were blinded to the CEUS result and biopsy location. Location‐specific CEUS assessments were recorded. Pathologic results were compared, including acute and chronic Banff scores and any new findings from the targeted or secondary biopsy.ResultsForty patients were enrolled between January 2016 and December 2018. No location‐specific pathologic differences correlated with differences in CEUS assessments. The second biopsy provided additional information that changed management in 4 of 40 patients (10.0% [95% confidence interval, 2.8%–23.7%]). Major bleeding complications occurred in 3 of 40 (7.5%) patients.ConclusionsContrast‐enhanced ultrasound targeting was not useful. Major bleeding complications were higher than expected, possibly due to the additional biopsy away from the operator‐preferred location. Obtaining a second renal transplant biopsy from a substantially different area than the initial operator‐preferred location provided additional clinically useful information in 10% of patients.
Impact of Uterine Sliding Sign in Routine United States Ultrasound Practice
Young, Scott W. , Dahiya, Nirvikar , Yi, Johnny , Wasson, Megan , Davitt, John , Patel, Maitray D , Young, Scott W , Wasson, Megan , Patel, Maitray D.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine | September 24, 2020 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1091-1096

10.1002/jum.15484 | PMID 32894615 Get It

ObjectivesThe study aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the uterine sliding sign in predicting deeply infiltrating endometriosis in the setting of non‐physician sonographers performing but not interpreting the maneuver. The impact of uterine sliding sign has not been previously demonstrated in this practice setting.MethodsPhysicians' remote interpretations of transvaginal ultrasound examinations in 2016, before uterine sliding sign, were compared to examinations in 2019 after addition of uterine sliding sign to determine the diagnostic rates. Surgical and histopathological results were reviewed to determine sensitivity and specificity of the respective exam techniques.ResultsTwo hundred eighty‐five transvaginal ultrasounds were performed in 2016 and 390 sliding sign ultrasounds in 2019. The number of deeply infiltrating endometriosis cases identified increased significantly from 2% to 6% during the study period (chi‐square, Fisher's exact test p = .012). The sensitivity and specificity of routine pelvic sonography for detecting deeply infiltrating endometriosis improved from 36%/94% to 68%/98%.ConclusionsUterine sliding sign videos should be included in the standard sonographic protocol for patients presenting with chronic pelvic pain, endometriosis history, or sonographic evidence of endometriosis in the setting of physicians interpreting sonographic images obtained by non‐physicians.
Immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for lymphoma: predictive biomarkers and clinical outcomes
Holtzman, Noa G. , Bentzen, Søren M. , Kesari, Vivek , Bukhari, Ali , Chaer, Firas El , Lutfi, Forat , Siglin, Jonathan , Hutnick, Elizabeth, Gahres, Natalie, Ruehle, Kathleen, Ahmad, Haroon , Badros, Ashraf , Hardy, Nancy M. , Rapoport, Aaron P. , Dahiya, Saurabh , Bentzen, Soren M , Xie, Hao , Shanholtz, Carl B. , Kocoglu, Mehmet H. , Yared, Jean A.

Neuro-Oncology | July 31, 2020 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 112-121

10.1093/neuonc/noaa183 | PMID 32750704 Get It

AbstractBackgroundCD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy (CAR-T) has emerged as effective for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). The neurologic toxicity seen with CAR-T, referred to as immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), is poorly understood. To better elucidate the clinical characteristics, treatment outcomes, and correlative biomarkers of ICANS, we review here a single-center analysis of ICANS after CAR T-cell therapy in R/R LBCL.MethodsPatients (n = 45) with R/R LBCL treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) were identified. Data regarding treatment course, clinical outcomes, and correlative studies were collected. Patients were monitored and graded for ICANS via CARTOX-10 scoring and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.03 criteria, respectively.ResultsTwenty-five (56%) patients developed ICANS, 18 (72%) of whom had severe (CTCAE grades 3–4) ICANS. Median time to development of ICANS was 5 days (range, 3–11). Elevated pre-infusion (day 0 [D0]) fibrinogen (517 vs 403 mg/dL, upper limit of normal [ULN] 438 mg/dL, P = 0.01) and D0 lactate dehydrogenase (618 vs 506 units/L, ULN 618 units/L, P = 0.04) were associated with ICANS. A larger drop in fibrinogen was associated with ICANS (393 vs 200, P < 0.01). Development of ICANS of any grade had no effect on complete remission (CR), progression-free survival (PFS), or overall survival (OS). Duration and total dose of steroid treatment administered for ICANS did not influence CR, PFS, or OS.ConclusionsICANS after CAR-T with axi-cel for R/R LBCL was seen in about half of patients, the majority of which were high grade. Contrary to previous reports, neither development of ICANS nor its treatment were associated with inferior CR, PFS, or OS. The novel finding of high D0 fibrinogen level can identify patients at higher risk for ICANS.