Jamal, Fares

Abstract Everolimus 10 mg daily is the standard dose for advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), but adverse events frequently necessitate dose reduction. As a result, oncologists often adopt a dose‐escalation strategy starting at 5 mg and increasing the dose as tolerated. In this multicenter study, we evaluated the effect of reduced dose (RD) and standard dose (SD) everolimus on survival, progression, and toxicity in patients with advanced NETs. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients with advanced NETs treated with everolimus at Mayo Clinic and University Hospitals (Cleveland, OH). Patients were grouped by starting dose (5 mg vs. 10 mg). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), real‐world progression‐free survival (rwPFS), and adverse events. Multivariable Cox models, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and time‐varying dose sensitivity analysis were used to account for confounding and dose crossover. Among 170 patients (48 started on 5 mg; 122 on 10 mg), the 5 mg cohort was older, had worse ECOG PS, and was more heavily pretreated. Median OS was 43.7 months (5 mg) versus 81.5 months (10 mg; log‐rank p = .02). However, after multivariable adjustment ( N = 124 G1–G2 patients; 51 events), the association was no longer statistically significant (adjusted HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31–1.12; p = .11). Median rwPFS was 7.0 versus 12.4 months (log‐rank p = .05); the adjusted rwPFS difference was not statistically significant (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.56–1.61; p = .84). Nearly half (46.7%) of 10 mg starters required dose reduction. Any‐grade toxicity was more common with 10 mg (89% vs. 75%; p = .05). The apparent survival advantage of standard‐dose everolimus was substantially attenuated after adjustment. These findings do not establish dose equivalence and should be interpreted in the context of limited statistical power. Given its more favorable observed tolerability profile, RD everolimus warrants prospective evaluation as a starting strategy for patients at increased risk of treatment‐related toxicity who may not tolerate SD.

Purpose Neutropenic diet (ND) has historically been recommended to reduce infectious complications in patients with cancer. Although its use has declined over the past decade, recent studies, particularly in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), have renewed concern regarding the safety of a liberalized diet (LD). We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing ND with LD in patients with cancer. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception through January 2026. Comparative studies evaluating ND versus LD in adults or children with cancer were included. Primary outcomes were major infections and bacteremia/fungemia; secondary outcomes were pneumonia, diarrhea, and mortality. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results Fifteen studies including 4,320 patients met criteria for analysis. ND was not associated with significant differences in major infections (RR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.18]; P = .795), bacteremia/fungemia (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.22]; P = .805), pneumonia (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.63]; P = .933), diarrhea (RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.31]; P = .159), or mortality (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.15]; P = .632). Sensitivity analyses restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were consistent. In hematologic malignancy/HSCT studies (9 studies; 1,769 patients), no differences were observed across outcomes. In RCTs limited to these patients (6 studies; 855 patients), ND was associated with lower bacteremia/fungemia risk (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47 to 0.95]; P = .023), with no differences in other outcomes. Conclusion ND was not associated with reductions in major infections, pneumonia, diarrhea, or mortality compared with LD. These findings do not support routine implementation of ND for patients with short-term neutropenia or lower-risk cancer populations although selected high-risk patients, particularly those undergoing HSCT or experiencing prolonged neutropenia related to hematologic malignancies, may still warrant cautious dietary practices.

