Citations

OBJECTIVE Ruptured, large pediatric arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) pose a significant management challenge due to high rerupture risk and the morbidity of conventional treatments. Volume-staged stereotactic radiosurgery (VS-SRS) has emerged as an alternative; however, evidence for its use in this specific population is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of VS-SRS for ruptured, large AVMs in a dedicated pediatric cohort. METHODS This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study from 21 centers analyzed outcomes for 42 pediatric patients (age < 18 years) with previously ruptured, large AVMs treated with VS-SRS. The primary outcome was complete AVM obliteration, and secondary outcomes included post-SRS hemorrhage, radiation-induced changes (RICs), and favorable outcome. Favorable outcome in this study was defined as obliteration without post-SRS hemorrhage or permanent RIC. RESULTS At the initial SRS, the median patient age was 14.5 years, and the median AVM volume was 15.0 cm 3 ; most AVMs were high grade (Spetzler-Martin grades IV and V). With a median follow-up of 41.5 months, complete AVM obliteration was achieved in 21 patients (50.0%). The cumulative obliteration rate was 37% at 5 years and 56% at 10 years. Patients with a nidus volume of ≤ 10 cm 3 had significantly higher cumulative obliteration rates than those with a nidus volume > 10 cm 3 (log-rank test, p = 0.021). Similarly, patients treated with a prescription dose > 17 Gy showed significantly higher cumulative obliteration rates compared to those treated with a dose ≤ 17 Gy (log-rank test, p = 0.012). The cumulative 5-year incidences of hemorrhage and RICs following VS-SRS were 19% and 7%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, only larger total AVM volume was an independent predictor of a lower likelihood of favorable outcome (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.80–0.99; p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS In this multicenter pediatric cohort, VS-SRS for ruptured, large AVMs provides a reasonable chance of long-term obliteration, but generally acceptable risks of post-SRS hemorrhage and RICs exist. VS-SRS should be considered as an option for pediatric patients with large, ruptured AVMs.

Abstract The lung, one the largest branching organs in our body and vital for survival at first breath, is commonly known as the gas-exchange organ. Recent novel findings on lung sensing cells, molecules, and lung-brain crosstalk in the emerging discipline of interoception have highlighted the consideration of the lung as a sensory organ. Acknowledging the central importance of lung sensing to human health and disease, NHLBI convened a workshop to synthesize the past, current, and future of lung sensing research, with in-person presentations by ∼20 interdisciplinary experts and a large virtual audience. Here, we highlight the key topics discussed and summarize a blueprint for the future in this important field.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Pediatric hospital medicine (PHM) is a growing field with a unique scholarly perspective and evolving role in academic leadership. Since the last systematic assessment of PHM research in 2009, predating subspecialty certification in 2016 and fellowship accreditation in 2020, the research infrastructure within PHM has not been reevaluated. We sought to assess the current state of PHM research by assessing the number, scope, and scholarly domains of research faculty, as well as research funding and support. METHODS Using the Pediatrics Research in Inpatient Settings Network, we distributed a cross-sectional survey to PHM group leaders across the United States and Canada. The 16-item instrument, adapted from prior PHM and adult hospital medicine surveys, assessed program demographics, faculty effort allocation, research support, funding, and scholarly domains. Surveys were distributed via REDCap with follow-up reminders. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS 49 programs responded (51% response rate), representing 1702 faculty (∼40% of US pediatric hospitalists). Fewer than half of programs (n = 21, 43%) reported faculty with more than 50% research effort. One-hundred and ninety faculty members (11%) had dedicated research time, and 72% of those conducting quality improvement research did so without any protected effort. Most PHM programs (n = 27, 55%) received less than $100 000 in total annual research funding. CONCLUSIONS Despite recent PHM subspecialty designation and pediatric hospitalist desire to conduct research, dedicated time and associated supports are uncommon in PHM groups. Improvements in the PHM research pipeline will require understanding institutional financial constraints and diversifying and strengthening research funding.

