Citations

Abstract Context Crinecerfont, a first-in-class corticotropin-releasing factor type 1 receptor antagonist, is FDA-approved as an adjunct to the physiologic glucocorticoid (GC) required to treat the underlying adrenal insufficiency in patients (≥4 years old) with classic congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH). By reducing elevated adrenocorticotropic hormone, crinecerfont controls excess adrenal androgens, thereby enabling lower GC doses. However, there are no published recommendations for how to reduce supraphysiologic GC doses after initiating crinecerfont. This manuscript aims to provide a framework developed by experienced endocrinologists for reducing supraphysiologic GC doses in patients taking crinecerfont. Evidence Acquisition An experienced panel of 11 endocrinologists discussed strategies and considerations when reducing GC doses and developed an algorithm to guide GC dose reductions after introducing crinecerfont in adults with CAH. Evidence Synthesis Approaches to GC reduction should be individualized based on the patient's therapeutic goals, cortisol needs, lifestyle preferences, and the clinician's experience to set appropriate targets for clinical parameters, androgens, and GC dose regimen. In general, GC doses should be reduced gradually to minimize the risks of developing symptoms of GC withdrawal or adrenal insufficiency. GC doses should be adjusted to the lowest level needed to maintain androgens at goal, without reducing below what is needed for cortisol replacement. Practical considerations during GC dose reduction include switching from longer- to shorter-acting GCs (eg, from dexamethasone to hydrocortisone), optimizing dose distribution to mimic normal circadian cortisol exposure, and consolidating or eliminating doses to improve adherence. Conclusion This framework for reducing supraphysiologic GC doses in adult patients taking crinecerfont may become increasingly relevant as treatment of CAH shifts toward physiologic GC replacement with adjunctive control of adrenal androgens.

Abstract Background The incidence of gastroesophageal cancer diagnosed at ages younger than 50 years is increasing. Assessment of the clinicopathologic and molecular characteristics of these cancers is limited currently. Methods This analysis used Tempus’ clinicogenomic database to compare patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 vs 50 years and older who completed tumor molecular profiling between December 2017 and July 2024. The spectrum of biomarkers, somatic alterations, and germline alterations were compared between those diagnosed with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years and those aged 50 years and older, and a multivariate analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with longer survival. Results Among 5863 gastroesophageal cancer patients, 785 had gastroesophageal cancer diagnosed at ages younger than 50 years. There were more females (35% vs 25%, P < .001) and fewer White patients (69% vs 80%, P < .001) with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years. Fewer tumors of patients with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years had high tumor mutational burden (3.2% vs 10.2%, P < .001) or high microsatellite instability (1.7% vs 5.1%, P < .001), but there was no difference in PD-L1 positivity (49% vs 51%, P = .3). Higher incidence of somatic CDH1 mutations was seen in those with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years (16.1% vs 6.6%, q < 0.001) with lower incidence of TP53 (65.6% vs 74.1%), CDKN2A (12.5% vs 19.8%), and KRAS (11.7% vs 18.3%, P < .001 for all) alterations. The most statistically significant germline difference was higher incidence of CDH1 (2.2% vs 0.3%, q = 0.001) and TP53 (0.6% vs 0%, q = 0.039) alterations among those with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years. Median survival for patients with metastatic disease was longer for gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years (11 vs 8.5 months, P = .002), and gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years, ERBB2 amplification, and high microsatellite instability were associated with superior survival. Conclusions Unique molecular and germline profiles were seen in patients with gastroesophageal cancer at ages younger than 50 years, which may suggest differences in causal factors yet undiscovered.

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are reshaping the therapeutic approach to advanced gastrointestinal cancers by integrating tumor-specific monoclonal antibodies with potent cytotoxic payloads to improve targeted tumor cell destruction while minimizing systemic exposure. Compared to traditional chemotherapy, trastuzumab deruxtecan has significantly improved objective response rates and overall survival in HER2-positive gastric and gastroesophageal junction tumors after trastuzumab-based therapy. This supports its role as an important second-line or later treatment option. The ongoing advancement of ADCs targeting CLDN18.2, TROP2, and CEACAM5 indicates that this therapeutic category will continue to expand across gastrointestinal neoplasms. Nonetheless, these advancements are accompanied by a specific and clinically significant toxicity profile. Hematologic suppression, gastrointestinal side effects, hepatotoxicity, and notably interstitial lung disease (ILD) are essential consequences that may need inpatient assessment and care. Interstitial lung disease (ILD), although uncommon, may be severe or lethal if not identified immediately and treated swiftly with medication cessation and corticosteroids. In hospitalized patients, distinguishing ADC-related toxicity from infection or disease progression is often difficult owing to overlapping clinical manifestations, requiring meticulous evaluation and interdisciplinary cooperation. As ADCs are integrated into earlier treatment lines and across a broader patient population, hospital systems must evolve to ensure prompt identification, consistent management protocols, and efficient collaboration between oncology and inpatient teams. This study analyzes the mechanisms, clinical effectiveness, and safety profile of ADCs in gastrointestinal oncology, pointing out the importance of institutional preparedness to safely incorporate these medicines into standard clinical practice. These features also align ADC therapy with personalized medicine by emphasizing biomarker-guided patient selection and individualized toxicity monitoring.

