Citations

Objectives Transplant patients are high risk for surgery due to their immunocompromised state. There is a paucity of evidence concerning the differences in incidence of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in solid versus non-solid organ transplant. Our aim is to analyze the difference in incidence of CRS requiring endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) between non-solid and solid transplant populations and determine if certain risk factors are associated with increased incidence of recalcitrant CRS in non-solid versus solid transplants. Study Design Retrospective cohort. Setting Multisite tertiary academic center. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of 1303 transplant recipients who were seen in our rhinologic clinic for CRS between 2017 and 2022. A total of 224 patients underwent ESS and were further analyzed for risk factors associated with recalcitrant disease requiring sinus surgery. Subgroup analysis based on solid and non-solid organ transplant was performed. Results Of the 224 patients in the study, 171/224 (76.3%) had solid transplants while 53/224 (23.6%) had non-solid transplants. 17.19% of all transplant recipients required ESS. The incidence of ESS in non-solid transplants was 28.2% versus 57% in solid transplant. The risk of recalcitrant CRS in solid transplant recipients was almost 1.78 times greater than those with non-solid organ transplant (95% CI, 1.27-2.54, p = 0.0005). Individual factors such as certain immunotherapy drugs, pancytopenia, and rejection appear to correlate with the risk of ESS in both non-solid and solid organ transplant. Conclusion Risk of ESS was greater in the solid transplant recipients compared to those who received non-solid organ transplant.

Abstract Background Matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry coupled to immune enrichment (MASS-FIX) as an alternative to serum immunofixation electrophoresis has demonstrated increased sensitivity in monoclonal protein (MP) detection with improved laboratory workflow. This study explored similar replacement of urine immunofixation electrophoresis (u-IFE) with urine MASS-FIX (u-MASS-FIX) by method comparison. Methods Residual urine (n = 1008) from Mayo Clinic patients with a known plasma cell disease were assayed neat by u-MASS-FIX analysis. Each sample was paired with the following: u-IFE, urine total protein, urine protein electrophoresis, serum κ/λ free light chain (LC) ratio (rFLC), and serum MASS-FIX (s-MASS-FIX). Analytical sensitivities were measured in pooled urine spiked with daratumumab. Results u-IFE and u-MASS-FIX had 91% agreement in determining the presence/absence of MPs (Cohen kappa = 0.8200). In discrepant cases, serum rFLC statistically aligned more closely with positive u-MASS-FIX cases than u-IFE. Patients positive by both s-MASS-FIX and u-MASS-FIX had matching MP masses (±20 daltons) in 94% of cases. The u-MASS-FIX spectra further identified κ/λ LC fragments and glycosylated LCs not appreciated on u-IFE. The unconcentrated u-MASS-FIX limit of detection of 0.156 mg/mL was determined equivalent to 100× concentrated u-IFE. Conclusion u-MASS-FIX is a reliable alternative to u-IFE with the added benefits of LC glycosylation detection and MP mass tracking between serum and urine. Furthermore, u-MASS-FIX is performed using neat urine. Eliminating the need to concentrate urine for u-IFE has potential to increase productivity by decreasing labor minutes per test.

Abstract Background Multiple laboratory tests are employed for detection of monoclonal proteins in patients and include serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP), immunofixation electrophoresis, free light chain (FLC) immunoassay, and mass spectrometry (Mass-Fix). Recently, reports on a drift in FLC quantitation results have been brought to light. Methods We studied a cohort of 16 887 patients whose sera were tested for a monoclonal protein by a FLC assay, serum protein electrophoresis, and Mass-Fix. This is a retrospective study designed to assess the impact of a drift on the performance of FLC ratio (rFLC) in groups of patients with and without detectable plasma cell disorders (PCDs). Results The results demonstrated that 63% of patients with monoclonal protein equal or higher than 2 g/L (by SPEP) had an abnormal rFLC (reference range 0.26–1.65). Conversely, 16% of patients with undetectable monoclonal protein by other methods (i.e., SPEP and Mass-Fix) who also had no record of treated PCD had an abnormal rFLC. In these cases, there was an imbalance in the number of kappa high rFLCs to lambda low rFLCs of 201 to 1. Conclusions The results of this study suggest decreased specificity of rFLC for a monoclonal kappa FLC in the 1.65 to 3.0 range.