Abstract Clinical medical physics is a profession that intersects with various groups as part of a broader healthcare team, including dosimetrists, radiation therapists, radiologic and MRI technologists, IT specialists, and physicians. Success in this field requires academic and technical excellence as well as comprehensive skills for working effectively within an interdisciplinary healthcare team. When hiring medical physics residents, the selection of well‐rounded and highly qualified candidates can be facilitated through a holistic review process that ensures consideration of traditional metrics such as academic performance while also accounting for the importance of various experiences, personal attributes, and intrinsic motivations that impact clinical performance and patient care. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) emphasizes an overall consideration of Experiences, Attributes, Competencies, and Metrics (EACM) as important for the search process. As part of the healthcare community, medical physics shares the same commitment to high‐quality patient care. By adopting the AAMC's EACM framework, medical physics residency programs can strengthen the fairness, rigor, and overall effectiveness of their application review processes—ultimately benefiting applicants, the medical physics community, and the patients we serve. This Society of Directors of Academic Medical Physics Programs (SDAMPP) task report aims to provide information and resources for applying holistic review to the applicant selection process for medical physics residency programs. Our objective is to enable program directors to reevaluate their selection methods in the context of institutional and program missions and goals and to improve the quality and specificity of recruitment by integrating holistic review concepts into their residency recruitment processes. This initiative can inspire change in recruitment practices, aid programs in hiring well‐rounded and well‐qualified residents, and support the professional growth of our trainees in healthcare. This report provides an overview of holistic reviews and its core principles. We review the current literature and provide evidence from successful implementations of holistic review in other medical fields to illustrate how it can benefit our field. Furthermore, we outline actionable recommendations to facilitate transitioning to a holistic review framework and address potential barriers with practical solutions. A supplemental workbook is provided to guide residency programs in developing their own holistic application review and interview processes. With this report, we aim to provide practical implementation guidelines that will allow residency program directors to implement a selection methodology that comprehensively assesses the full qualifications of individual candidates and ultimately fosters the development of versatile and competent clinical medical physicists who are best equipped to advance the field, meet patient needs, and improve patient care.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) is a severe condition with high short-term mortality. Identifying key predictors of poor outcomes is critical for guiding therapeutic strategies. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), a key determinant of tissue perfusion and systemic hemodynamics, may play a pivotal role in prognosis. METHODS: We analyzed a multicenter, prospective cohort of 323 patients hospitalized with AH, with validation in an independent cohort of 290 patients. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios for mortality, adjusted for Model for end stage liver disease score. Mechanistic insights were explored through assessment of cardiovascular biomarkers. RESULTS: A baseline MAP <80 mm Hg was associated with significantly higher mortality at both 28 days (27.3% vs 8.0%) and 90 days (40.3% vs 15.6%; P < 0.001 for both). This association persisted after adjusting for Model for end stage liver disease score, age, and baseline hepatic encephalopathy. The incidence of infections during follow-up was similar across MAP groups (27.6% vs 22.8%), but acute kidney injury occurred more frequently in the MAP <80 mm Hg group (62% vs 38%, P < 0.001). In the validation cohort, patients with MAP <80 mm Hg also demonstrated significantly lower 28-day transplant-free survival. Although B-type natriuretic peptide and plasma renin levels were altered in patients with AH, they did not correlate with MAP values. DISCUSSION: A baseline MAP <80 mm Hg is an independent predictor of short-term and mid-term mortality in patients with AH. Strategies aimed at restoring hemodynamic stability may improve outcomes in this high-risk population.

