Citations

Objective Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X‐linked, autoinflammatory, somatic syndrome (VEXAS) syndrome is characterized by a complex spectrum of inflammatory and hematologic manifestations. Clinical research to identify effective therapies is urgently needed but is hindered by the lack of validated outcome measures. A VEXAS‐specific disease activity index (DAI) is an essential tool for reliably capturing changes in disease activity over time, thereby supporting clinical research and informing patient care in this emerging disease. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive DAI to assess disease‐related inflammation across affected organ systems in patients with VEXAS syndrome. Methods Inflammatory manifestations of VEXAS were previously identified through a systematic literature review and expert input. A multinational expert advisory committee developed the VEXAS‐DAI using modified Delphi methodology until consensus (defined as ≥75% concurrence) was reached. Item grading was adapted from the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Scoring criteria were developed based on 158 test cases using the Physician Global Assessment of Inflammation. Results Consensus on the VEXAS‐DAI was achieved after four Delphi rounds. The index assesses inflammatory activity at the time of evaluation across 12 domains: inflammatory rash, chondritis, periorbital, ophthalmologic, joint, pulmonary, cardiovascular, genitourinary, neurologic, oral and gastrointestinal, renal, and constitutional symptoms. The total score ranges from 0 to 40. Conclusion The VEXAS‐DAI is a novel instrument designed to quantify active inflammation over time in patients with VEXAS. Prospective validation within a clinical trial setting is ongoing. image

Abstract Background Methylation class pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (mcPXA) comprises tumors with the DNA methylation signature of classical PXA but with a wider histologic spectrum, including overlap with glioblastoma (GBM). Methods To clarify the histologic and molecular scope of mcPXA and characterize its clinical behavior, a cohort of 469 tumor samples from 458 patients matching to mcPXA by the DKFZ classifier (v12.6 score ≥0.85) was interrogated. Results Patient median age was 23 years (range 1-73 years) with a female predominance (259 female/199 male). CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion was observed in 406 of 469 (87%) samples. In samples tested for BRAF p.V600E mutations (n = 279), 240 (86%) harbored the mutation. A chr7+/chr10− pattern was observed in 103 of 469 (22%) samples. Among samples tested for TERT promoter mutations (n = 143), 32 (22%) harbored the mutation. Progression-free and overall survival of patients with mcPXA were comparable to patients with methylation class IDH-mutant astrocytoma, low grade, but a GBM-like subset (ie, cases with a pre-methylation working diagnosis of GBM) showed shorter survival. Histologic features of high grade, including palisading necrosis and microvascular proliferation, were prognostic in mcPXA. Compared to patients with BRAF p.V600E-altered GBM, patients with mcPXA were younger and had a lower frequency of TERT promoter mutations. Conclusion Tumors in mcPXA share molecular characteristics with histologically defined PXA, and high-grade histologic features can help predict their clinical behavior. The use of an epigenetic classification of PXA reveals that this group of tumors is more common than previously appreciated and warrants in-depth study to identify efficacious therapeutic options.

Abstract BACKGROUND Preclinical studies have demonstrated that IDH1-mutant (IDHmt) gliomas harbor a BRCAness phenotype with a defect in homologous recombination that confers PARP inhibitor sensitivity. METHODS The phase II component of ABTC 1801 examined the efficacy of the combination of pamiparib (BeiGene BGB-290) with low dose metronomic temozolomide in recurrent IDHmt grade 2 and 3 gliomas. In this two-stage design, Arm A enrolled patients who had failed two lines and Arm B a single line of alkylator therapy. Pamiparib and temozolomide doses based on phase I results was 60 mg BID and 20 mg daily. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS 39 patients (Arm A 15, Arm B 24) enrolled in the phase II. Median age was 45 (range: 25-69), 56% male, and median KPS 90. 72% of tumors were MGMT methylated. There were no confirmed responses in Arm A and one in Arm B; neither arm met the threshold for additional accrual. One-third of subjects discontinued treatment for reasons other than progressive disease. Estimated median PFS was 5.8 months in Arm A and 11.3 months in Arm B. Seven subjects (Arm A 3, Arm B 4) developed DLT during treatment. Grade 3+ toxicity was principally hematologic; 9 patients had grade 3 anemia, 7 grade 3 and 3 grade 4 neutropenia, and 3 grade 3 thrombocytopenia. In enhancing and non-enhancing tumors from 8 surgical arm patients, median unbound drug tumor/plasma ratios were 0.98 and 0.92, respectively; and median unbound pamiparib tumor concentrations were 209 and 188 nmol/L (or nmol/kg), respectively, which were >20-fold the in vitro IC50 for PARP inhibition. CONCLUSIONS While pamiparib appeared to achieve sufficient pharmacologically active concentrations in both enhancing and non-enhancing tumors, combination with temozolomide did not produce a meaningful ORR in IDHmt recurrent gliomas. Cumulative hematologic toxicity was substantial.