Abstract Background Immunosuppression is a recognized risk factor for severe and disseminated coccidioidomycosis; however, data describing outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving advanced therapy, including biologics and small molecules, remain limited. We aim to describe the prevalence, clinical presentation, treatment patterns, and outcomes of coccidioidomycosis in IBD patients receiving advanced therapy at an endemic tertiary care center. Methods We performed a retrospective observational study of adult patients with IBD at Mayo Clinic Arizona diagnosed with coccidioidomycosis between 2023 and 2026. Patients were included if IBD diagnosis preceded coccidioidomycosis diagnosis and advanced therapy had been active for at least 4 weeks before infection. Cases were classified as proven, probable, or possible based on microbiologic, clinical, radiographic, and serologic criteria. Clinical outcomes included antifungal treatment duration, hospitalization related to coccidioidomycosis or IBD, IBD treatment modification after diagnosis, re-emergence of coccidioidomycosis symptoms, and IBD-related surgery. Results A total of 48 patients met inclusion criteria. Among 1083 tested IBD patients receiving advanced therapy, coccidioidomycosis positivity prevalence was 4.4% when including all serologically positive patients and 1.9% when restricted to proven or probable cases. The median age at coccidioidomycosis diagnosis was 40 years (range 19-87 years), and 30 (62.5%) of 48 had Crohn’s disease. Proven or probable infection was identified in 21 (43.8%) of 48 patients, while 14 (29.2%) of 48 patients were classified as possible. Antifungal therapy was prescribed in 32 (66.7%) of 48 patients, including all proven cases, 15 (88.2%) of 17 probable cases, 9 (64.3%) of 14 possible cases, and 3 (25.0%) of 12 nondiagnostic cases. Among proven/probable/possible cases, the median antifungal treatment duration was 174 days (range 8-831 days). Advanced IBD therapy was continued in 3 (75.0%) of 4 proven cases, 9 (52.9%) of 17 probable cases, 12 (85.7%) of 14 possible cases, and all nondiagnostic cases. Hospitalization occurred in 6 (12.5%) of 48 of the cohort, all of which were proven/probable cases. Most patients remained on advanced therapy after diagnosis, although tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors were the most interrupted or discontinued agents. Conclusions In this endemic tertiary care cohort, management decisions varied according to diagnostic certainty. Patients with proven or probable coccidioidomycosis were more likely to receive antifungal therapy and undergo advanced IBD therapy modification, whereas most patients with possible or nondiagnostic serologic findings remained on advanced therapy without major IBD-related complications. Prolonged antifungal treatment was common, highlighting the complexity of managing coccidioidomycosis in immunosuppressed patients with IBD.

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are immune-mediated disorders of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that, despite involving different tissues, are increasingly recognized to coexist. Epidemiologic studies demonstrate a bidirectional association, with patients affected by one condition showing a higher-than-expected prevalence of the other, suggesting shared susceptibility rather than incidental overlap. Genetic and epigenetic data support partial convergence in immune regulatory pathways, while epithelial barrier dysfunction and antigen-driven immune activation emerge as common upstream features. Overlapping cytokine networks, including IL-4, IL-13, and IL-23 signaling, contribute to chronic inflammation in both diseases, although differences in tissue environment and immune dominance give rise to distinct inflammatory phenotypes and clinical behavior. Clinical outcomes in patients with dual diagnoses appear heterogeneous, with available data suggesting neither uniformly worsened nor clearly protective disease courses, underscoring the complexity of shared immune mechanisms operating within different anatomic contexts. Beyond inflammatory activity, coexistence of EoE and IBD poses important nutritional and quality-of-life challenges, as overlapping dietary restrictions and chronic symptoms increase the risk of malnutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, and psychosocial burden. Current therapies remain disease-specific, with strong evidence supporting proton pump inhibitors, swallowed topical steroids, dietary therapy, and dupilumab in EoE, and biologics and small molecules targeting TNF-α, IL-12/23, IL-23, integrins, and JAK–STAT signaling in IBD, while evidence guiding treatment in patients with dual diagnosis remains limited. Together, current evidence supports a framework of shared immune machinery with tissue-specific expression that explains coexistence while preserving the distinct identities of EoE and IBD. By integrating emerging genetic, immunologic, and clinical evidence, this review aims to provide a framework for understanding and managing patients with coexisting EoE and IBD.

Background: Given aspirin’s biologic plausibility for antifibrotic and antineoplastic effects, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between aspirin use and major liver-related outcomes in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis restricted exclusively to patients with biopsy- or registry-confirmed MASLD. Methods: A comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed in October 2025. Studies enrolling adults with a confirmed MASLD diagnosis were included; those with viral hepatitis or alcohol-related liver disease were excluded. Outcomes assessed included hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), fibrosis progression, cirrhosis, all-cause and liver-related mortality, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, and liver disease progression. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were pooled using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Results: Seven studies met the eligibility criteria, with approximately 720,000 individuals included. Pooled analysis showed that aspirin use was associated with a significantly lower HCC risk (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.43–0.81; I2 = 83%). No statistically significant association was found between aspirin use and cirrhosis incidence (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.13–2.37; I2 = 83.4%) or GI bleeding (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.74–1.66; I2 = 98.9%). Among the two studies that explored all-cause mortality, aspirin was associated with a modest but statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.78–0.95; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: Aspirin use is associated with a reduced risk of HCC and all-cause mortality in MASLD without significantly increasing GI bleeding or hemorrhagic strokes. These associations may reflect aspirin’s anti-inflammatory properties in liver disease. Further RCTs are needed to verify the causal role of aspirin in MASLD management.

