Citations

Abstract Purpose Bevacizumab is an effective treatment for radiation necrosis; dose dependent radiographic and edema response data are lacking. Methods Multicenter, retrospective cohort study of adult patients with primary central nervous system tumors or brain metastases who received bevacizumab for radiation necrosis between June 2021 and July 2024. Patients were grouped by bevacizumab dose (7.5 mg/kg vs 10 mg/kg administered every three weeks). Primary outcome was edema response, assessed by a blinded neuro-oncologist. Secondary outcomes included contrast enhancing disease response, clinical response, adverse events, treatment discontinuation, and re-dosing for recurrent radiation necrosis. Analyses were performed with and without adjustment for tumor type. Results 104 patients were included (7.5 mg/kg, n = 53; 10 mg/kg, n = 51). Edema response differed between dosing groups in unadjusted analyses (p = 0.032), favoring the 7.5 mg/kg cohort; however, this association was attenuated after adjustment for tumor type. Contrast enhancing disease response did not differ between groups in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses (p = 0.43). Clinical response was higher in the 7.5 mg/kg group (65.2% vs 37.8%, p = 0.013). Tumor type differed significantly between cohorts (p < 0.001), with more primary CNS tumors in the 10 mg/kg group. Rates of adverse events, treatment discontinuation, and re-dosing were similar. Conclusions While lower-dose bevacizumab was associated with greater edema reduction in unadjusted analyses, this effect was attenuated after accounting for tumor type. Importantly, 7.5 mg/kg dosing appeared sufficient for achieving edema control and contrast enhancing disease response. These findings support an individualized approach to bevacizumab dosing in radiation necrosis and highlight the need for prospective, tumor-stratified studies.

Abstract Background Bevacizumab is a treatment for radiation necrosis; the optimal dosing remains inadequately studied. Methods Retrospective review of adult patients with primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors or brain metastasis treated with bevacizumab for radiation necrosis from 6/29/2021 to 7/31/2024. Primary outcome was to compare edema response with two different bevacizumab doses: 7.5 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg. Edema response was classified according to the following groups: (1) increase of edema, &gt;105% of baseline; (2) constant edema, 75%-105% of baseline; (3) slight decrease of edema, 25%-75% of baseline; (4) large decrease of edema, &lt;25% of baseline. Results 104 patients were evaluated (median age 59 years, 56% male); 53 patients in the 7.5 mg/kg group and 51 patients in the 10 mg/kg group. Tumor type varied significantly across dosing groups (p &lt; 0.001). In the 7.5 mg/kg group, tumor type was primary CNS (n = 23, 43%), lung (n = 14, 26%), breast (n = 8, 15%), melanoma (n = 4, 8%) and other (n = 4, 8%). In the 10 mg/kg group, tumor type was primary CNS (n = 43, 84%), lung (n = 2, 4%), melanoma (n = 2, 4%) and other (n = 4, 8%). Median number of bevacizumab doses administered was 4. There was a statistically significant difference in distribution of edema response across all response levels favoring bevacizumab 10 mg/kg (p = 0.032). When edema response was dichotomized (large decrease vs other), the difference remained statistically significant (p = 0.015). Conclusion Bevacizumab 10 mg/kg was more efficacious in terms of edema response; this result is impacted by the significantly higher incidence of primary CNS tumors in the 10 mg/kg dosing group.