Objective To provide evidence‐based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of Kawasaki disease (KD), focusing on clinical scenarios more commonly addressed by rheumatologists. Methods Sixteen clinical questions regarding diagnostic testing, treatment, and management of KD were developed in the Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) question format. Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation method to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations. Each recommendation required consensus from at least 70% of the Voting Panel. Results We present 1 good practice statement, 11 recommendations, and 1 ungraded position statement to guide the management of KD and clinical scenarios of suspected KD. These recommendations for KD are focused on situations in which input from rheumatologists may be requested by other managing specialists, such as in cases of treatment‐refractory, severe, or complicated KD. The good practice statement affirms that all patients with KD should receive initial treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). In addition, we developed 7 strong and 4 conditional recommendations for the management of KD or suspected KD. Strong recommendations include prompt treatment of incomplete KD, treatment with aspirin, and obtaining an echocardiogram in the setting of unexplained macrophage activation syndrome or shock. Conditional recommendations include use of IVIG with other adjuvant agents for patients with KD and high‐risk features of IVIG resistance and/or coronary artery aneurysms. These recommendations endorse minimizing risk to the patient by using established therapy promptly at disease onset and identifying situations in which adjunctive therapy may be warranted. Conclusion These recommendations provide guidance regarding diagnostic strategies, use of pharmacologic agents, and use of echocardiography in patients with suspected or confirmed KD.

Objective To provide evidence‐based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of Kawasaki disease (KD), focusing on clinical scenarios more commonly addressed by rheumatologists. Methods Sixteen clinical questions regarding diagnostic testing, treatment, and management of KD were developed in the Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) question format. Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation method to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations. Each recommendation required consensus from at least 70% of the Voting Panel. Results We present 1 good practice statement, 11 recommendations, and 1 ungraded position statement to guide the management of KD and clinical scenarios of suspected KD. These recommendations for KD are focused on situations in which input from rheumatologists may be requested by other managing specialists, such as in cases of treatment‐refractory, severe, or complicated KD. The good practice statement affirms that all patients with KD should receive initial treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). In addition, we developed 7 strong and 4 conditional recommendations for the management of KD or suspected KD. Strong recommendations include prompt treatment of incomplete KD, treatment with aspirin, and obtaining an echocardiogram in the setting of unexplained macrophage activation syndrome or shock. Conditional recommendations include use of IVIG with other adjuvant agents for patients with KD and high‐risk features of IVIG resistance and/or coronary artery aneurysms. These recommendations endorse minimizing risk to the patient by using established therapy promptly at disease onset and identifying situations in which adjunctive therapy may be warranted. Conclusion These recommendations provide guidance regarding diagnostic strategies, use of pharmacologic agents, and use of echocardiography in patients with suspected or confirmed KD.