In recent years, the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for craniopharyngiomas has proven to be a safe option for extensive tumor resection, with minimal or no manipulation of the optic nerves and excellent visualization of the superior hypophyseal branches when compared to the Transcranial Approach (TCA). However, there is an ongoing debate regarding the criteria for selecting different approaches. To explore the current results of EEA and discuss its role in the management of craniopharyngiomas, we performed MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS searches from 2012 to 2022. Baseline characteristics, the extent of resection, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed through an X2 and Fisher exact test, and a comparison between quantitative variables through a Kruskal–Wallis and verified with post hoc Bonferroni. The tumor volume was similar in both groups (EEA 11.92 cm3, -TCA 13.23 cm3). The mean follow-up in months was 39.9 for EEA and 43.94 for TCA, p = 0.76). The EEA group presented a higher visual improvement rate (41.96% vs. 25% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 7.7). Permanent DI was less frequent with EEA (29.20% vs. 67.40% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 0.2). CSF Leaks occurred more frequently with EEA (9.94% vs. 0.70% for TCA, p < 0.0001, OR 15.8). Recurrence rates were lower in the EEA group (EEA 15.50% vs. for TCA 21.20%, p = 0.04, OR 0.7). Our results demonstrate that, in selected cases, EEA for resection of craniopharyngiomas is associated with better results regarding visual preservation and extent of tumor resection. Postoperative CSF leak rates associated with EEA have improved compared to the historical series. The decision-making process should consider each person’s characteristics; however, it is noticeable that recent data regarding EEA justify its widespread application as a first-line approach in centers of excellence for skull base surgery.

Abstract Objectives There is a paucity of data on penile amyloidosis. We aimed to assess the frequency of different amyloid types in surgical specimens from the penis involved by amyloidosis and correlate relevant clinicopathologic parameters with proteomic findings. Methods Since 2008, our reference laboratory has performed liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) for amyloid typing. The institutional pathology archive and reference laboratory database were queried to retrospectively identify all penile surgical pathology specimens with LC-MS/MS results between January 1, 2008, and November 23, 2022. Archived H&E-stained and Congo red–stained sections were re-reviewed. Results Twelve cases of penile amyloidosis were identified, which represented 0.35% (n = 3,456) of penile surgical specimens. AL-type amyloid was most frequent (n = 7), followed by keratin-type amyloid (n = 3) and ATTR (transthyretin)–type amyloid (n = 2). AL-type amyloid cases often showed diffuse dermal/lamina propria deposition, whereas all keratin-type amyloid cases were localized to the superficial dermis. Two cases with keratin-type amyloid had concomitant cutaneous findings (penile intraepithelial neoplasia and condyloma). Conclusions This series, the largest to date, demonstrates that penile amyloidosis has a heterogeneous proteomic landscape. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study describing ATTR (transthyretin)–type penile amyloid.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials are important for managing older patients with AML. We investigated differences in outcomes of older patients with AML on the basis of whether patients participated in intensive chemotherapy trials at community versus academic cancer centers. METHODS: We used data from the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology phase III trials that enrolled patients age ≥ 60 years with newly diagnosed AML between 1998 and 2002 in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9720 trial and between 2004 and 2006 in the CALGB 10201 trial. Centers funded by the NCI Community Oncology Research Program were identified as community cancer centers; others were designated as academic cancer centers. Logistic regression models and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare 1-month mortality and overall survival (OS) by center type. RESULTS: Seventeen percent of the 1,170 patients were enrolled in clinical trials in community cancer centers. The study results demonstrated comparable rates of grade ≥3 adverse events (97% v 93%), 1-month mortality (19.1% v 16.1%), and OS (43.9% v 35.7% at 1 year) between community versus academic cancer centers, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, 1-month mortality (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.92 to 2.12; P = .11) and OS (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.22; P = .67) were not statistically different among patients treated in community versus academic cancer centers. CONCLUSION: An older patient population, who have complex health care needs, can be successfully treated on intensive chemotherapy trials in select community cancer centers with outcomes comparable with that achieved at academic cancer centers.