LBA514 Background: Preclinical and clinical data show that antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) such as T-DXd may synergize with immunotherapy. Rilvegostomig (R) is a monovalent, Fc-reduced, dual checkpoint bispecific IgG1 monoclonal antibody against PD-1 and TIGIT receptors. R + T-DXd was evaluated as neoadjuvant therapy for up to 4 cycles. Methods: I-SPY2.2 is a phase II neoadjuvant trial with three neoadjuvant sequences (Blocks A/B/C). All HER2-negative subtypes were eligible for R + T-DXd in Block A. Predicted responders at the end of Block A or B could undergo surgery; otherwise, they continued to Block B +/- C. Block B pts received paclitaxel +/- carboplatin +/- pembrolizumab and Block C pts doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (AC) +/- pembrolizumab, HR+ immune+ received IO in Blocks B/C. Results are analyzed by receptor and response predictive subtypes (RPS), that include expression-based immune, and luminal signatures with hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status. Some pts were randomized to a control regimen (skipping R + T-DXd in block A and starting in block B). To minimize risk of interstitial lung disease (ILD) that could lead to treatment discontinuation, pts underwent pulmonary function tests and high-resolution chest CTs every 6 weeks. Abnormalities were reviewed in real time. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR), within each RPS and HR/HER2 signature, with estimated pCR (EpCR) rates compared to subtype-specific block A goal rates and control pts in those groups. Other endpoints included safety and treatment discontinuation. Results: 105 pts were treated with R + T-DXd in block A, while 31 pts were randomized to the control regimen. Block A EpCR rate was 57% in the 12 HR+Immune+ pts vs a pre-specified goal of 15% (posterior probability, PP > .99). In 35 HR-Immune+ pts EpCR was 52% vs a pre-specified goal of 40% (PP = .87). No other groups (Immune-) had a PP > .85 for their respective pCR goal rate. HER2-IHC was 0 (27.6%), 1+ (49.5%) and 2+ (22.9%) in the treatment arm vs. 37.7%, 37.7%, and 24.7% in the control arm, with no difference in distribution between arms in immune subtypes. The most common adverse events in Block A were fatigue (84.8%), nausea (81.0%) and alopecia (58.1%). ILD was the most common adverse event of special interest in Block A and overall, occurring in 12 pts (11.4%; 7G1, 4G2, 1G3) during Block A and in 3 pts (G1, 2.9%) in other Blocks. 8 pts discontinued T-DXd + R due to ILD and proceeded to the next Block. Conclusions: When considering the full treatment strategy including block B and C regimens, experimental strategies had similar EpCR rates vs. controls in immune+ subtypes but block A rates exceeded pre-defined goal thresholds. This infers that treatment beginning with R + T-DXd has equivalent efficacy to standard of care for immune+ pts, but 64% pts with pCR skip chemotherapy (Block B) and 97% avoid AC (Block C). R + T-DXd participants avoided persistent ILD. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 .

Ziftomenib - a potent, selective, oral menin inhibitor - is approved as monotherapy for adults with relapsed/refractory (R/R) NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (NPM1-m AML). The KOMET-007 phase 1 trial investigated clinical activity and tolerability of ziftomenib in combination with standard therapies for R/R and newly diagnosed AML. Here, we report outcomes of adults with R/R NPM1-m AML treated with ziftomenib plus venetoclax/azacitidine. In phase 1a, patients received ziftomenib 200, 400, or 600 mg once daily with standard doses of venetoclax/azacitidine. In phase 1b, ziftomenib 600 mg was selected for expansion. Sixty-seven patients were treated (27 phase 1a; 40 phase 1b). Median age was 66 years, and 55% were men. Median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1-8); 55% received prior venetoclax and 22% had prior transplantation. Most common (≥20%) grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were leukopenia (34%), thrombocytopenia (28%), febrile neutropenia and neutropenia (25% each). Six patients developed QTc prolongation (1 ziftomenib-related; grade 1), and 2 experienced differentiation syndrome (grade 3); all events were successfully managed. In patients receiving ziftomenib 600 mg, composite complete remission (CRc) rate was 46% (22/48), with 67% (12/18) achieving central measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity (&lt;0.01% threshold). In venetoclax-naïve and -exposed patients, CRc rates were 70% (16/23) and 24% (6/25), with MRD-negativity rates of 75% (9/12) and 50% (3/6), respectively. Median duration of response was 8.6 months, and median overall survival was not reached. The combination of ziftomenib 600 mg with venetoclax/azacitidine was well tolerated with deep and durable clinical activity in R/R NPM1-m AML. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT05735184.