ObjectiveKawasaki disease (KD) is a self‐limited vasculitis affecting medium‐sized vessels with a predilection for the coronary arteries. Although treatment reduces the likelihood of developing of coronary artery aneurysms, 5% of patients still develop aneurysms despite treatment, making KD the leading cause of acquired heart disease in children in the United States. Consequently, there is a great deal of interest in optimizing treatment regimens, particularly for higher‐risk patients, to decrease morbidity. The aim of this systematic review is to support the development of the American College of Rheumatology/Vasculitis Foundation for the diagnosis and management of KD, focusing on the more complex scenarios in which rheumatologists may become involved, such as high‐risk and refractory disease.MethodsEighty‐nine articles were considered for full review in this systematic literature review to address 16 Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions related to KD. Data were abstracted in hierarchical fashion. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were considered first; if none were identified or if they contained insufficient information, comparative observational studies were then viewed, followed by single‐arm observational studies/single arms from comparative studies. Only observational studies with more than 10 subjects with vasculitis were included.ResultsEight RCTs and 28 observational studies that addressed the questions were identified. Two questions were addressed by RCTs, seven questions had at least some comparative observational studies, three questions were only addressed by single‐arm data, and four questions had no relevant studies.ConclusionThis systematic review evaluates the benefits and harms of treatments for KD beyond first‐line therapy.

Objective To provide evidence‐based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of systemic polyarteritis nodosa (PAN). Methods Twenty‐one clinical questions regarding diagnostic testing, treatment, and management were developed in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) format for systemic, non–hepatitis B–related PAN. Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations. Each recommendation required ≥70% consensus among the Voting Panel. Results We present 16 recommendations and 1 ungraded position statement for PAN. Most recommendations were graded as conditional due to the paucity of evidence. These recommendations support early treatment of severe PAN with cyclophosphamide and glucocorticoids, limiting toxicity through minimizing long‐term exposure to both treatments, and the use of imaging and tissue biopsy for disease diagnosis. These recommendations endorse minimizing risk to the patient by using established therapy at disease onset and identify new areas where adjunctive therapy may be warranted. Conclusion These recommendations provide guidance regarding diagnostic strategies, use of pharmacologic agents, and imaging for patients with PAN.

Objective To provide evidence‐based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of giant cell arteritis (GCA) and Takayasu arteritis (TAK) as exemplars of large vessel vasculitis. Methods Clinical questions regarding diagnostic testing, treatment, and management were developed in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) format for GCA and TAK (27 for GCA, 27 for TAK). Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. Recommendations were developed by the Voting Panel, comprising adult and pediatric rheumatologists and patients. Each recommendation required ≥70% consensus among the Voting Panel. Results We present 22 recommendations and 2 ungraded position statements for GCA, and 20 recommendations and 1 ungraded position statement for TAK. These recommendations and statements address clinical questions relating to the use of diagnostic testing, including imaging, treatments, and surgical interventions in GCA and TAK. Recommendations for GCA include support for the use of glucocorticoid‐sparing immunosuppressive agents and the use of imaging to identify large vessel involvement. Recommendations for TAK include the use of nonglucocorticoid immunosuppressive agents with glucocorticoids as initial therapy. There were only 2 strong recommendations; the remaining recommendations were conditional due to the low quality of evidence available for most PICO questions. Conclusion These recommendations provide guidance regarding the evaluation and management of patients with GCA and TAK, including diagnostic strategies, use of pharmacologic agents, and surgical interventions.

Objective To provide evidence‐based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of systemic polyarteritis nodosa (PAN). Methods Twenty‐one clinical questions regarding diagnostic testing, treatment, and management were developed in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) format for systemic, non–hepatitis B–related PAN. Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations. Each recommendation required ≥70% consensus among the Voting Panel. Results We present 16 recommendations and 1 ungraded position statement for PAN. Most recommendations were graded as conditional due to the paucity of evidence. These recommendations support early treatment of severe PAN with cyclophosphamide and glucocorticoids, limiting toxicity through minimizing long‐term exposure to both treatments, and the use of imaging and tissue biopsy for disease diagnosis. These recommendations endorse minimizing risk to the patient by using established therapy at disease onset and identify new areas where adjunctive therapy may be warranted. Conclusion These recommendations provide guidance regarding diagnostic strategies, use of pharmacologic agents, and imaging for patients with PAN.