Background: Shared Decision Making in palliative care encompassing patient-clinician collaboration has shown potential for improved patient outcomes. However, the impact of decision aids intended to support palliative care decision making discussions across clinical care settings remains uncertain. Aim: To assess the impact of shared of decision aids on decision making, clinical outcomes, and quality of life for patients with palliative care needs and their caregivers. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, reported according to PRISMA, with overall evidence quality assessed using GRADE. Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE (all segments), EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, from inception through September 20, 2024, without restrictions on publication date, sample size, or language. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that included adult patients with palliative care needs or their caregivers, using any form of decision aids. Outcomes encompassed decision-related, clinical, and quality of life measures. Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials were included. Participant ages ranged from 44 to 85 years. Predominant decision aids were videos or printed materials addressing goals of care and treatment options, with aims that included improving understanding of prognosis and supporting values clarification. Decision aids significantly improved decision-related knowledge (SMD: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.14–0.67, p = 0.003) and lowered preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.20–0.40, p < 0.001). They showed no significant impact on decisional conflict, satisfaction, or regret. Conclusion: Evidence regarding the effectiveness of decision aids in palliative care decision making is limited and of low overall quality, with observed improvements primarily in patient knowledge and changes in stated treatment preferences rather than established improvements in decision quality or values-concordant care. Future research should prioritize integration into comprehensive shared decision making frameworks, cultural adaptations, and larger-scale studies to enhance patient-centered outcomes.

Abstract Background This secondary analysis of a phase I clinical trial illustrates integrated summary and visualization of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) data and Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) data at baseline and through the first cycle of treatment for tolerability review during dose-cohort evaluation in a phase I trial. Methods This study uses data from a phase I clinical trial of patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Through iterative feedback from clinicians and statisticians, we developed a summary of cycle 1 PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE data for the first dose-level cohort. This summary is intended to demonstrate reporting that would be reviewed to inform a decision about proceeding to the next dose level in a dose escalation trial. Results Cycle 1 CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE data for 4 patients enrolled in the first dose cohort are summarized as narrative and tabular summaries and visualized using swimmer and butterfly plots. In this cohort, 3/4 (75%) patients had at least one CTCAE grade 3 or higher adverse event, and all 4 (100%) patients had at least one PRO-CTCAE composite score of 3 during cycle 1. All 4 (100%) patients had at least one symptom for which PRO-CTCAE suggested greater symptom burden than was reflected in CTCAE. Conclusions In this illustrative summary of a dose cohort, PRO-CTCAE complemented CTCAE reporting by capturing patient-reported symptomatic burden that was not always fully reflected by clinician-graded adverse events. Reviewing PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE data together during dose-cohort evaluation may enrich discussions on safety and tolerability in phase I trials.

Abstract Background Patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy experience multiple symptoms that cause decrements in quality of life. A deeper understanding of serum metabolites as biomarkers may guide in predicting symptom occurrence and severity. This study evaluated change in serum metabolite levels from before chemotherapy (T1) to after the initial first or second cycle of chemotherapy (T2), after the third cycle of chemotherapy (T3) and finally after a month of chemotherapy completion (T4). Change in metabolite levels were analyzed in association with symptom occurrence. Methods Patients with breast cancer (n = 10) completed study measures at four timepoints. Neuropsychological and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were evaluated using the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. Dietary intake was assessed using the NHANES Dietary Screener Questionnaire. Serum metabolites were analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrophotometry. Results Five patients experienced > 3 GI symptoms at T2 and T3. At all 4 timepoints, ≥ 6 patients experienced moderate to severe neuropsychological symptoms severity. Daily mean intake of fiber, whole grain, and calcium were less than the recommended guidelines. Compared to T1, long chain fatty acid and amino acid derivative levels decreased at T2 and T3 (p < 0.05). Increase in metabolite levels of glucose-6-phosphate (p = 0.02) and 6-phosphogluconate (p = 0.05) at T2 were associated with fatigue occurrence. Conclusions Patients experienced several gastrointestinal and neuropsychological symptoms during chemotherapy and early survivorship. Chemotherapy-induced changes in metabolites involved in cellular energy metabolism may explain patient symptom experience. Metabolite level changes overtime may reflect inadequate dietary intake. Larger sample size studies may guide in building metabolic prediction models for symptom burden.