PURPOSE Gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) is increasingly managed using biomarker-guided therapies. Although both tissue DNA (tDNA) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing are used clinically, the concordance of genomic alterations between primary tumors, metastatic sites, and liquid biopsy remains incompletely understood. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 345 patients with GEC who underwent ctDNA testing at Mayo Clinic. tDNA next-generation sequencing and immunohistochemistry (IHC) for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 ( ERBB2 ) and mismatch repair (MMR) were collected. Concordance was evaluated between ctDNA and tDNA, ctDNA and IHC, and across all three modalities, using 60-day and 30-day intervals. RESULTS Among 345 patients with ctDNA testing, 186 had tDNA testing, and 310 underwent IHC. ctDNA testing showed a shorter turnaround time than tDNA (median 6 v 13 days). The most frequent alteration in ctDNA, primary tDNA, and metastatic tDNA was TP53. Concordance between ctDNA and primary tDNA was ≥78.8% for key genes; between ctDNA and metastatic tDNA, it was ≥84.8%. IHC-ctDNA concordance was higher in metastatic tumors, with 91.1% for HER2/ ERBB2 and 97.7% for mismatch repair (MMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) compared with 81.1% and 95.8%, respectively, in primary tumors. Triplet concordance for MSI/MMR was 97.6% in primary tumors and 100% in metastatic tumors, while ERBB2 /HER2 showed 84.4% and 93.9% concordance, respectively. ctDNA temporal heterogeneity analysis revealed 14 patients with fluctuating ERBB2 status and 3 with fluctuating MSI-H status. CONCLUSION ctDNA testing demonstrates high concordance with tDNA and IHC and offers faster turnaround. Given its minimally invasive nature and strong concordance with tissue-based testing, ctDNA is a reliable tool for genomic profiling and longitudinal monitoring in GEC.

Background: Perianal fistulizing Crohn’s disease (CD) is associated with significant morbidity and remains difficult to treat. Although advanced medical therapies are widely used, much of the available evidence derives from heterogeneous fistula populations or luminal CD trials, with limited perianal-specific synthesis and inconsistent outcome definitions. We conducted a systematic review focusing exclusively on perianal-specific clinical, radiologic, and composite outcomes in adults with perianal fistula (PAF) CD. Methods: We performed a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA 2020. Electronic databases were searched from inception through November 2025. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies enrolling adults with CD reporting outcomes specific to PAF. Interventions included biologics and small-molecule therapies, compared with placebo or other therapies. Due to substantial heterogeneity in outcome definitions and study designs, a meta-analysis was not performed. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) for randomized trials and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Results: Seven studies including >1200 participants with PAF-CD met inclusion criteria. Follow-up ranged from 24 weeks to 5 years. Across studies, outcome definitions and assessment modalities varied. Upadacitinib demonstrated significantly higher clinical fistula closure compared with placebo across multiple dose regimens at 52 weeks. In observational comparisons, ustekinumab and vedolizumab were associated with higher clinical closure rates than anti-TNF therapies. However, infliximab demonstrated higher closure rates than adalimumab as a first-line treatment. The definition for radiologic remission was less consistent across studies and often did not parallel clinical outcomes. Composite clinical–radiologic remission and response were reported in a limited number of studies, with filgotinib showing higher composite outcomes in comparison to placebo in a phase 2 trial. Surgical interventions, relapse outcomes, biomarkers [C-reactive protein (CRP)/fecal calprotectin (FCP)], and patient-reported outcomes were variably reported and not consistently significant across comparisons. Conclusions: Evidence for advanced therapies in PAF CD remains limited by heterogeneity in endpoint definitions, subjectivity in clinical observation, inconsistent radiologic reporting, and reliance on subgroup or observational comparisons. While anti-TNF therapy remains the most established option in guidelines, emerging data suggest significant benefits with ustekinumab, vedolizumab, and JAK inhibitors in selected patients. There is a need for PAF-specific, adequately powered randomized trials using standardized composite clinical and radiologic endpoints.

Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) is an under-recognised cause of chronic diarrhoea in patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). If left untreated or undertreated, PEI can lead to complications such as oxalate nephropathy (ON), which may result in loss of kidney function and potentially limit oncologic treatment options, including peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). We present a man in his late 60s with a small bowel NET who developed persistent, uncontrolled diarrhoea for several years. The diarrhoea was attributed to multiple factors, including secretory NET (ie, carcinoid syndrome), bile acid diarrhoea and PEI secondary to somatostatin analogue therapy. Due to financial constraints, the patient was unable to consistently take pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). Years after the diagnosis of NET, the patient developed a new onset worsening of kidney function. Further work-up, including a kidney biopsy, confirmed ON, which significantly limited subsequent treatment options, including PRRT. Routine screening for PEI and early initiation of PERT should be considered in all NET patients with chronic diarrhoea to prevent ON and preserve future treatment options.

Background: Loeys–Dietz syndrome (LDS) is an autosomal dominant aortopathy characterized by aggressive aneurysm formation and arterial dissections. Pregnancy-related outcomes and timing of LDS diagnosis remain poorly characterized. Methods: Demographics, genetic, obstetric, and vascular data was collected from genetically or clinically confirmed individuals with LDS seen at the three Mayo Clinic sites from 2018 to 2025. Aneurysm progression, new aneurysm formation, and arterial dissections were recorded across all vascular beds. Vascular events were assessed during pregnancy, within 12 months postpartum, and during breastfeeding. Comparative analyses were performed between women with and without a history of pregnancy, and a single-arm descriptive analysis was conducted among patients who experienced vascular complications during the peripartum period. Continuous variables were compared using the Mann–Whitney U test, while categorical variables were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher exact tests. Results: Of 47 women with LDS, 24 had a history of pregnancy, accounting for 54 pregnancies. In the comparative analysis, age at LDS diagnosis differed significantly between women with and without a prior pregnancy: women without prior pregnancy were diagnosed at a younger age (median 23.5 years [IQR 10.8–41.0], n = 23) than those who had been pregnant (median 53.5 years [IQR 43.0–59.3], n = 24). Among pregnant women, the median age at first pregnancy was 28 years (IQR 23–34); only 4 (16.7%) knew their diagnosis before pregnancy. Of 54 pregnancies, 40 (74.1%) resulted in live birth, with 23 (57.5%) vaginal and 17 (42.5%) cesarean deliveries; preterm delivery occurred in 1 (2.5%) pregnancy, and postpartum hemorrhage in 2 (5.0%). No maternal deaths, aortic dissections, or uterine ruptures occurred during gestation or the first postpartum year. In addition, 14 women (58.3%) developed aneurysms, 6 (25.0%) experienced at least one arterial dissection, and 7 (29.2%) required surgical repair, predominantly involving the ascending and abdominal aorta. The prevalence of vascular complications did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusions: In this LDS cohort, pregnancy and the early postpartum period were not accompanied by acute aortic catastrophes, despite frequent diagnostic delay. Although women without prior pregnancy were diagnosed at a younger age, the overall burden of vascular and morphologic complications did not differ significantly by pregnancy history. These findings highlight the importance of long-term cardiovascular follow-up in women with LDS.

Abstract Background The increasing reliance on accelerated approvals and surrogate endpoints for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer therapies raises concerns about their clinical benefit and long-term patient outcomes. The shift toward single-arm trials in regulatory decisions further complicates treatment evaluation. Material and Methods This retrospective observational study evaluated all FDA approvals for GI cancer therapies from January 2006 through January 2025. Data were extracted from FDA archives, ClinicalTrials.gov, and PubMed. Approvals were categorized by regulatory pathway (accelerated vs regular), trial design (single-arm vs randomized), and primary endpoint (surrogate vs overall survival [OS]). Clinical benefit was assessed based on OS improvement and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The primary outcome was the proportion of approvals based on surrogate versus OS endpoints. Secondary outcomes included use of single-arm designs, frequency of accelerated approvals, OS gain, and the proportion meeting ESMO-MCBS substantial benefit (score ≥ 4). Results The FDA granted 60 GI cancer drug approvals from 67 trials. Approvals rose from 15 (25%) in 2006-2014 to 45 (75%) in 2015-2025. Single-arm trials increased to 24%, and surrogate endpoints were used in 41.8% (ORR 20.9%, PFS 19.4%). Median OS improvement was 2.1 months (IQR: 1.6-2.65). Only 24.3% of trials met ESMO-MCBS substantial benefit. Of 15 accelerated approvals, 66.7% remained pending, 13.3% received full approval, and 20% were withdrawn. Conclusion Expedited approvals have improved drug access in GI oncology, but modest benefits highlight the need to balance speed with outcomes that truly matter to patients.