Background: Statins have been associated with a reduced risk of primary liver cancer (PLC), primarily hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the optimal use for effective protection and whether benefits vary by patient characteristics remain unclear. We evaluated the association between statin use and PLC risk in metabolic-dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), considering cumulative exposure and potential effect modifiers. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Veteran Affairs electronic health records. Patients with chronically elevated liver enzymes and metabolic dysfunction, without other chronic liver diseases, were identified between 2007 and 2009 and followed through 2019 for incident PLC. Statin exposure was assessed at baseline and during the follow-up, with dose standardization by LDL-lowering potency (simvastatin-equivalent units). Time to PLC was analyzed using Cox models adjusted for covariates, considering potential interactions. Results: Among 329,577 patients (92% male; median age 62 years), 0.82% developed PLC (median follow-up of 9.7 years). Baseline statin use showed a significantly lower PLC risk (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64; 95% CI, 0.57–0.71; p < 0.0001). No significant interaction was observed with age, sex, metabolic syndrome, or cirrhosis. Higher cumulative statin exposure demonstrated a dose-dependent risk reduction, remaining significant at simvastatin-equivalent doses > 15,561 mg annually after accounting for incident cirrhosis. Atorvastatin/rosuvastatin use provided comparable protection, despite different lipophilicity, and demonstrated stronger effects than others. Conclusions: In MASLD, statin therapy was associated with a dose-dependent PLC risk reduction. High-intensity therapy (simvastatin-equivalent > 40 mg daily) conferred substantial protection regardless of age, sex, insulin resistance, or cirrhosis, supporting a potential statin-based PLC chemoprevention in MASLD.

Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) rates are increasing, with instability, aseptic loosening, and infection identified as primary indications for surgery. Managing significant acetabular and femoral bone loss remains a complex challenge, requiring standardized classification systems to guide reconstruction strategies. Objective: This article reviews current surgical protocols and clinical outcomes for complex THA revisions, specifically focusing on the management of bone defects and periprosthetic fractures using techniques employed at the Mayo Clinic. Key Points: Preoperative evaluation must prioritize the exclusion of infection via inflammatory markers and joint aspiration. Acetabular reconstructions are categorized by the Paprosky classification; Type 3 defects often necessitate jumbo cups, porous tantalum augments, or custom triflange implants to achieve stability. In cases of pelvic discontinuity, tantalum cup-cage constructs or distraction techniques are utilized, showing high short-term survival despite risks of stress fractures or reduced bone stock. Femoral revisions utilize modular fluted tapered stems (TMFT) for Paprosky Type 3 and 4 defects, providing superior axial and longitudinal stability compared to cemented options. Extended lateral femoral osteotomy is frequently employed to facilitate component removal. Periprosthetic fractures are managed according to the Vancouver classification, with stable stems treated via internal fixation and loose stems requiring TMFT or proximal femoral replacement. Conclusion: Successful THA revision relies on meticulous preoperative planning and the selection of implants that ensure osseointegration and mechanical stability. The shift toward porous metal technology and modular femoral components has improved outcomes in cases of severe bone deficiency.

Objectives Uniformity artifacts caused by defective transducer elements or scanner malfunctions degrade diagnostic image quality. Traditional quality control (QC) methods, such as phantom testing and visual or quantitative image analysis, can be labor‐intensive and limited in test frequency. This study aims to develop a deep learning framework to detect uniformity artifacts and complement traditional QC. Methods Clinical median images were generated by aggregating co‐registered grayscale ultrasound images acquired by each transducer and computing median intensity values across the image stack. A pretrained ResNet‐18 model was fine‐tuned on a dataset consisting of clinical median images from linear and curvilinear transducers. The dataset was divided into training, validation, and testing subsets, ensuring no overlap between training and test transducers. To assess generalizability, the model was also evaluated on an independent test set of 396 phantom‐validated images from linear and curvilinear transducers. Results The model achieved 100% accuracy on the first dataset's test set. On the independent test set, it attained 87.4% accuracy with high sensitivity (0.84) and specificity (0.88), demonstrating robust generalization. Occlusion sensitivity maps confirmed the model's attention to uniformity artifact regions. Conclusion The deep learning framework using clinical median images demonstrated robust performance across several linear and curvilinear transducer models. It could be integrated into the clinical QC workflow by automating artifact detection in an effective and timely manner. In our practice, it can flag median images classified as artifact‐present, reducing human review time by approximately 80% while preserving detection accuracy.