Abstract Background Isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH-1) inhibitor ivosidenib and dual-IDH1/2 inhibitor vorasidenib have demonstrated clinical activity in the treatment of IDH-mutant gliomas. We evaluated the efficacy of vorasidenib in patients with prior exposure to ivosidenib. Methods Retrospective review of patients with IDH-mutant glioma treated with vorasidenib who had prior treatment with ivosidenib. Previous treatments, radiographic response, and adverse events were collected and analyzed descriptively. Results Twenty-nine patients (median age 42, 34% female) were evaluated. Tumor types included IDH-mutant astrocytoma (grade 2 n = 9, 31%; grade 3 n = 3, 10%; grade 4 n = 3, 10%) and oligodendroglioma (grade 2 n = 10, 34%; grade 3 n = 4, 14%). Treatments received prior to ivosidenib included surgical resection (n = 23, 79%), radiation (n = 16, 55%), temozolomide (n = 15, 52%), procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine (PCV, n = 2, 7%), bevacizumab (n = 3, 10%), lomustine (n = 2, 7%), and pembrolizumab (n = 1, 3%). Four patients received additional treatment in between ivosidenib and vorasidenib treatment. Ten of 16 (63%) patients who experienced disease progression on ivosidenib achieved stable disease and remain on vorasidenib, while 6 (37%) had continued progression. Eleven patients with stable disease on ivosidenib transitioned to vorasidenib following FDA approval and remained without progression. Two patients who transitioned to vorasidenib due to ivosidenib-related adverse effects (diarrhea and fatigue) experienced symptom resolution and maintained disease stability. Conclusions Vorasidenib demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with IDH-mutant gliomas previously treated with ivosidenib. Notably, stable patients who transitioned maintained disease stability, while some of those with progressive disease achieved stabilization with vorasidenib. These findings support vorasidenib as a viable therapeutic option following ivosidenib exposure.

Background: Pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis (PPFE) is a rare interstitial lung disease (ILD) associated with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Its clinical characteristics and outcomes in SARDs remain poorly defined. Objectives: To describe demographics, imaging patterns, and outcomes in SARD-associated PPFE. Methods: Patients diagnosed with PPFE and SARDs at Mayo Clinic (2000-2024) were included. PPFE diagnosis was confirmed by high-resolution computed tomography, and SARD diagnoses were established by rheumatologists. Results: Fifteen of 62 patients with PPFE had SARDs with majority having systemic sclerosis (SSc)(n= 7, 46%). Median age at PPFE diagnosis was 57.2 years; 80% were female; 40% were ever-smokers; 40% required supplemental oxygen; 5 had pulmonary hypertension. Coexisting ILD patterns included UIP (26.7%) and NSIP (20%). Coexisting ILD patterns included usual interstitial pneumonia (26.7%) and nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (20%). Three patients died, including two with SSc. Conclusion: Systemic sclerosis was the most frequently observed SARD among patients with PPFE, and may coexist with other ILD patterns; recognition may inform risk stratification, multidisciplinary evaluation, and longitudinal follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Online patient education materials are essential in improving access to and understanding of clinical information. Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically ChatGPT, offers a novel way to synthesize complex information and is increasingly being used for patient education, including in obstetrics and gynecology. This study compares the understandability and actionability of patient education materials about hysterectomy and uterine fibroids generated by ChatGPT with those published by the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG). METHODS: In a randomized cross-sectional study, participants were allocated to one of four groups: ACOG–Fibroids, ChatGPT–Fibroids, ACOG–Hysterectomy, or ChatGPT–Hysterectomy. The ACOG groups reviewed the corresponding ACOG FAQ webpage, while the ChatGPT groups reviewed responses generated by ChatGPT to the same FAQs. Participants then completed demographic questions and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). The primary outcome was the equivalence of PEMAT scores between ACOG and ChatGPT. RESULTS: Equivalence was not demonstrated between ChatGPT and ACOG for either topic. For fibroid material, ACOG was rated higher on both understandability (86.3 versus 82.6 points, P =.039) and actionability (65.4 versus 53.2 points, P =.003) on superiority testing. For hysterectomy content, no significant difference was observed. No interaction was found between material type and either education level or personal history of fibroids/hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: PEMAT scores for ACOG were superior to ChatGPT for fibroid content, but neither equivalent nor superior for hysterectomy content. While ChatGPT offers a responsive, iterative source of information, its understandability and actionability may depend on topic-specific factors, highlighting both the promise and limitations of AI for patient education.